No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998/10/14 - Agenda PacketCITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -- STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: October 14, 1998 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Rudy Zeledon, Assistant Planner DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 98-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the regulations for second dwelling units for consistency with changes in State law. (Continued from September 23, 1998.) BACKGROUND: The Development Code Amendment request was originally reviewed by the Planning Commission at their meeting on June 10, 1998. At that meeting, the Commission raised several issues with regards to the proposed changes and directed staff to research the issues and address them. Staff has reviewed various alternatives for the development of appropriate criteria for second dwelling units. Attached are the previous staff report and minutes. ANALYSIS: Planning Commission Concerns: In reviewing the proposed code amendment, the Commission questioned the appropriateness of almost doubling the unit size for second dwelling units~ from 640 to 1,200 square feet and having two units on a single family lot. The Commission requested information on the zoning for second dwelling units, the number and location of past approvals, and consideration of additional development criteria. Second dwelling units are conditionally permitted in Very Low, Low, and Low-Medium Residential Districts. Since 1993, the City has approved five Conditional Use Permits for second dwelling units (see Exhibit "D"). Four out of five of the approved second dwelling units are located in the Very Low Residential Distdct and range in size from 813 square feet to 1,200 square feet B= State/am In 1982, a State law was enacted to encourage local governments to provide for second units in response to the need for affordable housing and to prevent local governments from precluding second units. In response to the new state legislation, the City adopted Ordinance No. 204, in June of 1983, which allowed second dwelling units in single family residential zones. In August of this year, the City Attorney informed staff that the State law, ~ Second dwelling unit means an attached or a detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons, including provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation, on the same lot as the primary residence, ITEM A Y PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 98-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA October 14, 1998 Page 2 which allows a maximum of 1,200 square feet for a detached dwelling unit or not to exceed 30 percent of the main dwelling if attached, only applies to cities that had adopted a second dwelling unit ordinance after July 1, 1983. Since the City adopted its ordinance pdor to July 1, 1983, it is exempt from conforming to the above state regulation and is allowed to establish minim_um (not less then 150 square feet) and maximum unit size requirements for both attached and detached second dwelling units as well as establishing additional cdteria to regulate these units. C= Reasons for Development Code Amendment 98-02: The requested amendment to second dwelling units will help clarify unclear parking requirements, provide additional criteria to help reenforce single family residential use as the pdmary use of a property, and provide some flexibility for proposed projects on parcels of one-half acre or more. Staff has reviewed and researched various options for second dwelling units and feels that the proposed changes adequately address the Planning Commission's concerns. Therefore, staff recommends the following changes to the Development Code: 1. ExistinQ Criteria: "The unit does not exceed 640 square feet." Proposed Cdteda: The unit shall not exceed 640 square feet if the parcel is less than one-half acre; if greater than one-half acre, the second unit can exceed 640 square feet but may not be greater than 1,200 square feet or 30 percent of the main dwelling unit, if attached. (Unit size is exclusive of enclosed parking space requirement.) 2. Existing Cdteda: "The unit shall provide parking and access per Chapter 17.12, except temporary removable units shall provide one off-street parking space." Proposed Cdteda: The unit shall provide parking and access per Chapter 17.12 and provide one enclosed parking space per bedroom, not to exceed two enclosed spaces per unit. The enclosed parking space shall not be located in the required front or side yard setback for the pdmary unit. 3. Proposed Additional Cdteda: Lot Size: A second dwelling unit may be established on a lot or parcel of land having a minimum of 10,000 square feet. Height:. A second dwelling unit shall be limited to one story, shall not exceed 16 feet in height, and shall not exceed the height of the main dwelling unit. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, pursuant to Section 21080.17. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 98-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA October 14, 1998 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution Recommending Approval to the City Council. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:RZ/jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Staff Report and Minutes dated June 10, 1998 Exhibit "B" - California Government Code, Section 65852.2 Exhibit "C" - Existing and Proposed changes to Development Code Section 17.08,030,E.6 Exhibit "D" - Map of approved second dwelling units from 1993 to 1998. Exhibit "E" - Survey of second dwelling unit ordinances by community vs. Rancho Cucamonga Resolution Recommending Approval CITY OF RANCHO CUCAN[ONGA -- STAFF RI ,PORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: June 10, 1998 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller; City Planner Rudy Zeledon, Planning Technician DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 98-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the regulations for second dwelling units for consistency with changes in State law. ABSTRACT: The Development Code regulates second dwelling unitsL This amendment is necessary because of changes in State law to encourage this form of housing for family members, stQdents, the elderly, in-home health care proriders, and the disabled. ANALYSIS: Currently, the Development Code requires that second dwelling units shall not exceed 640 square feet. State law now allows a maximum of 1,200 square feet for a detached dwelling unit or not to exceed 30% of the main dwelling if attached. State law also mandates that the City cannot require parking for second dwelling units exceeding 1 parking space per unit or bedroom. Our Development Code has been interpreted to require 2 parking spaces within a garage. Staff recommends the following changes to the Development Code, in order to be in compliance with state law and to help clarify inconsistencies: 1. Existinq Criteria: Proposed Criteria: "The unit does not exceed 640 square feet" The total floor area shall not exceed 1,200 square feet for a detached unit or 30 percent of the main dwelling for an attached unit. 2. Existinc~ Criteria: Proposed Criteria: "The unit shall provide parking and access per Chapter 17.12, except temporary removable units shall provide 1 off-street parking space'" The unit shall provide access per Chapter 17.12 and 1 enclosed parking space per bedroom, not to exceed 2 enclosed parking spaces per unit. Temporary removable units shall provide one off-street parking space. Second dwelling units means an attached or a detached residential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons, including provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and ~anitat',2/o~ ,~/the same lot as the primary residence PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 98-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA June 10, 1998 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The amendments are exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, pursuant to Section 21080.17. CORRESPONDENCE: The item has been advedised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin. newspaper. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution recommending approval to the City Council. Respectfully submitted. City Planner BB:RZ:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Existing and Proposed changes to Development Code Section 17.08.030 (E.6.d and Exhibit "B" - California Government Code, Section 65852.2 Resolution Recommending Approval Ordinance Establhhment of zoning di~tria$ Vniformay "Granny" housing Local second unit ordinances Standards to / B " 64 · 1996 Hanni~, Zoning, and Development Laws IRE; PLANNING AND ZONING LAW or sa_fcty, This prohibition shall be applicable to chatter cities sinc~ the promotion of ~ u~ of nonfossil fuel senn~ ~t ~s the policy of th~ sfat~ to promote and encourag~ the tt~ of solar ~a~gy ~ysftml and to r~mov~ obatacl~ diet~o. Accordingly, r~a~onable r=strictiuus oa a solar e~fgy ~ys~m at= those t~l~ction~ ~hich do not ~ignificantly in~ase the cost of the system or s guificami]t decrease its efficiency, or which allow for zo alt~ve and efficiency. For the purposes of this section, "solar energy system" shall have the same meaning as set fotin in Section 801 .S o~ the Civil Cede. (A,~'ed by S~a~s. 1978, C]~ 1154.) · 65881. For such puq3osns the legislative body may divide a county, a city, or portions ritesnor, ~ zones of the number,! shape and ax~a it deems best suited to carry out the porpus~ of this chaptsL · (Ac~'ed by £tats. 1965, Ch. 188~.) 6S8S2. All such regulations shall be uniform for each class or kind of building or use oflamt throughout each zone, bet the regulation in one type of zone may differ from those in other types of zones. (Repealed an~ a~ted by Sta,. 1~65, Ch. 1880.) S85~.1 NotwathstandingSeeUon65906 an a mclndin acbene · · , Y ty,' ' g rcity, county, orcityandcoumymayissneazodiag~ variance. special use permit, or conditional use permit for a dwelling unit to be consmu:~L or which is ~,~,.hnd to ora detached from, a prima~ residence on a parcel zoned for a single-family rosinend, if the dweBing unit is intended for the so le occupancy of one adult or two adult perzous who are ti2 yea~ of age or over, and the area of floor space of the awached dwelling unit does not exceed 30 petrent of the existing living ax~a or the m of the floor space of the clenched dwelling unit does not exceed 1,200 squa~ fe~. This section shhil not be construed to limit the tuluL'~mnets of Section 6585~2, or the power of lnc~t guvemmnets to permit second units. (Amended by Slats. 1982. CIt 1440; Amended by Start. 1990, Ch. 1150.) 65852.150. The L~glslatuse finds and declares that second units are a valuable form of housing in California. Second units provide housing for family members, studants, the eld~ly, in-home health car~ pwvidm, ~ disabled, and oth~, at below market prices within existrig neighborhoods. Homeoweere who crua~ ~ unit~ ben~lt f~om added incon~ and an increased sense of security. It is the intcnt of the Legislature that any second-unit onti~ ndoptecl by local agenci~ have the effect of providing for the creation of second units and that provisions in these ordinances relating to m=n,~S including unit size, parking fees and other tequivemcnts, are not so arbitrary, exceusive, or bunteusome so as to ~ly resttia the ability of homeowners to create second units in zones in which they ate authorized by local (Added by Stats. 1994, Ck 580.) 658S22,, (a) Any local agency may, by ordinance, provide for the creation of second units in ~InS~family and multi family residential zonea. The untnance: (I) May designate areas within the jurisdiction of the local agency whese s~:end ,nit,, may be permitted. The desi gnatlon of areas may be based on cait~ia, which may include, but ate not limited to, tie ~ of wat~ and s~vor services and the impact of second units on Wartic flow. (2) May impo~ standards on second units which inc!,,t,,. bet are not limited to, parking height, sett~w~. ot coverage, architectoral review, and maximum size of a unit (3) May pmvi de that second units do not exceed the allowable density for the lot upon which the ~ond unit is located, and that second units ave a residential use that is zousistent with the existing general plan uad zoning designation for the IOL (4) May establish a ptt~-ss for the issuance of a conditional use permit for second units. (5) Shall not be considomd in the applicatio of any local ordinance, policy, or pmSram to limit n~id~tihi 8rowth, Co) ( l ) Whan a local agency w hl ch has not ~o~ted an orttl nance guverning second onits in a,;,7.,c.t.~anc~ with subdivis ion (a) or (c), receives its tint application on or aftcr July 1, 1983, for a conditional us~ permit pumaant to this subdivision, the local agency s hall accept the appli cation and ap prove or disapprove the applipUion pumamR to this subdivision unle~ it adopts an ordinance in accontzoee with subdivision (a) or (c) within 120 days afi~ reeeiving the application. Notwithstanding Section 6590 I, evet~ local agency shat/grant a special use or a conditional use permit for the creation of a second unit if the second unit complies with a~l of the following:. (A) The unit is not intended for sale and may be rented. (B) The lot is zoned for single-family or multifamily use. (C) The lot contains an existing single-family dwelling. (D) The second uni t is al thex attached to the exi sting dwe lung and located within the living area of the exi sth~gdwefling or detached from the existing dwelling and located on the same lot as the existing dweilinF, (E) The increased finor area of an attached second unit shall not exceed 30 pen:ent of the existing living area. (F) The tond area of floor space for a detached second unit shall not eF-,',~_ 1,200 squa~ feet. (G) Requirements relating to height, setback, lot coverage, architectural review, site plan review, fees, charges, and other zoning requirements generally applicable to residential construction in the zone in which the property is 1o''~','rl. (H) Local building cede requirements which apply to detached dwelling, as al~pt~,pxiate. pLANNING AND ZONING LAW (I) Approval by the local health officer where a private s~wage disposal system is being used, if requir~. (2) No other local ordinance, policy, or regulation shall be the basis for ll~ denial of n building permit or n use permit under this subdivision. (3) This subdivision establishus the maximum standards thai local agcncins shall use to evaluate proposed second units on lots zoned for rcsidandal use which contain an existing singin-family dwelling. No ,,4~itioul standards. other than those provided in titis subdivision or sulxlivi sion (a). shall be uti~zed or imposed. except thal a leGl agency my ~luise an applicant for a permit issued pursuant to this sutx~fivision to be an owner-oc.c~panL (4) No changes in zoning ordinances or other or~'nanccs or any changes in the general plan shaft be requim:l to implement this subdivision. Any local agency my amend its zoning oallnnn~e or general plan to incmlxm'a~ the policies, procedures. or other provisions applicable to the creation of second units if these provisions are consisten~ with the limitations of this subdivision. (5) A second unit which conforms to the requirements of this subdivision shah not be comid~m:l to allowable density for the lot upon which it is located, and shall be deemed to be a imidmnffid use which is comistent with the existing general plan and zoning designntions for the los The seonnd units mhn!! not be collsic[~l~ in the application of any local ordinance, policy, or program to limit residential gmwffi. (c) No local agency shall adopt an ordinance which totally lxecludns second units within single-family and multifamily zoned areas unless the ordinanc~ contains findings acknowledging that the orrlinm~c8 ~ay fiBlit housing oplx)rtunities of the region and further contains findings thai specific adverse impacU on the public health, safety, and welfar~ thai would result from allowing second units within single-family and multifnml !y zoned armLsjustify adolning th~ ordinarr.~. (d) A local agency may establish minimum and maximum unit sin: rcquimmouts forboth ,-,rhed and deanbed second units. No minimum size for a second unit, or siz~ bas~l upon a by ordi nanco for either aitoched o r detached dwe Ili ngs which does not p~'rnit at lus~ an efficiency unit to be constructed in compliance with local development stendards. (e) Parking requirements for second units shall not exr,~d on~ padring spoc~ per unit or per bothram. Additional parking may be ruquired provided thai a finding is made that the additional patting requiretoffees are directly the use of the second unit and are consistent with existing neighborhood standards applicable to existing dwallings. Off- su~et parking shall be permiuecl in setback areas in locations detesmined by the local agmcy or through tandem parking. unless specific findings are made that parking in setback area or tandem iratiring is mx feasible bas4~l upon specific site or regional topographical or fire and life safety conditions, or that it is mx pennit~l anywhe~ else in ~ jorisdiction. (O Fees charged for the construction of second units shall be d--_,-nnined in a,.~v, dancc with CILapU~ 5 (cornmanning with Section 66000). (g) This section does not limit the authority of local agencies to adopt less ruffletire requiretannin for the creation of second units. (h) Local agcncias shall submit a copy of the ordinancns adopted putanam to subdivision (a) or (c) to ~ Dcparummt of Housing and Community Dcveiopmant wiffiin 60 days ~ adoption. (i) As used in this s~don, the following terms mean: (1) "Living area," means the interior habitable area of a dwellinS unit iocledin8 basements and aUius but does not include a garage or any accessory stsucnu~_ (2) "Local agency" means a city, coanty, or city and county, wi't, thor general hw or cham:ml. (3) For purposes of this section, "neighboffiond" has the same meaning ass set foffit in SeXton 655893. (4) "Second unit" means an aUached or a detached rnsidential dwelling unit which provides complete independent living facilities for one or more perleus. It shall inclUdn permanent Fovisious for living, sleeping, e.,a~ns, cooking, and sanitation on the same parcel as ~e single-family dwelling is situated. A ,,,',~_nd unit also inch,,4-,, the following: (A) An efficiency unit, as defined in Section 17958. 1 of He4dth and Safety Code. (B) A rnanufactarm:i home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code. Note: gtats. 1986, Ch. 156, also mads: SEC. 2. This oct shall become operative April 1, 1987. (Added by Start. 1982, Ch. 1440. Effective July 1, 1983; Amtndt. d by 5tail. 1986, Clt 156; Amentied by 5tart. 1990, CIt 1150; Amended by Staff. 1994. Ch. 580.) Note: Stats. 1982. Ck 14~,0, also reads: SEC. I. (a) The L~gisiantre finds and declares thai there is a tremendous unrnet need for new housing to shelter California's population. The unmct housing needs will be further aglravai~i by the severe cuti,m-k, in fedend housing programs. (b) The Legislature finds and declares that Califoroia's existing housing resoorces axe vastly u.,ale~tilizcd dan in large part to the changes in social pauems. The improved ut:.lizaiion of this staie's existing housing resources offere an innovative and cost-effective solution to Califomia's housing crisis. (c) The Lcgislaiure finds and declares that the state has a role in incre~ing tile ufi~zafion of Califomia's housing resoumes and in reducing the barriers to the provision of affordable housing (d) The Legislature finds and declares that them are many benefits associated wi~h thn neation of second-family residential units on existing singin-family lots, which include: ( 1 ) Providing a cust-effcctive means of servi ng development through the use .Of existing infraslmctores, as conU'asted to requiring the construction of new costly infrastructures to save devalopmcnt in undeveloped areas. /i~ r~ 1996 ptn,,,,lq, Zordng, and Development Laws Nteeuary ftnds for ordf~umce prolibiang second · 65 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17. 08. 030 The Design Review Committee shall determine if the placement of the mobile home is compatible to the immediate area in which it is being placed in accordance with Section 17.06010 and the following criteria: (1) The design of the mobile home unit shall be similar in character and appearance to other dwellings in the area for such things as unit size, roof overhangs, roof materials and extedor matedais. (2) All building setbacks, parking, coverage, height, width and sign requirements of the base District shall apply. Recreational Vehicle StoraGe Yard. The parking and storage of recreational vehicles in proximity to residential users shall be permitted only on lots of 2 acres or more unless part of a master planned development, subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. All storage activities shall be screened from public view by a combination of block or masonry wall, berming, dense landscaping, or building mass. Retail or wholesale activity, Commercial dismantling, repair or storage wrecking activities or the storage of junk or salvage materials or dismantled parts are prohibited. Second DwellinQ Units. Permitted subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit and the following criteria: The unit may be constructed as an accessor,/building or attached to the primary residence on a parcel in a single family residential district. The unit is not for sale, but for rental purposes only, or use by a member of the immediate family. C= The lot contains an existing single family detached residence, and does not contain a guest house.. Thc unit doc3 not cxcced 640 squarc fact. The unit shall not exceed 640 square feet if the parcel Is less than one-half acre; if greater than one-half acre, the second unit can exceed 640 square feat but may not be greater than 1,200 square feet or 30 percent of the main dwelling unit, if attached. (Unit size is exclusive of enclosed parking space requirement) Lot size: A second dwelling unit may be established on a lot or parcel of land having a minimum of 10,000 square feel Height: A second dwelling unit shall be limited to one sto~y, shall not exceed 16 feet in height, and shall not exceed the height of the main dwelling uniL e. The unit shall have a separate entrance from the main residence. 17.08-8 3/96 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17. 08. 030 Thc unit 3hall provide parldng end acccss per Chaptcr 17.12, cxccpt tcmporery rcmovablc units shall providc onc off 3trcct parking 3pocc. The unit shall provide parking and access per Chapter 17.12 and provide one enclosed parking space per bedroom, not to exceed two enclosed spaces per unit. The enclosed parking space shall not be located in the required front or side yard setback for the primary unit. Temporary removable units shall provide one off-street parking space. The unit construction shall conform to the site development criteda applicable to accessory buildings or additions to main residence in the base district in which the unit is located. The use of temporary/removable structures for a second dwelling unit shall be limited to the sole occupancy of one or two adult persons who are 60 years of age or over and related to the occupants of primary residence by blood, marriage, or adoption. Further, said structure shall be restricted to the area at the rear of the primary residence and adequately screened from public view from the street. The unit may require design review, pursuant to Section 17.06.010-E, as determined by the City Planner, The applicant shall submit to the Building and Safety Division written certification from the affected water and sewer district that adequate water and sewer facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed unit. For units using septic facilities allowable by the Santa Ana Regional Quality Control Board and the City, written certification of acceptability including all supportive information shall be submitted. Uses Within RecoGnized Historical Structures. Existing historical landmarks and focal points which have been recognized by the City as having historical significance are encouraged to be enhanced through physical improvements. Historical structures within a residential district may be used for uses other than residential based upon the following criteria: a. A conditional use permit shall be appreved by the Planning Commission. Any use proposed shall not cause intensification or disruption to any adjacent uses or neighborhood. c. The uses shall be limited to small scale uses such as, but not limited to, boarding house, bed and breakfast inn, minor offices, boutique, antique shop, book store. or florist. d. The site and structure shall be fully improved to include such things as, but not limited to. landscaping, parking, new exterior building materials (roofing, siding, painting), wails or fences, street improvements, drainage facilities, etc. TelecommutinQ Centers. Single-family development of 500 or more units shall provide a telecommuting center or contribute toward the development of one in an amount satisfactory to the City Council. 17.08-9 3/96 Approved Second Dwelling Units From 1993-1998 1. CUP 95-04 8455 Hillside (VL) 2. CUP 93-44 8761 Sierra Madre (L) 3. CUP 96-16 5653 Beryl (VL) " 4. CUP 96-33 9748 Cottonwood Way Cv'L) 5. CUP 97-26 5515 Amethyst (VL) Second Dwelling Units Conditionally Permitted in the FoilowlngDistricts: 1. Very Low Residential (Min. lot size 20,000 sq. ft.) 2. Low Residential (Min. lot size 7,200 sq. ft.) 3. Low Medium Residential (Min. lot size 5,000 sq. ft.) --- City Limits ......... Unicorporated Area Within City Sphere of Influence "b" SURVEY OF SECOND DWELLING UNIT ORDINANCES BY COMMUNITY 2. 3. 4, 5, 6. 7. 8, 10, 12, 13 14. 15, 16, SECOND UNIT CRITERIA Conditional Use Permit Req'd. Temporary Use Permit Req'd. Second unit can be attached or detached. Limit to rental only or use by immediate family member. Design continuity with existing home. Prohibits the division of property. Must meet building, firs, setback, and service requirements. Minimum lot coverage. Limit unit to certian residential Limit height per zoning district. Property owner must live in main unit at time of CUP approval. CLAREMONT UPLAND LA VERNE RC X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X i X ' .k X X X X X X X X X X X X 17. Limit second unit size to 640 square feet or under 600 square X X feet. '.' 8. Sec~.-.<l uns: can exceed 640 square X X iee',. 19. Subject to driveway/parking req'd. X X X X 20. One on-site parking required. X X X X 22. Minimum of one covered parking X X space. 22. No additional driveway approaches X from public streets. 23. Separate entrance from may unit X X required. 24. Second unit may be constructed X X over existing garage. * 16 feet in required rear yard only. 35 feet outside requl~[,yird/ ~Proposed criteria adoption. ~x,~,~, / '~" RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 98-02, AMENDING SECTION 17.08.030, PERTAINING TO SECOND DWELLING UNIT REGULATIONS. AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for Development Code Amendment No. 98-02, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Code Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On June 10, and continued to July 8, August 12, September 9, September 23, and October 14, 1998, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said headng on the latter date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng the above- referenced public headng, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The amendment is warranted in order to be in compliance with State law. b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng the above- referenced public headng and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the proposed amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and b. That the proposed amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the Development Code; and c. That the proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and d. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the City's General Plan. 4. This Commission hereby finds that the proposed amendment has been prepared and reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. DCA 98-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA October 14, 1998 Page 2 the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, and further, specifically finds that based upon substantial evidence, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendment Will have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, the proposed amendment is exempt pursuant to State C EQA Guidelines, Section 21080.17. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of Development Code Amendment 98-02 as shown in the Ordinance attached hereto. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of ibis Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 1998. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman A'FI'EST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Bullet, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of October 1998, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT NO. 98-02, AMENDING SECTION 17.08.030 PERTAINING TO SECOND DWELLING UNIT REGULATIONS. A. Recitals. 1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for Development Code Amendment No. 98-02, as described in the title of this Ordinance. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the subject Development Code Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On June 10, and continued to July 8, August 12, September 9, September 23, and October 14, 1998, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on the latter date. 3. On , the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and ordained by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public hearing on , including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The proposed amendment is warranted in order to be in compliance with State law. b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment. Code. c. The proposed amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the Development d. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development in a manner consistent with the General Plan and related development; and Code; and The proposed amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the Development CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DCA 98-02 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Page 2 c. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and d. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. This Council hereby finds that the proposed amendment has been prepared and reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970. as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, and further, specifically finds that based upon substantial evidence, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendment will have a significant effect on the environment and. therefore, the proposed amendment is exempt pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, Section 21080.17. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set fodh in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Council hereby approves Development Code Amendment No. 98-02, amending Section 17.08.030.E.6.d. & f. to read as follows: fld · Thc unit doca not excccd 640 3quarc fcct. The unit shafi not exceed 640 square feet if the parcel is less than 20,000 square feet; if greater than 20,000 square feet, the second unit can exceed 640 square feet but may not be greater than 1,200 square feet or 30 percent of the main dwelling unit, if attached. (Unit size is exclusive of enclosed parking space requirement) Lot size: A second dwelling unit may be established on a lot or parcel of land having a minimum of 10,000 square feet. Height: A detached second dwelling unit shaft be limited to one story, shaft not exceed 16 feet in height, and shaft not exceed the height of the main dwelling unit. Thc unit 3haft providc parking and accc33 pcr Chaptcr 17.12, cxccpt tcmporary rcmoveblc unit3 3hall providc onc off 3trcct parking 3pacc. The unit shall provide parking and access per Chapter 17. 12 and pro vide one enclosed parking space per bedroom, not to exceed two enclosed spaces per unit. The enclosed parking space shaft not be located in the required front or side yard setback for the primary unit. Temporary removable units shaft provide one off- street parking space." 6. If any section, subsection, sentence. clause. phrase, or word of this Ordinance is, for any reason. deemed or held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any coud of competent jurisdiction, or preempted by legislative enactment. such decision or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section. subsection, sentence. clause, phrase, or word thereof. regardless of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences. clauses, phrases, or words might subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional or preempted by subsequent legislation. 7· The City Clerk shall certify to ~he adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage at least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. California. DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: October 14, 1998 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CITY OF ILa, NCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT Brad Buller, City Planner Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-45 - MASI COMMERCE PARTNERS - The development of three auto service buildings totaling 20,400 square feet on 2.23 acres of land within the Masi Plaza in the Industrial Park Distdct (Subarea 7) of the industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southwest side of Masi Drive and Sebastian Way - APN: 229-011-56 through 60. (Continued from September 23, 1998). PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: Surrounding Land Use and ZoninG: North - A partially developed commercial center; Industrial Park District, Subarea 7 of Industrial Area Specific Plan and Commercial Recreation South - Adult sports complex; General Industrial District, Subarea 8 of Industrial Area Specific Plan East Undeveloped; Industrial Park District, Subarea 7 of Industrial Area Specific Plan West Undeveloped but with vineyards; Industrial Park District, Subarea 7 of Industrial Area Specific Plan General Plan DesiGnations: Project Site - Industrial Park North Industrial Park and Commercial Recreation South - General Industrial East Industrial Park West Industrial Park Site Characteristics: The site is graded and landscaped for erosion control. All street improvements, curbs, gutters, sidewalk, street lights, and street trees are completed. D. Parking Calculations: Number of Number of Type Square Parking Spaces Spaces of Use Footage Ratio Required Provided 3 Auto Service Bldgs. with 42 Bays total 21,400 3 per bldg. 93 93 plus 2/bay ITEM B Y PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 9745 - MASI COMMERCE PARTNERS October 14, 1998 Page 2 ANALYSIS: General: The project site is within Masi Plaza, a 27-acre commercial and industrial master planned complex located at the southwest quadrant of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue. The master plan development was approved by the City in July 1992, as shown in Exhibit "A." Public improvements for Masi Plaza such as curbs, gutter, sidewalk, street lights and street trees were completed. The project site located at the southwest side of the master plan is an expansion of the auto service court. The design ofthe proposed project, that is, the orientation of the buildings and .the architectural style, is in substantial conformance with the master plan. The three buildings are planned for speculative minor auto repair or auto related types of businesses. The applicant did not indicate any specific tenants for the buildings. Desian Review Committee: The Committee (Macias, McNiel, Fong) reviewed the proposed project and recommended that the applicant revise the building design to address the concerns listed in the Design Review Committee Action Agenda, (see Exhibit "G"). The Committee (Macias and Fong).raviewed the revised plans and recommended approval on September 1, 1998, (see Exhibit "G"). Environmental Assessment: Staff has completed the Initial Study Part II and determined that the development of the proposed project will not have significant impact on the environment. If the Commission concurs with the findings, then issuance of a Negative Declaration for the project would be in order. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public headng in the Inland Valley Daily B_ ulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the project site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission approve the project and issue a Negative Declaration. City Planner BB:NF:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" Exhibit "B" Exhibit "C" Exhibit "D" Exhibit "E" Exhibit "F" Exhibit "G" Approved Master Plan for Masi Plaza Detailed Site Plan Conceptual Grading Plan Conceptual Landscape Plan Elevations Floor Plans Design Review Committee Action Agenda dated August 18, and September 1, 1998 Exhibit "H" Initial Study Part II and Negative Declaration Resolution of Approval with Conditions -- AUtO FOOTHILL BOULEVARD ~ REM~L RE[,UL III IU ~JIIIIILHI' IIJfiL!J.IIIIJ CURVE DATA BENCH MARK NO. 121-B STORM DRAIN NOTE: MAS{ PI~Y_A fp WEST ELEVATIOH MASI PLAZA .?1 SDUTH ELEVATION NORIH ELEVATION ~EST ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION (~ runor PLAN {~ ~)~ ............. BUILDING NO. 20 © ® ; ® PLAN FLOOR PI,~ BUILDING NO. 2 1 FLnDR PLAN ELL"VAI10NS DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Nancy Feng August 18, 1998 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-45 -MASI - The development of three auto service buildings totaling 20,400 square feet on 2.23 acres of land within the Masi Plaza in the Industrial Park District, Subarea 7 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southwest side of Masi Drive and Sebastian Way - APN: 229-011-56 through 60. Desiqn Parameters: Recently, the City Council amended the size of auto service centers from 4 to 6 acres and added design criteria for auto service uses. The attached Ordinance No. 589 shows the following added criteria: increasing the percentages of landscape areas, requiring 360-degree architectural treatments, screening of service bays and pumps, and requiring plaza areas. With the success ofthe auto service court in Masi Plaza, the applicant would like to expand it. The site for the auto service expansion is immediately south of the existing one. All street improvements, curb gutters, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees around the site are completed. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: Provide additional architectural treatment to all office entries towers for the three buildings. The office entries need to project a stronger architectural statement. Several possibilities have been discussed with the project architect. Vanate the roof line and the building plane to break up the long continuous horizontal roof and continuous row of service bays at the rear of Buildings 20 and 21. The building surface needs to have additional architectural treatment. 3. Add architectural treatment to the side e evations of the three buildings. Secondan/Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Provide raised planters, metal trellises and appropriate landscaping materials for the three recessed areas at the northeast side of Building 21. 2. Provide additional trees along the west property boundary. 3. Provide specimen size trees at project entries. , Landscape palette and building materials and color scheme should be consistent with the theme established in Masi Plaza. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the applican! revise the elevations to address the above identified issues and submitted for further Committee revue Plans will be available at the meeting. Attachment ~f/'/fSIT"~ /" ,e DRC AGENDA CUP 97-45 - MASI AQgust 18, 1998 P~ge 2 D~siqn Review Committee Action: Members Present: Larry McNiel, Rich Macias Stiff Planner: Nancy Fong follows: 1. ~ Add pop-out areas to the rear elevations of Buildings 20 and 21 consistent with the design shown in Building 9 of the Masi Plaza. 5. 6. 7. Expand the column size at the office entries for Building 21 consistent with Buildings 20 and 22. Add spandrel glass to the recessed wall at the north elevation of Building 20 and the east elevation of Building 21. Add storefront glass to the north elevation of Building 21. Expand the width of the office tower at the middle section of the east elevation of Building 21 Provide dense landscaping along the west and south property boundaries. The applicant agreed to address the secondary design issues identified in the staff commenb minus Item No. 1. CONSENT CALENDAR COMMENTS 8:10 p.m. Nancy Fong September 1, 1998 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 97-45 -MASI - The development of three auto service buildings totaling 20,400 square feet on 2.23 acres of land within the Masi Plaza in the Industrial Park District (Subarea 7) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southwest side of Masi Drive and Sebastian Way - APN: 229-011-56 through 60. Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Rich Macias, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Nancy Fong The Committee reviewed the revised elevations and recommended approval with a condition that a recessed area at the projected roof parapet be provided to the south elevation of Building 20 and west elevation of Building 21, consistent with the design of the existing auto service buildings. City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: 2. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit 97-45 Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 98-01; Conditional Use Permit 91-24 Description of Project: The development of three auto service buildings totaling 20,400 square feet on 2.23 acres of land within the Masi plaza in the Industrial Park District, Subarea 7 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at the southwest side of Masi Drive and Sebastian Way - APN: 229-011-56 through 60. The project site is within Masi Plaza, a 27-acre commercial and industrial master planned complex located at the southwest quadrant of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue. The master plan development was approved by the City in July of 1992. Public improvements for the site such as curbs, gutter, sidewalk, street lights and street trees for Foothill Boulevard, Rochester Avenue, the new Masi Ddve and Sebastian Way were completed, and the related building pads were graded. The auto service court at the northwest side of the master plan is completed. The 18+ acre mixed use center at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Rochester Avenue is partially developed. The industrial center at the southern portion of the master plan is still undeveloped. The proposed project located at the southwest side of the master plan is an expansion of the auto service court. The design of the proposed project (three auto service buildings) is in substantial conformance with the master plan. The project site is graded, disturbed and landscaped for erosion control. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Masi Commerce Partners Mike Scandiffio 11871 Foothill Boulevard Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 5. General Plan Designation: Industrial Park Zoning: Industrial Park District, Subarea 7 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: North Zoned Industrial Park Distdct (Subarea 7), and developed with a 4-acre auto service court consisting of a service station and minor auto repair services. South - Zoned Park and developed with an adult sports complex and baseball stadium. East Zoned Industrial Park District (Subarea 7), and is undeveloped but with improved street frontages and is master planned for future small industrial buildings. West Zoned Industrial Park Distdct (Subarea 7), and is undeveloped. EXHIBIT "H" Initial Study for CUP 97-45 - Masi City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2 Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Contact Person and Phone Number: Nancy Fong, AICP Senior Planner (909) 477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: Cucamonga County Water District ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ( ) Land Use and Planning ( ) Population and Housing ( ) Geological Problems (X) Water (X) Air Quality ( ) TransportatioNCirculation ( ) Biological Resources ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources ( ) Hazards ( ) Noise ( ) Mandaton/Findings of Significance ( ) Public Services ( ) Utilities and Service Systems ( ) Aesthetics ( ) Cultural Resources ( ) Recreation DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: (x) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. () I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. () I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. () I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based upon the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I~itiat Study for CUP 97-45 - Masi City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1 ) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signed: City Planner August 19, 1998 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS P. ursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation i~ required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Ir~corporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. t'L LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal.' a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community? ( ) (x) ( ) (x) ( ) (x) ( ) (x) Comments: The proposed development is an expansion of an existing auto service court, which would be compatible to the surrounding uses. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal.' a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ( ) No ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga CUP 97-45 - Masi Page 4 b) c) Potentially Signdicant Impact Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? ( ) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) NO Impact ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) b) c) d) e) g) h) ~) Comments: Fault rupture? ( ) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) Seiche hazards? ( ) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) Subsidence of the land? ( ) Expansive soils? ( ) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) Project site is not within a Fault Zone. No Impact ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) () () () () () () () () (x) (x) (x) (x) Potentially Significant ImOad WATER. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? ( ) b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( ) () () (x) () No () (x) I~itial Study for GUP 97-45 - Masi City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 5 c) d) g) h) ~) Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwate~ Impacts to groundwater quality? Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? (x) () () () () (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) Comments: a) The development of the site will increase the impervious surface, which will have an increase in surface runoff. The drainage facilities required to be installed for the development of the site will handle the increase. c) The site is designed for minor auto repair and related services, which could increase the opportunity for discharge of pollutants into the drainage facilities. However the auto related types of businesses will be required to meet the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). Therefore, the development of the site would not have an impact to the quality of the surface water. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposak a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? No ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga CUP 97-45 - Masi Page 6 c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) Comments: a) & d) The proposed development must comply with requirements of Air Quality Management District, who regulates air quality. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g.. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including, but not limited to: plants. fish, insects, animals. and birds)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for ~UP 97-45 - Masi City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 7 b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? () ( ) (x) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g,, eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? () ( ) (x) d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, ripadan, and vernal pool)? ( ) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) (x) Comments: The project site is at the southwest side of Sebastian way and Masi Drive. The project site .and east of the site were disturbed, graded, and landscaped for erosion control. West of the project site is undeveloped and is an active but declining vineyard. However, two burrowing owls were observed at the north and south side of Sebastian Way at or adjacent to the project site in February and March of 1998. There were no sightings of the owls in August of 1998. The species is not protected by State or Federal Endangered Species Acts but is protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918. The guidelines from the California Department of Fish and Game require that the project-related disturbances at active nesting territories be reduced or eliminated during the nesting cycle of February to August 31. The applicant was informed and he agreed to follow the species- specific survey protocol. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal.' a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner?. ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga CUP 97-45 - Masi Page 8 HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including. but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? ( ) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? ( ) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? ( ) e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? ( ) No () -() (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) t0. NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) () () () () No (x) (x) 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) b) C) d) e) Fire protection? ( ) Police protection? ( ) Schools? ( ) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) Other governmental services? ( ) () () () () () () () () () () NO (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) I,mtlal Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga CUP 97-45 - Masi Page 9 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) b) c) d) g) Power or natural gas? Communication systems? Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste disposal? Local or regional water supplies? () () () () () () () No (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) 13. ImDacl AESTHETICS. Would the proposal.' a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) c) Create light or glare? ( ) () () () () () () No (x) (x) (x) 1'4 CULTURAL RESOURCES, Would the proposal: a) b) c) d) e) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) Signfficant Unless ~,~gation No (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga CUP 97-45 - Masi Page 10 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal.' a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) 16. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restdct the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? ( ) b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively bdef, definitive period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) ( ) c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) ( ) d) · Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ( ) NO Impact ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) I~itial St y r City of Rancho Cucamcnga , ud fo GUP 97-45 - Masi Page 11 EARLIER ANALYSES E:arlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, o, ne or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards. and s'uch effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (X) General Plan EIR (Certified Apdl 6, 1981) ( ) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (X) Industrial Area Specific Plan EIR (Certified September 19, 1981) ( ) Industrial Area Specific Plan. Subarea 18, EIR (SCH #93102055, certified June 15, 1994) ( ) Victoria Planned Community EIR (Certified May 20, 1981) ( ) Terra Vista Planned Community EIR (SCH #81082808, certified February 16, 1983) ( ) Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan EIR _, . (SCH #87021615, certified September 16. 1987) ( ) Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR (SCH #82061801. certified July 6, 1983) (X) Other: A N~.g,~tiv~. F)6.r.l~r~tinn w~ i~ ~d fnr M~i Plaza under CUP 91-24 /~.PPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where cleady no significant environmental effects would occur, Signature: Date: Print Name and Title: Mikp R~nnr'liffin . M~i ~nmmprr~p (":pntpr RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 97-45 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THREE AUTO SERVICE BUILDINGS TOTALING 20,400 SQUARE FEET WITHIN MASI PLAZA IN THE INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT, SUBAREA 7 OF THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST SIDE OF SEBASTIAN WAY AND MASI DRIVE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 229-011-56 THROUGH 60. A. Recitals. 1. Masi Commerce Partners has filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit No. 97-45, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On September 23, and continued to October 14, 1998, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public headng on October 14, 1998, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at the southwest side of Sebastian Way and Masi Drive with a street frontage of approximately 380 feet and lot depth of 160 feet and is presently undeveloped. b. The property to the north is partially developed with commercial buildings, the property to the south is the Adult Sports Complex, the properties to the east and west are undeveloped. c. The project site is within an approved 27-acre master plan, Masi Plaza. The proposed project is an expansion of the auto service court already completed at the north side of the project site. d. The proposed project, with its building orientation and architectural style, is consistent with the approved master plan environment. The development of the project would not have a significant impact on the PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ,COUP 97-45 - MASI COMMERCE PARTNERS ctober 14, 1998 Page 2 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng the above- i'eferenced 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 use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code and the Industrial Area Specific Plan, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. b. 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 )mprovements in the vicinity. c. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code and Industrial Area Specific Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. The Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed 'and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the 'application. b. Based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the 'proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5c of Title 14 of the California Code of ',Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed !project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which ,wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, ;the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission dudng the ,public headng, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set ;forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. ; 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, 3, and 4 above, 'this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planninq Division 1 ) The approval is for three auto service buildings totaling 20,400 square feet. 2) All repair or other work shall be conducted inside the buildings. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION CUP 97-45 - MASI COMMERCE PARTNERS October 14, 1998 Page 3 3) Outdoor parking or storage of vehicles for repair not within business operating hours is prohibited. Signs shall be posted for no overnight parking on-site. 4) Placement of mail boxes shall be subject to City Planner review and approval. 5) Public phones shall be placed inside the buildings. 6) Building materials, color scheme, hardscape, and landscape palette shall be consistent with the theme established in Masi Plaza. 7) Provide concrete curbing to all landscape planters. Provide asphalt curbing along the eastedy property boundary for proper transition to undeveloped area. 8) Provide additional trees at the rate of one tree per 10 feet on center for the west and south property boundaries. 9) Provide specimen size trees at project entdes. lo) Provide a recessed area at the projected roof parapet to the south elevation of Building 20 and west elevation of Building 21, consistent with the design of the existing auto service buildings. 11 ) Provide reflective coating for the glass area of the sectional roll-up doors. Enaineedna Division 1) All lot line adjustments affecting parcels 22 through 26 shall be recorded, pdor to building permit issuance. 2) Revise Drawing No. 1499 to locate all parkway culverts on the Sebastian Way frontage (sheet 2), void the approved intedm spillway design for the south end of the 60-foot wide surface overflow easement (sheet 28), and show the ultimate design. Provide a drainage study to support the recommended design. The overflow spillway shall be constructed as part of this development. 3) Parcel Map No. 13845 monumentation has not been completed. This issue shall be resolved, prior to issuance of any more building permits. 4) Outstanding conditions of approval tied to Phase 1 improvements shall be completed and accepted by the City, pdor to the issuance of any more building permits. 5) All existing street improvements, including traffic signs and markings, shall be protected in-place. pLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ,CUP 97-45 - MASI COMMERCE PARTNERS October 14, 1998 Page 4 Fire Prevention/New Construction Unit 1) Locate existing fire hydrants. Additional Fire hydrants may be required. 2) All access must meet the miniurn 26 feet wide with 14 feet 6 inches vertical clearances. All turning radius must comply with the Fire District Fire Lane standards. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 1998. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission Qf 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 !he Planning Commission held on the 14th day of October 1998 by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: . COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: Conditional Use Permit 97-45 Three Auto Service buildings totaling 20,400 sq. ft. on 2.23 acres Masi Commerce Partners Southwest side of Sebastian Way and Masi Ddve ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: General Requirements 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, offcars, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. ComOletjon Date A copy of the signed Resolution of Approval or City Planner's letter of approval, and all Standard Conditions, shall be included in legible form on the grading plans. building and construction plans, and landscape and irrigation plans submitted for plan check. Bo Time Limits Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. C. Site Development The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, extedor materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations. and the Industrial Area Specific Plan. 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 City Planner. · 1 SC - 8/27198 /~) / Project NO CUP 9~-45 Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be su bruitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. , 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. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable COmmunity or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. A detailed on-site lighting plan, including a photometric d lagram, shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and Police Department (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. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened th rough the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. For single family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. 10.' All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, , including proper illumination. 11.¸ All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved pdor to the issuance of building permits. D. Sh~pping Centers 4,: Graffiti shall be removed within 72 hours. The entire site shall be kept free from trash and debris at all times and in no event shall trash and debris remain for more than 24 hours. Textured pavement shall be provided across circulation aisle, pedestrian walkway, and plaza. They shall be of brick/tile pavers, exposed aggregate, integral color concrete, or any combination thereof. Full samples shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. Any outdoor vending machines shall be recessed into the building faces and shall not extend into the pedestrian walkways. The design details shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits. Prolect No. CUP g7-45 Completion Date E. Building Design All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction ofthe City Planner. Details shall be included in building plans. For commercial and industrial projects, paint roll-up doors and service doors to match main building colors. F. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) All parking spaces shall be 9 feet wide by 18 feet long. When a side of any parking space abuts a building, wall, support column, or other obstruction, the space shall be a minimum of 11 feet wide. All parking lot landscape islands shall have a minimum outside dimension of 6 feet and shall contain a 12-inch walk adjacent to the parking stall (including curb). Textured pedestrian pathways and textured pavement across circulation aisles shall be provided throughout the development to connect dwellings/units/buildings with open spaces/plazas/recreational uses. All parking spaces shall be double stdped per City standards and all driveway aisles, entrances, and exits shall be striped per City standards. Handicap accessible stalls shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or more parking stalls. Designate two percent or one stall, whichever is greater, of the total number of stalls for use by the handicapped. Motorcycle parking area shall be provided for commercial and office facilities with 25 or more parking stalls. Developments with over 100 parking stalls shall provide motorcycle parking at the rate of one percent. The area for motorcycle parking shall be a minimum of 56 square feet. Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commercial, office, industrial, and multifamily residential projects or more than 10 units. Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the required automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first 50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2.5 percent of the required automobile parking spaces. Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage spaces at a rate of 2.5 percent on the required automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a 3-bike rack. In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces required exceed 100. Where this results in a fraction of 0.5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher whole number. ' - Carpool and vanpool designated off-street parking close to the building shall be provided for commercial, office, and industrial facilities at the rate of 10 percent of the total parking area. If covered, the vertical clearance shall be no less than 9 feet. G. Landscaping A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 3. 4. 5. Project No CUP CompletiOn Date A minimum of 20% of trees planted within industrial projects, and a minimum of 30% within commercial and office projects, shall be specimen size trees - 24-inch box or larger. Within parking lots, trees shall be planted at a rate of one 15-gallon tree for every three parking stalls, sufficient to shade 50% of the parking area at solar noon on August 21. Trees shall be planted in areas of public view adjacent to and along structures at a rate of one tree per 30 linear feet of building. 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, ordecaying plant material shall be replaced within 30 days from the date of damage. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xedscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: H. Sit~ Development 1. j Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number (i.e., CUP 98-01 ). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electdc Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please contact fie Building and Safety Division for copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new commercial'or industrial development or addition to an existing development, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: Transportation Development Fee, Drainage Fee, School Fees, Permit and Plan Checking Fees. 3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, aftertract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday. I. New Structures SC - 8/27/98 Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for the property line clearances considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness. Provide compliance with the Uniform Building Code for required occupancy separation(s). Project NO. CUP 9745 Completion Date 3. Roofing material shall be installed as for wind-resistant roof covering at wind velocity not less than 90 mph. Grading 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards. and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. 3. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved pdor to issuance of building permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: K. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed, and operable prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. 2. An automatic fire extinguishing system(s) will be required as noted below: X Other: 1994 UBC, Note: Special sprinkler densities are required for such hazardous operations as woodworking, plastics manufacturing, spray painting, flammable liquids storage, high piled stock, etc. Contact the Fire Safety Division to determine if the sprinkler system is adequate for proposed operations. 3. Sprinkler system monitoring shall be installed and operational immediately upon completion of sprinkler system. 4, A fire alarm system(s) shall be required as noted below: X Per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection Distdct Ordinance 15. 5. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire Distdct's fire lane standards, as noted: X All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection Distdct Ordinance 22. 6. Fire department access shall be amended to facilitate emergency apparatus. 7. Emergency secondary access shall be provided in accordance with Fire District standards. 8. A Knox rapid entry key vault shall be installed prior to final inspection. Proof of purchase shall be submitted prior to final building plan approval. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specific details and ordering information. 9. $677,00 Fire District fee(s), and a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District prior to Building and Safety permit issuance, ** Project NO. CUP 9745 CompleUon Date A Fire Distdct fee in the amount of $132.00 shall be paid at the time of Water Plan submittal. **Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans. 10.; Plansshallbesubmittedandapprovedpdortoconstructioninaccordancewith1994UBC, UFC, UPC, UMC, NEC, and RCFD Standards 22 and 15. L. Special Permits 1.: Special permits may be required, depending on intended use. as noted below: Garages. Motor vehicle repair (H-4). /-- DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: October 14, 1998 CII'Y OF ILANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15911 - FRIEDMAN - A residential subdivision of 55 single family lots on 17 acres of land in the Low- Medium Residential Distdct (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the northeast corner of East Avenue and the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way - APN: 227-141-011 and 012. Related file: Tentative Tract 15912. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Proiect Density: 3.2 dwelling units per acre Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Single family dwellings, vacant land; Low and Low-Medium Residential Districts South- Railroadright-of-way(trackspresently"outofservice");MediumResidentialDistdct East - 1-15 Freeway West - Single family dwellings, vacant land; Low Residential District Ce General Plan Desiclnations: Project Site - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) North Low and Low-Medium Residential (2-4 & 4-8 dwelling units per acre, respectively) South - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) East 1-15 Freeway West Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) D, Site Characteristics: The project site is on the east side of East Avenue, north of the abandoned railroad. The site is undeveloped land with non-native grasses and other ruderal plant species. There are no windrows or heritage trees within the project boundaries. The mature windrow south of the abandoned railroad will not be impacted by the project. The site slopes approximately 3 percent from north to south. ANALYSIS: General: The project site extends from East Avenue to the I-15 Freeway with the abandoned railroad right-of-way along its southern boundary. A Community Trail (hiking, biking, and equestrian) is proposed along the railroad right-of-way. A community equestrian trail is ITEH C PmLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TI' 15911 - FRIEDMAN October 14, 1998 Page 2 designated along the eastern boundary of the site. The project consists of a subdivision map only; no house plans are proposed at this time. . The Etiwanda Speci~c Plan restricts accesson EastAvenue, which leadstothe single access design, The applicant is proposing a loop street with the entrance to the tract on East Avenue. A future street stub-out is provided in the northeastem portion of the tract to provide secondary access upon development of the property to the north. Lots range in size from 8,800 to 18,613 square feet, with an average lot size of 10,100 square feet, which are considerably larger than typical lots within the Low-Medium Residential District. The project wi II provide the East Avenue theme wall as the tract boundary wall (stone pilasters with stucco wails and river rock planters). A noise attenuation wall is required at the southeast portion of the project to mitigate noise from the I-15 Freeway. The noise attenuation wall is from 6 to 11 feet in height, except for the southeastern comer cut-off, where 3 lots abutting the freeway will require a wall 15 to 17 feet in height. The noise attenuation wall will match the proposed design for the Route 30 Freeway wall (split-face block with fluted split-face block on the upper three courses). The freeway is considerably higher than the tract, so the view of the wall is not expected to be disproportionate from this vantage point. The developer will provide vines and other plant material in the rear yard of impacted lots to mitigate excessive wall heights from inside the project. This project relies Upon the construction of an interim water detention basin located outside of the project boundaries. The basin is proposed on the 10+ acre site on the southwest corner of East Avenue and the railroad right-of-way in the companion application, Tentative Tract 15912. The conditions will make approval of this project contingent upon the approval and construction of the off-site basin. NeiGhborhood MeetinG: The developer conducted a neighborhood meeting at Etiwanda High School on August 13, 1998. ReSidents in attendance were concerned with the existing traffic congestion at Victoria Street and East Avenue because of the high school and believed a traffic signal would help this situation. Residents did not object to the street system or lot layout. Trails Advisory Committee: The project was reviewed by the Trails Advisory Committee on June 4, 1998. The Committee recommended the dedication and construction of a 20-foot Community Trail along the east tract boundary, with a pedestrian-oriented trail connection to allow access from the loop street to the Community Trail. DesiGn Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee on September 15, 1998 (see Exhibit "F"). The Committee (Madas, McNiel, Fong) was satisfied with the proposed street system and lot layout and provided additional direction forthe access trail from the loop street to the Community Trail (Lot A). The Committee recommended the trail be designed for pedestrian and maintenance vehicle access using a meandering, textured sidewalk and low maintenance reckscape theme similar to the pedestdan/reckscape access approved for Tract 14534 on the southeast corner of Victoda Park Lane and Rochester Avenue (see Exhibit "E"). The width of the trail should "flare out" at the juncture with the Community Trail to avoid creating a tunnel effect with the freeway sound wall returns. The PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 15911 - FRIEDMAN October 14, 1998 Page 3 Committee recommended the Planning Commission approve the project with conditions to require a final acoustical study, a tract boundary wall plan, access trail, side yard landscaping on the two lots abutting the access trail, and rear yard landscaping on the three lots abutting the freeway. E= Technical Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Technical Review Committee on September 16, 1998. The Committee noted special conditions will be required to link approval of this project to the proposed off-site detention basin. Also, fire sprinklers are required because there is no secondary emergency access. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The site is impacted by various drainage, traffic, and noise issues. In order to complete the Initial Study pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the developer prepared detailed reports and made plan revisions to address issues, including: DrainaQe Issues: This project relies upon the construction of an interim water detention basin proposed for the adjacent tentative tract. A drainage study was prepared which analyzes the drainage impacts and the adequacy of the proposed basin to serve both projects. The conditions of approval require Tentative Tract 15911 to provide adequate drainage facilities to serve the development. Approval of this tentative tract is contingent upon the construction and availability of the intedm water detention basin proposed in Tentative Tract 15912. The proposed water detention basin shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the necessary easements acquired prior to recordation of this map. The basin shall be constructed prior to building permit issuance for future dwelling units. B. Traffic ImPacts: The proposed density is less than the density range allowed for the property. However, to address traffic issues, the developer has agreed to pay transportation development fees prior to final map approval in anticipation of a City project to install a traffic signal at the intersection of East Avenue and Victoda Street. Noise Impacts: The project's eastern boundary borders the I-15 Freeway. The City's General Plan indicates projected noise levels exceeding 65 LDN. A noise study was prepared forthe project to determine the noise exposure and necessary mitigation measures for development of the site. The study indicates a noise barrier ranging in height from 8 feet to 17 feet in height will be necessary along Lots 3 through 22 to mitigate freeway noise. The noise barrier may be a combination of berming and masonry walls, In addition, intedor noise levels will be mitigated through the imposition of a '~/indows Closed" condition by the means of mechanical ventilation and upgraded windows. A final acoustical analysis shall be required prior to obtaining building permits for the project. Staff completed the Initial Study, Part II, and determined that, with these mitigation measures, there would not be a significant adverse impact upon the environment as a result of this project. Staff recommends issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (see Exhibit "G"). FACTS FOR FINDING: A. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. P~LANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 'FF 15911 - FRIEDMAN October 14 1998 Rage 4 B. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan in which the site is located. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable prov!sions of the Development Code and Etiwanda Specific Plan. 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. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public headng in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a' 300-foot radius of the project site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract 15911 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions and the issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:RVB/jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Exhibit "B" - Exhibit "C" - Exhibit "D" - Exhibit "E" - Exhibit "F" - Exhibit "G" - Location Map Site UtiliZation & Master Circulation Plan Tentative Tract Map Grading Plan Paseo Plan September 15, 1998, Design Review Committee Action Comments Initial Study Part II Resolution of Approval with Conditions EXHIBIT A LOCATION MAP HWY. 30 HIGHLAND AVE. V1CTORIA ST. r" 'ETRACT 159 ! 1,.. TRACT 15912-/ I i S.P.R.R. (ABANDONED) BASELINE RD. N TENTATIVE TRACT NO, 15911 SITE UTILIZATION AND MASTER CIRCULATION PLAN .{ 2 ~) , / TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15911 CONCEPTUAL GRADING All) DRAINAGE PLAN 40 4 I 42 { 46 N TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15911 CONCEPTUAL GRAD&iG AND DRAINAGE PLAN BROOM FINISH CONCRETE ORIYE $$ ROCK TREA TWENT CITY APPROVAL ~T A. wEi~8 ASSOCt4 TES [,,,'IQ,,,I]iSI"I"" "1=" TRACT NO. 15911 PASEO PLAN DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Rebecca Van Buren September 15, 1998 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15911 - FRIEDMAN - A residential subdivision of 55 single family lots on 17 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (2- 4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the northeast corner of East Avenue and Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way - APN: 227-141-011 & 012. Design Parameters: The project site extends from East Avenue to the I-15 freeway with the abandoned railroad right-of-way along its southern boundary. A community trail (hiking, biking, and equestrian) is proposed along the railroad right-of-way. A community equestrian trail is designated along the eastern boundary of the site. The project consists of a subdivision map only; no house plans are proposed at this time. The Etiwanda Specific Plan restricts access on East Avenue, which leads to the single access design. The applicant is proposing a loop street with the tract entrance on East Avenue. A future street stub-out is provided in the northeastern portion of the tract to provide secondary access upon development of property to the north. Lots range in size from 8,800 to 18,613 square feet, with the lot average at 10, 100 square feet, which are considerably larger than typical lots within the Low-Medium District. The project will provide the East Avenue theme wall as the tract boundary wall (stone pilasters with stucco walls and dyer rock planters). Along the south and east boundaries, a noise attenuation wall is required to mitigate noise from the I-15 freeway. The noise attenuation wall is from 6 to 11 feet in height, except for the southeastern portion of the project, where 3 lots abutting the freeway will require a wall 15-17 feet in height. The freeway is considerably higher than the tract, so the view of the wall is not expected to be disproportionate from this vantage point. The developer will provide vines and other plant material in the rear yard of impacted lots to mitigate excessive wall heights from inside the project. This project relies upon the construction of an interim water detention basin located outside of the project boundaries. The basin is proposed on the 10+ acre site on the southwest corner of East Avenue and the railroad right-of-way in the companion application, Tentative Tract 15912. The conditions will make approval of this project contingent upon the approval and construction of the off- site basin, Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion: Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Staff recommends the noise attenuation wall on the south and east boundaries match the proposed design for the Route 30 freeway wall to minimize mix-match freeway sound wall designs. The Route 30 freeway wall consists of a double-sided split-face block with fluted split face block on the upper 3 courses. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project subject to the above modification. Attachments DF~C COMMENTS TE, 15911 - FRIEDMAN S~ptember 15, 1998 Pa,'ge 2 D~sign Review Committee Action: Members Present: Rich Macias, Larry McNiet, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Rebecca Van Buren The Committee reviewed the project and recommended the Planning Commission approve the project subject to the following: 1.; A wall plan shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval, prior to issuance of building permits. 2, ! The noise attenuation wall at the southeastern boundary shall match the proposed design for the i Route 30 freeway wall (split-face block with fluted split face block on the upper 3 courses). 3. ! A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval, prior to issuance : of building permits. The design of the project shall comply with recommendations in the report, The access to the community trail (Lot A) shall be designed as a pedestrian access with a meandering sidewalk and low maintenance rockscape theme similar to the pedestrian/rockscape access approved for Tract 14534. The access trail shall be designed to accommodate maintenance vehicles. The width of the access trail shall "flare out" at the community trail to avoid creating a tunnel effect. The precise configuration and design treatment of the access trail shall be subject to review by the Technical Review Committee. Side yard landscaping shall be required on Lots 17 and 18 abutting the community trail access route to include trees to shade the trail. City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND · 1. Project File: Tentative Tract No. 15911 2. Related Files: Tentative Tract No. 15912 Description of Project: A residential subdivision of 55 single family lots on 17 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Ran, located at the northeast comer of East Avenue and the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: John Friedman, RBF Associates 2049 Century Park East, Suite 790 Los Angeles, CA 90067 5. General Plan Designation: Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) Zoning: Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: To the north are single family dwellings and vacant land, to the south is a railroad right-of-way, (tracks are presently "out of service"), to the east is the 1-15 freeway, and to the west are single family residential dwellings and vacant land. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Ddve Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Contact Person and Phone Number: Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner (909) 477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: None I,nitial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15911 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the f,ollowing pages. ( ) Land Use and Planning ( ) Population and Housing (X) Geological Problems (x) Water ( ) Air Quality DETERMINATION (x) Transportation/Circulation (x) Biological Resources ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources ( ) Hazards (x) Noise ( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance (X) Public Services (X) Utilities and Service Systems ( ) Aesthetics ( ) Cultural Resources ( ) Recreation On the basis of this initial evaluation: ( ) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. () I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based upon the eadier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case becauseall potentially significant effects 1 ) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant'to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signed: Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner August 17, 1998 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15911 Page 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal.' a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal.' a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ( b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? ( c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( () () () (x) (x) (x) GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? ( ) No Impact ( ) ( ) (x) Ipitial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15911 Page 4 b) Seismic ground shaking? c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? d) Seiche hazards? e) Landslides or mudflows? f) Erosion, changes in 'topography, or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? h) Expansive soils? i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Com~en~; f) The project involves grading to develop residential pad sites and streets. The southeastern portion of the site presently drains to a culvert that crosses under the I-15 freeway. The topography of the site will be altered to allow the lots to drain to the new public streets, where runoff wiil be conveyed to approved drainage facilities. The design of the project site and construction of the proposed grading and structures shall follow the recommendations of the soils engineer and shall comply with the current building standards and codes at the time of construction. The recommendations of the Final Soils Engineering Investigation Report shall be incorporated into the project design with pertinent information noted on the final Grading Plan which shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Official pdor to issuance of grading permits. WATER, Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15911 Page 5 e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? f) g) h) i) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?. Impacts to groundwater quality? Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? (x) 0 ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) Commen~; a) This project relies upon the construction of a proposed intedm water detention basin located outside of the project boundaries. The basin is proposed on a 10+ acre site on the west side of East Avenue, south of the railroad right-of-way, in a companion application, Tentative Tract 15912. A drainage study was prepared which analyzes the drainage impacts and the adequacy of the proposed basin to serve both projects. The conditions of approval shall require Tentative Tract t 5911 to provide adequate drainage facilities to serve the development. Approval of Tentative Tract 15911 is based upon the construction and availability of an interim water detention basin to be located in the adjacent Tentative Tract 15912. The proposed water detention basin shall be completed prior to occupancy. b) The project is located in an area where the flood hazards are undetermined (Zone D). Since the project is south of both the Victoda Basin and the future Route 30 Freeway, it is expected they will be able to process a redesignation to Zone X through FEMA. The conditions of approval shall require the developer to obtain a redesignation through FEMA to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. e) The southeastern portion of the site presently drains to a culvert that crosses under the 1-15 freeway. The topography of the site will be altered to allow the lots to drain to the new public streets. where runoff will be conveyed to approved drainage facilities. Surface runoff currently reaching the site from off site areas will be conveyed to approved drainage facilities which will be designed to handle the flows. I~itial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga T, entative Tract 15911 Page 6 6. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal.' a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) (X) ( ) ( ) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) (X) ( ) ( ) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Commertts; a) The project will not increase vehicle trips or traffic congestion in excess .of projections for the adopted land use, for which the street widths were evaluated at build-out conditions. The proposed density is less than the density range for the property. The intersection of East Avenue and Victoria Street handles significant peak hour traffic from the nearby high school. The conditions of approval shall include the preparation of a Traffic Signal Study and mitigation to include provisions for installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of East Avenue and Victoria Street. The project will be required to install frontage street improvements in their ultimate configuration, per City Ordinance, and to pay Transportation Development Fees. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15911 Page 7 b) The circulation design features conform with our Street Design, Driveway, and Intersection Line of Sight policies. The project involves creating residential lots which will generate additional pedestrian trips, including pedestrian trips to the nearby Etiwanda High School on Victoria Street. The project design includes sidewalks and Class II bike lanes along the East Avenue frontage; however, there will be a narrow, unimproved gap on East Avenue between the project frontage and Victoria Street. In order to provide for the safety of pedestrians traveling behveen the project and the nearby school, the developer shall install a temporary asphalt sidewalk from the northern boundary of the project to Victoria Street to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Locally designated species (e.g., hedtage trees, eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, dpadan, and vernal poo~)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: b) The project involves removing two large shrubs along the northern boundary. The shrubs were identified in the biological report addendum, (Thomas Olsen Associates July, 10, 1998), as a Siberian elm, (UImus pumila), and a blue elderberry shrub, (Sambucus mexicana). The shrubs are non-native species and do not have historical, cultural, or scenic value. The shrubs do not represent significant bird or wildlife resources. The removal of the shrubs is not considered to be a significant impact. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) Potet~tially S~Jnrrt, ant Irnpac~ Less No ( ) ( ) (x) I, nitial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15911 Page 8 b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? No Imoact ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) 10. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals. or radiation)? ( ) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? ( ) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? ( ) e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or treeS? ( ) No ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) (-) (x) ( ) ( ) Commerlts: b) The project's eastern boundary borders the I-15 Freeway. The City's General Plan indicates projected noise levels exceeding 65 LDN A noise study was prepared for the project to determine the noise exposure and necessary mitigation measures for development of the site. The study indicates a noise barrier ranging in height from 6 feet to 17 feet in height will be necessary along Lots 3-22 to mitigate freeway noise. The noise barrier may be a combination of betruing and masonry walls. In addition, interior noise levels will be mitigated through the imposition of a Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15911 Page 9 "Windows Closed" condition with a means of mechanical ventilation and upgraded windows. A final acoustical analysis shall be required prior to obtaining building permits for the project. The design of the project shall follow the recommendations and mitigation measures of the acoustical engineer, and shall comply with the current building standards and codes at the time of construction. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: Potentially Signicant Impact Less a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Schools? ( ) (X) ( ) ( ) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) e) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: c) The Etiwanda and Chaffey High School Districts submitted correspondence indicating existing schools that would serve this project are already at or above capacity. The Districts state mitigation beyond the state statutory fees will be needed. As a condition of approval, the developer shall execute an agreement with the Districts to provide the additional mitigation or to provide full mitigation. Full mitigation may be accomplished by means of a requirement to form, or participate in an existing, Mello-Roos Community Facilities District for school facilities. 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? b) Communication systems? c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? d) Sewer or septic tanks? e) Storm water drainage? f) Solid waste disposal? () () () () () () ) (x) ) (x) ) ) (x) () (x) (x) () (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga tentative Tract 15911 Page 10 g) Local or regional water supplies? () () () (x) Comments: e) The project will not result in substantial alterations to the master plan of storm drainage by proposing to alter the location of interim basins which are required until the Regional Mainline facilities are installed by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District. The drainage approach shall be justified in the preliminary drainage report and a final drainage study will be required pdor to map recordation. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal.' a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? b) Disturb archaeological resources? c) Affect historical or cultural resources? d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? e) Restdct existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) t5. RECREATION. Would the proposal.' a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? Potentially () () () (x) () () () (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15911 Page 11 16, MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long- term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? () (x) (x) (x) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga tentative Tract 15911 Page 12 EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and ~dequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and ~uch effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (x) General Plan EIR (Certified April 6, 1981) (x) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (x) Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR (SCH #82061801, certified July 6, 1983) APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I!certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the 15roject plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur. S.9.ature: Date: City of Rancho Cucamonga NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 2f09f and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Tentative Tract 15911 Public Review Period Closes: October 14, 1998 Project Name: Project Applicant: John Friedman, RBF Associates Project Location (also see attached map): Located at the northeast corner of East Avenue and Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way - APN: 227-141-011 and 012. Project Description: A residential subdivision of 55 single family lots on 17 acres of land in the Low- Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Located at the northeast corner of East Avenue and Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way - APN: 227-141-011 and 012. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where cleady no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period. October 14, 1998 Date of Determination Adopted By RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROV1NG TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15911, A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 55 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON 17 ACRES OF LAND IN THE LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) OF THE ETIWANDA 'SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF EAST AVENUE AND THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-141-011 AND 012. A. Recitals. 1. John Friedman has filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 15911, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of October 1998, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said headng on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found. determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on October 14, 1998, including wdtten and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this CommissiOn hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at the northeast comer of EastAvenue and the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way, with a street frontage of 600 feet, a lot depth of 1,320 feet, and which is presently undeveloped; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is single family residential and vacant land, the property to the south consists of the railroad right-of-way. the property to the east is the 1-15 Freeway, and the property to the west contains single family.residential and undeveloped land; and c. The application contemplates a residential subdivision of 55 single family lots on 17 acres of land within the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and d. The General Plan and the Etiwanda Specific Plan designate a public Community Trail along the eastedy tract boundary and off-site within the railroad easement to the south; and e. The property is one block away from Etiwanda High School and approximately two blocks away from Etiwanda Intermediate School and will general traffic and school children that will use East Avenue and Victoria Street. :PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. iTT 15911 - FRIEDMAN :October 14, 1998 Page 2 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 I and 2 ,above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Etiwanda Specific Plan; and " b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Etiwanda Specific Plan; and c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental ,damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and , e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and i f. The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. ~ 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance' with ~he California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and; further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into !he proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code ~f Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat Upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the P~anning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption Of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of ,Regulations. ; 5, Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planninq Division 1 ) A wall plan shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. The wall plan shall include: PLANNtNG COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15911 - FRIEDMAN October 14, 1998 Page 3 a) The project shall provide the East Avenue theme wall as the tract boundary wall on East Avenue (stone pilasters with stucco walls and river rock planters). b) The noise attenuation wall at the southeastern boundary shall match the proposed design for the Route 30 freeway wall. c) The developer shall provide vines and other plant material in the rear yard of Lots 15, 16, and 17 to mitigate the appearance of a massive noise attenuation wall from inside the project. d) The developer shall provide vine pockets in the perimeter wall and install vines in the rear yards of Lots 3-17 to deter graffiti on the noise attenuation wall. 2) The developer shall dedicate and construct a 20-foot Community Trail along the east tract boundary, with a pedestrian-oriented trail connection to allow access from the loop street to the Community Trail. 3) The access to the Community Trail (Lot A) shall be designed as a pedestrian access with a textured sidewalk and low maintenance rockscape theme. The access trail shall be designed to accommodate maintenance vehicles. The width of the access trail shall "flare out" at the community trail to avoid creating a tunnel effect. The precise configuration and design treatment of the trail shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Planner and City Engineer pdor to recordation of the map. 4) Front and side yard landscaping shall be required on Lots 17 and 18 abutting the Community Trail access route, Landscaping shall include trees to shade the trail and shrubs or groundcover to soften the trail edge in the front setback, EnqineednQ Division {All Engineering Conditions annotated with an asterisk (*) shall be mitigation measures for the project.} 1) The full width of the existing portion of East Avenue shall be removed and reconstructed to Secondary Arterial standards simultaneous with widening along the project frontage. Widening shall extend across the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Provide pavement transitions sufficient to accommodate left turn striping into the proposed tract from the north and AC berm south'to Base Line Road for drainage purposes. 2) The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the project side of East Avenue shall be undergrounded from the first pole off site north of the north project boundary to the first pole off site south of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way, pdor to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. All services crossing East Avenue shall be undergrounded at the same time. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the City adopted cost for undergrounding from future development (redevelopment) as it occurs on the opposite side of the street. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, ~ 15911 - FRIEDMAN ,October 14, 1998 Page 4 3) *4) *5) 6) *7) *8) agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all dghts of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. Construction of improvements within East Avenue shall take into consideration the ROute 30 Freeway construction and Etiwanda High School traffic and maintain two-way traffic on East Avenue at all times. Construct a 6-foot wide paved shoulder on the east side of East Avenue from this development to Victoria Street, within existing rights-of-way. Transportation Development Fees shall be paid pdor to final map approval in anticipation of a City project to install a traffic signal at the intersection of East Avenue and Victoda Street. Provide an easement to the City for all of Lot E in Tract 15912 containing the proposed Etiwanda/San Sevaine Interim Master Basin No. 5, prior to final map approval. Construct Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area 8 Master Plan Storm Drain facilities in East Avenue from the north tract boundary to, and including, the relocated interim basin in Tentative Tract 15912, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, The developer shall receive credit for the cost of permanent master plan facilities up to the amount of the related drainage fees in effect at the time reimbursement is requested and shall be reimbursed for excess costs from future fee collection in accordance with City policy. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. Construct Etiwanda/San Sevaine Interim Master Basin No. 5 as follows, justified by a final drainage report approved by the City Engineer: a) Provide an ultimate design for the basin to serve the entire Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area 8 developed tributary area north of Base Line Road. b) Provide for maintenance vehicle access in the basin design. Install sufficient capacity to mitigate the increased runoff from this development, with an outlet system capable of handling the ultimate basin design (entire tributary area) with a minimum amount of modification as incremental development occurs. d) An assessment district shall be formed for maintenance of the detention basin or a maintenance agreement with a refundable deposit shall be executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing private maintenance of the facility, but providing the City with the dght of access to maintain the facility if private maintenance is insufficient and allowing the PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15911 - FRIEDMAN October 14, 1998 Page 5 9) 10) 12) 13) Fire 1) City to assess those costs to the developer. Said agreement shall be recorded to run with the property. e) Basin shall be completed and operational prior to the issuance of building permits. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover the proportionate cost of the land and ultimate basin related facilities (outlet, etc.) from future development using the basin. If the developer fails to submit said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. Extend the local storm drain in "C" Drive through Lot A to serve adjacent property to the northeast. Install a temporary inlet for undeveloped flows within Lot A near the southeast corner of Lot 18. All four sump catch basins shall be designed to handle Q100. Construct an interior Community Trail along the southeast tract boundary, within Lot A, per Standard Drawing 1004 modified as shown on the approved conceptual grading plan. Public improvement plans shall include a separate Community Trail plan, subject to approval of the City Engineer. The pedestrian/maintenance access paseo portion of Lot A shall conform with ADA and be designed to accommodate maintenance vehicles. Gates shall be installed to prohibit public access until such time as the Community Trail is extended, with key access for City maintenance. Parkway improvements along East Avenue shall be consistent with Figure 5-28A of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Tract perimeter walls shall be located at the top of slope, just outside the landscape easement. Portions ofthe river rock planter wall or the perimeter wall may be used for retaining, if needed. Landscape Maintenance District plans shall incorporate cost efficient, low maintenance designs, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The maximum slope within publicly maintained landscape areas shall be 3:1. Where slopes occur, a 1-foot flat area behind the sidewalk shall be provided. Slopes higher than 6 feet shall have a 2-foot bench at the top of slope, measured from the wall. It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone D designation removed from the project area. The developers engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, and hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be obtained from FEMA prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA pdor to occupancy or improvement acceptance, whichever occurs first. Distdct Fire sprinklers for residential dwellings are required in lieu of secondary access. Notwithstanding, if an adjoining property PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. ~TT 15911 o FRIEDMAN October 14, 1998 Page 6 subsequently provides secondary access to the project, the developer may submit a written request to the Fire District for a waiver of this condition. Mitiaation Measures 1) A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval pdor to the issuance of building permits. The acoustical report shall evaluate extedor noise impacts from the 1-15 Freeway. The acoustical report shall address the access trail designated as Lot A and provide recommendations for noise attenuation return walls. The design of the project shall comply with recommendations in the report. 2) A noise barrier ranging in height from 6 feet to 17 feet in height will be necessary along Lots 3 through 22 to mitigate freeway noise. The noise barrier may be a combination of berming and masonry walls. In addition, interior noise levels will be mitigated through the imposition of a "Windows Closed" condition by the means of mechanical ventilation and upgraded windows. All Engineering Conditions annotated with an astedsk shall be mitigation measures for the project. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 1998. .PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman 'A'FrEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do :hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and ,adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of October 1998, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: TENTATIVE TRACT 15911 SUBJECT: A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 55 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON 17 ACRES APPLICANT: JOHN FRIEDMAN LOCATION: NEC EAST AVENUE AND THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2790, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. Completion Date 2. ' Approval of Tentative Tract No. 15911 is granted subject to the approval of TT 15912. The developer shall commence, participate in. and consummate or cause to be commenced, participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection Distdct to finance construction and/or maintenance of a fire station to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed, and built to all specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the Distdct's property upon completion. The equipment shall be selected by the District in accordance with its needs. In any building of a station, the developer shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District for the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of such existing District prior to the recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. Further, if the affected school district has not formed a Mello-Rocs Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval of the project and 1 Project No 'FF15911~ ComDletlolr~ Oats prior to the recordation of the final map or issuance of building permits for said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void. This condition shall be waived if the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school impacts as a result of this project. A copy of the signed Resolution of Approval or City Planner's letter of approval, and all Standard Conditions, shall be included in legible form on the grading plans, building and construction plans, and landscape and irrigation plans submitted for plan check. B. Time Limits Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. C. Site Development 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 Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 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. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 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 City Planner. For single family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners'association, orothermeansacceptabletotheCity. Proofofthislandscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. D. Landscaping 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 City Planner review and approval pdor to the issuance of building permits or pdor final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The 2 Projsct No. location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and tdmming methods. All private slopes of 5 feet or less in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1 -gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropdate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigations shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Pdor to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. On projects which abut the 1-15 Freeway, the developer shall provide landscaping within the freeway right-of-way along the boundary of this project or pay an in-lieu of construction cash deposit. The landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared in conformance with Caltrans and City Standards through the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and City Engineer. Landscape and irrigation shall be installed prior to the release of occupancy of the project. If final approvals and/or installation is not complete at that time, the City will accept a cash deposit for future landscaping of the Caltrens right-of-way. E. Environmental A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provided, and if appropriate, vedty the adequacy ofthe mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report. Mitigation measures are raquirad for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the amount of $719.00, prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation TT159fi Coml31etion Date Project No. TT1591'i Comp etlon Date measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit, In those instances requiring long term monitoring (i.e.) beyond final certificate of occupancy), the applicant shall provide a written monitoring and reporting program to the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. Said program shall identity the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. F. Other Agencies 1.; Theapplicantsha~~c~ntacttheU`S.P~sta~Servicet~determinetheappr~pdatetypeand~~cati~n of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mail boxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mail boxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: G. Dedication and Vehicular Access Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all intedor public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees. traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Pdvate easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the pedmeter streets (measured from street centedine): 44 total feet on East Avenue 3. ' Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 4. Pdvate drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests necessary to construct the required public improvements, and if he/she should fail to do so, the developer shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the property interests required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Secudty for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at developers cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City pdor to commencement of the appraisal. This condition applies in particular, but not limited to: Intedm Master Basin No. 5 in Tract 15912. I/ 4 Project NO TT 15911 Coml:)letion Date H. Street Improvements All public improvements (intedor 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. 2. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Street Name East Avenue Curb & A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Other Gutter Pvmt walk Appr, Lights Trees Trail island Trail / / / / / e f Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and ovedays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in*lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. (e) Stdpe for Class II Bike Lane. (t) Post R26 signs. 3. Improvement Plans and Construction: Street improvement plans, including streettrees, 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 pdvate street improvements, pdor to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. Pdor to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineers Office in addition to any other permits required. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 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 widng. 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 (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with adequate detours dudng construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash Project No TT15911h Gore I p etion Date 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. 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 City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. Street trees, a minimum of 15-cJallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. 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. A permit shall be obtained from Caltrens for any work within the 1-15 Freeway right-of-way I. Public Maintenance Areas A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval pdor to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. The landscaped parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails or other areas for East Avenue and the Communit,/Trail in Lot A shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District. Public landscape areas are required to incorporate substantial areas (40%) of mortared cobble or other acceptable non-irrigated surfaces. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropdate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City. Parkway landscaping on East Avenue shall conform to the results of the respective Beautification Master Plan. J. Drainage and Flood Control A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. Util. ities Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electdc power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 6 Project No TT 15911 Completion Date 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department ofthe County of San Bemardino. Aletter ofcompliance from the CCWD 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 pdor to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. L. General Requirements and Approvals Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Regional Mainline, Secondary Regional, and Master Plan Drainage Fees shall be paid pdor to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. 2. Permits shall be obtained from SANBAG for work within their right-of-way. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new street lights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: M. General Fire Protection Conditions 1, Mello Roos Community Facilities Distdct requirements shall apply to this project. 2. Fire flow requirement shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel pdor to water plan approval. For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional fire flow test of the on-site hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel after construction and pdor to occupancy. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed, and operable pdor to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials. etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. , Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants, if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire Distdct standards require a 6-inch riser with a 4-inch and a 2-1/2-inch outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgraded to meet this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Fire District that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of the required fire protection system. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed pdor to final inspection. 7 C3v Project NO All roadways within project shall comply with the Fire Distdct's fire lane standards per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance No, 22, $132.00 in Fire District fee(s), and a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District prior to Building and Safet,/permit issuance. ** A Fire District fee in the amount of $132.00 shall be paid at the time of Water Plan submittal. **Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC, UPC, UMC, NEC, and RCFD Standards 22 and 15. T~ 15911 Completion Date DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -- STAFF REPORT October 14, 1998 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15912 - FRIEDMAN - A residential subdivision of 26 single family lots and an interim detention basin on 10 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way - APN: 227-131-005. Related files: Tree Removal Permit 98-16 and Tentative Tract 15911. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Project Density: 2.6 dwelling units per acre. Surrounding Land Use and ZoninG: North - Railroad right-of-way (tracks presently "out of sen/ice"); Low Residential District South - I-15 Freeway and vacant land; Office/Professional Distdct East - Single family dwellings and vacant land; Medium Residential Distdct West - Plant nursery; Low-Medium Residential District General Plan Desianations: Project Site - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) North - Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) South - 1-15 Freeway; Office East - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) West - Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) Site Characteristics: The project site is on the west side of East Avenue, south of the abandoned railread tracks. The site contains a single family dwelling, accessory structures, and a collection of inoperable vehicles and debris. There are four stands of Eucalyptus windrows on site which show signs of damage by borer beetle, fire, and barbed wire and are generally in poor condition. A healthy Eucalyptus windrow stand is south of the site and will not be impacted by the project. The site slopes approximately 2 percent from north to south. ANALYSIS: A. General: The project site is located on the west side of East Avenue, with the abandoned railroad right-of-way along its northern boundary. A Community Trail (hiking, biking, and k, J ITEH D P~LANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ]p' 15912 - FRIEDMAN October 14, 1998 Page 2 equestrian) is proposed along the railroad right-of-way. The project consists of a subdivision map only; no house plans are proposed at this time. The Etiwanda Specific Plan restricts access on East Avenue, which leads to the single access design. The applicant is proposing a series of cul-de-sacs with the tract entrance on East Avenue. A future street stub-out is provided in the western portion of the tract to provide secondary access upon development of property to the west. Lots range in size from 7,895 to 15,540 square feet, with an average lot size of 10,000 square feet, which is considerably larger than typical lots within the Low- Medium District. The project will provide the East Avenue theme wall as the tract boundary wall (stone pilasters with stucco walls and river rock planters). A 6-foot high noise attenuation wall is required to mitigate noise from the I-15 Freeway. The developer is proposing to revise the master plan of storm drainage by altering the location of interim basins which are required until the Regional Mainline facilities are installed by the San Bernardino County Flood Control Distdct. At the present time, the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Intedm Master Basin No, 5 is designated on a site on East Avenue, south of the I-15 Freeway. The developer is proposing to relocate Basin No. 5 north of the freeway to the project site. The basin would be located in the southern two acres and would serve the original basin area, including the proposed development in the companion application, Tentative Tract 15911. The basin will have the theme wall along East Avenue, a noise attenuation wall along the southern boundary, and wrought iron fencing along the remainder of its perimeter. The project will remove four mature windrows in poor condition and provide a replacement windrow at the northern boundary, adjacent to the railroad right-of-way. Neiahborhood Meetincl: The developer conducted a neighborhood meeting at Etiwanda High School on August 13, 1998. Residents in attendance were concerned with the existing traffic congestion at Victoda Street and East Avenue due to the high school and believed a traffic signal would help this situation. Residents did not object to the street system or lot layout. Desian Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee on September 15, 1998 (see Exhibit "F"). The Committee (Macias, McNiel, Fong) recommended that the Planning Commission approve the project with conditions to require a final acoustical study, a landscape and irrigation plan for the basin, and a wall plan for the tract boundary and freeway sound walls. D= Technical Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Technical Review Committee on September 16, 1998. The Committee noted special conditions will be required to revise the master plan of storm drainage by altering the location of the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Interim Master Basin No. 5 and to create an easement or other binding document to allow Tentative Tract 15911 to rely upon the proposed basin, Also, fire sprinklers are required because there is no secondary emergency access. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The site is impacted by various drainage, traffic, and noise issues. In order to complete the Initial Study pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the developer prepared detailed reports and made plan revisions to address issues, ipduding: PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Ti' 15912 - FRIEDMAN October 14, 1998 Page 3 Drainage Issues: This project proposes to relocate a designed basin and to construct an alternate interim water detention basin. A drainage study was prepared which analyzes the drainage impacts and the adequacy of the proposed basin to serve the original basin area. The conditions of approval require Tentative Tract 15912 to provide adequate drainage facilities to serve the development. Approval of Tentative Tract 15912 is based upon the construction and availability of an interim water detention basin to be located within the project boundaries. The proposed water detention basin shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to recordation of this map and shall be constructed pdor to issuance of building permits for future dwelling units. Traffic Impacts: The proposed density is less than the density range allowed for the property. However, to address traffic issues, the developer has agreed to pay transportation development fees pdor to final map approval in anticipation of a City project to install a traffic signal at the intersection of East Avenue and Victoria Street. C= Noise Impacts: The project's southern boundary borders the Base Line off-ramp of the I-15 Freeway. The City's General Plan indicates projected noise levels exceeding 65 LDN. A noise study was prepared for the project to determine the noise exposure and necessary mitigation measures for development of the site. The study indicates a noise barrier approximately 6 feet in height will be necessary along the southern boundary to mitigate freeway noise. The noise barrier may be a combination of berming and masonry walls. In addition, interior noise levels will be mitigated through the imposition of a "Windows Closed" condition through the means of mechanical ventilation and upgraded windows. A final acoustical analysis shall be required pdor to obtaining building permits for the project.. Tree Removal ReQuest: There are four mature Eucalyptus windrows on the site which are proposed for removal. An arborist's report (Thomas Olsen Associates, May 15, 1998) determined that the windrows have suffered numerous losses and show marked signs of borer beetle infestation and damage from fire and barbed wire. None of the windrows has a realistic probability of recovery. The windrows do not have significant habitat, aesthetic, or wind-control value in their present condition and are not designated as windbreaks to be preserved in the Etiwanda Specific Plan. As a condition of approval, replacement windrows of 15-gallon Eucalyptus maculata (spotted gum) planted 8-foot on center will be required to mitigate the loss of the mature windrows to be removed. Staff has completed the Initial Study, Part II and determined that, with these mitigation measures, there would not be a significant adverse impact upon the environment as a result of this project. Staff recommends issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration (see Exhibit "G"). FACTS FOR FINDING: A. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. B.. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan in which the site is located. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. PiLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ,'ITI' 15912 - FRIEDMAN October 14, t998 Page 4 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. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily B'ulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the project site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract 15912 and Tree Removal Permit 98-16 through adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with Conditions and the issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Respectfully submitted, Gity Planner BB:RVB/jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Location Map Exhibit "B" o Site Utilization and Master Circulation Exhibit "C" - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "D" - Grading Plan Exhibit "E" - Future Lot E Detention Basin Exhibit "F" - Design Review Committee Action Comments September 15, 1998 Exhibit "G" - Initial Study Part II Resolution of Approval with Conditions EXHIBIT A LOCATION MAP HVVY, 30 ......................................... ~ HIGHLAND AVE. VICTORIA ST, : .TRACT 15911."~ ['.::.::,..:::.::::.:~ TRACT 15912 S.P.R.R. I I I I I ~ I I (ABANDONED) BASELINE RD. I N N TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15912 SITE UTILIZATION AND MASTER CIRCULATION PLAN N LOT "E" ~, .... : ........... ~t~ .....~' TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15912 TENTATIVE 24 P (::,,,) ...... FUT. FUT. LOT LOT ...... ' ...... , ...... TRACT NO. 15912 "C" DRIVE FUT. FUT, FUT. LOT LOT LOT FUT. LOT FUT. ~ FUT. - LOT ,( I- uJ SECTION A-A N ,,j',, S SCALI']: 1"='10' WEBB CIVIl, ENGINEERS 3788 MCCRAY ST. RIVERSIDE CA. 92506 (909) 686 1070 EARTIIWOI(K NOTE: ~9.~oo ~.~. oE r,LL ,~ EsE,.A;EoEXHIBIT FUTURE LAYOUT AND GRADING LOT "E" DETENTION BASIN OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Rebecca Van Buren September 15, 1998 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15912 - FRIEDMAN -A residential subdivision of 26 single family lots 10 acres of land in the Low-Medium Distdct (2-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way -APN: 227-131-005. Design Parameters: The project site is located on the west side of East Avenue, with the abandoned railroad right-of-way along its northern boundary. A community trail (hiking, biking, and equestrian) is proposed along the railroad right-of-way. The project consists of a subdivision map only; no house plans are proposed at this time. The Etiwanda Specific Plan restricts access on East Avenue, which leads to the single access design. The applicant is proposing a series of cul-de-sacs with the tract entrance on East Avenue. A future street stub-out is provided in the western portion of the tract to provide secondary access upon development of property to the west. Lots range in size from 7,895 to 15,540 square feet, with an average lot size of 10,000 square feet, which are considerably larger than typical lots within the Low-Medium District. The project will provide the East Avenue theme wall as the tract boundary wall (stone pilasters with stucco walls and river rock planters). A 6-foot high noise attenuation wall is required to mitigate noise from the I-15 freeway. This project proposes the construction of an interim water detention basin in the southern 2 acres of the site. The basin is proposed to serve the project plus the proposed development in the companion application, Tentative Tract 15911. The basin will be secured with wrought iron fencing and landscaped alon9 its perimeter. The project will remove 4 mature windrows in poor condition and provide a replacement windrow along the railroad dght of way. Staff. Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion: Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan for the basin should be required, prior to final map approval. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the project subject to the above modification. Attachments Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Rich Macias, Larry McNiel, Nancy Fon9 Staff Planner: Rebecca Van Buren DRC COMMENTS TT 15912 - FRIEDMAN September 15, 1998 Page 2 The Committee reviewed the project and recommended the Planning Commission approve the project subject to the following: 1. A wall plan shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval, prior to issuance of building permits. 2. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval, prior to issuance of building permits. The design of the project shall comply with recommendations in the report. 3. A detailed Landscape and Irrigation Plan for the basin should be required, prior to final map approval. City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND Project File: Tentative Tract No. 15912 2, Related Files: Tentative Tract No. 15911 Description of Project: A residential subdivision of 26 single family lots on 10 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way. APN 227-131-005 Project Sponsor's Name and Address: John Friedman, RBF Associates 2049 Century Park East, Suite 790 Los Angeles, CA 90067 5. General Plan Designation: Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) 6. Zoning: Low-Medium Residential Distdct (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: To the north is a railroad right-of-way (tracks are presently "out of service"), to the south are vacant land and the I-15 freeway, to the west is a plant nursery, single family residential dwellings, and vacant land, to the east are single family residential dwellings and vacant land. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Ddve Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Contact Person and Phone Number: Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner (909) 477-2750 Other agencies whose approval is required: None Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15912 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ( ) Land Use and Planning (X) Population and Housing (X) Geological Problems (X) Water ( ) Air Quality (X) Transportation/Circulation (X) Biological Resources ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources ( ) Hazards (X) Noise ( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance (×) Public Services (X) Utilities and Service Systems ( ) Aesthetics ( ) Cultural Resources ( ) Recreation DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: ( ) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. (x) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ( ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. (), I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an eadier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based upon the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. () I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1 ) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signed: Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner August 17, 1998 I;nitial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15912 Page 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ~ursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation i~s required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposak a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community? ) ( ) ( ) (x) ) ( ) ( ) (x) ) ( ) ( ) (x) ) ( ) ( ) (x) POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal.' a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? No ) ( ) ( ) (x) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) (x) ( ) Comments: c) The proposed project involves demolishing and remowng one existing residence in order to facilitate construction of 26 residences. The existing residence is not an affordable housing unit. This impact is not considered to be significant. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15912 Page 4 GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? b) Seismic ground shaking? c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? d) Seiche hazards? e) Landslides or mudflows? f) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? g) Subsidence of the land? h) Expansive soils? i) Unique geologic or physical features? Comments: f) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) The project involves grading to develop residential pad sites, streets, and an interim detention basin. The topography of the site will be altered to create a detention basin. All runoff will be conveyed to approved drainage facilities. The design of the project site and construction of the proposed grading, basin, and structures shall follow the recommendations of the soils engineer and shall comply with the current building standards and codes at the time of construction. The recommendations of the Final Soils Engineering Investigation Report shall be incorporated into the project design with pertinent information noted on the final Grading Plan which shall be reviewed and approved by the Building Official pdor to issuance of grading permits. WATER. W/I/the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? c) Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? "~ I ~'' (x) () (x) (x) (x). I I Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga n~t~a 'f'entative Tract 15912 Page 5 e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ( ) ( ) f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? ( ) ( ) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) ( ) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ( ) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? () () (x) () (x) (x) (x) (x) Commen~: a) This project proposes the construction of a proposed interim water detention basin located on approximately 2 acres of land in the southern portion of the site. A drainage study was prepared which analyzes the drainage impacts and the adequacy of the proposed basin to serve this project and a companion application, Tentative Tract 15911. The conditions of approval shall require Tentative Tract 1 5912 to provide adequate drainage facilities to serve the development. Approval of Tentative Tract 15912 is based upon the construction and availability of an interim water detention basin. b) The project is not in a special flood hazard area. e) The project will not alter the course or direction of nearby water movements. Surface runoff currently reaching the site from off site areas will be conveyed to approved drainage facilities which will be designed to handle the flows. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal.' a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15912 Page 6 TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (eg,, bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? d) g) Rail or air traffic impacts? No ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) (x) ( ) (x) () () (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a) The project will not increase vehicle tdps or traffic congestion in excess of projections for the adopted land use, for which the street widths were evaluated at build-out conditions. The project density is less than the density range for the property. The intersection of East Avenue and Victoda Street handles significant peak hour traffic from the nearby high school The conditions of approval shall include the preparation of a Traffic Signal Study and mitigation to include provisions for installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of East Avenue and Victoria Street. The project will be required to install frontage street improvements in their ultimate configuration, per City Ordinance, and to pay Transportation Development Fees. b) The circulation design features conform with our Street Design, Driveway, and Intersection Line of Sight policies. e) The project involves creating residential lots which will generate additional pedestrian trips, including pedestrian trips to the nearby Etiwanda High School on Victoria Street. The project design includes sidewalks and Class II bike lanes along the frontage. However, there will be a narrow, unimproved gap on East Avenue between the project frontage and Victoria Street. In order to provide for the safety of pedestrians traveling between the project and the nearby school, the developer shall install a temporary asphalt sidewalk from the northern boundary of the project to Victoria Street to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Ibitial Study for ~entative Tract 15912 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? () ( ) ( ) (x) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: b) The proposed project includes removal of 4 mature windrows on site (Tree Removal Permit 98-16). An arborlet report by Thomas Olsen Associates dated May 15, 1998, indicates the 4 mature windrows have suffered numerous losses and show marked signs of borer beetle infestation or damage from other sources (fire and barbed wire). None of the 4 mature windrows has a realistic probability of recovery; nor do they have significant habitat value or wind-control value in their present condition. The 4 windrows are not designated as existing windbreaks to be preserved in Figure 5-13 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, As a condition of approval, replacement windrows of 15 gallon Eucalyptus maculata (spotted gum), planted 8- foot on center, shall be required to mitigate the loss of the mature windrows. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) initial Study for Tentative Tract 15912 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8 Potentially Signfficanl HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticicles, chemicals, or radiation)? ( ) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? ( ) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? ( ) e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) 10, NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? Signrficant Mitigation S~rlzfica~t NO ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) Comments: b) The 1-15 freeway and Base Line Road off-ramp are located south of the project. The City's General Plan projects noise levels exceeding 65Ldn. A preliminary noise study prepared by RKJK, dated April 29, 1998, indicates 6-foot high noise barriers will be required to mitigate freeway noise, In addition, interior noise levels will be mitigated through the imposition of a "Windows Closed" condition with a means of mechanical ventilation and upgraded windows. A final acoustical analysis shall be required prior to obtaining building permits for the project. The project design includes 6-foot sound walls; therefore, the impact. is considered less than significant. The design of the project shall follow the recommendations and mitigation measures of the acoustical engineer and shall comply with the current building standards and codes at the time of construction. fitial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15912 Page 9 ql. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Schools? ( ) (X) ( ) ( ) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) (×) e) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: c) The Etiwanda and Chaffey High School Districts submitted correspondence indicating existing schools that would serve this project are already at or above capacity. The Districts state mitigation beyond the state statutory fees will be needed. As a condition of approval, the developer shall execute an agreement with the Districts to provide the additional mitigation or to provide full mitigation. Full mitigation may be accomplished by means of a requirement to form, or participate in an existing, Mello-Roos Community Facilities Distdct for school facilities. t2. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? ( b) Communication systems? ( c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? ( d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( e) Storm water drainage? ( f) Solid waste disposal? ( g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) (x) () () ( ) (x) ( ) (x) ( ) (x) ( ) (x) () () ( ) (x) ( ) (x) ComlTleNts: e) The project will not result in substantial alterations to the master plan of storm drainage by proposing to alter the location of interim basins which are required until the Regional Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15912 Page 10 Mainline facilities are installed by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District. The drainage approach shall be justified in the preliminary drainage report and a final drainage study will be required prior to map recordation. 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal.' a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) litial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga 3Tentative Tract 15912 Page 11 1.6. Potst~tially Unre$$ Than S~gnfficant Miti{latlon S~gnfficant No MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? ( b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive pedod of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) ( c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) ( d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ( ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x! ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier E!R or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following eadier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (X) General Plan EIR (Certified April 6, 1981) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15912 Page 12 (x) (x) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR (SCH #82061801, certified July 6, 1983) APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would OCCUr. Signature: ,2,...E-L Date: Print Name and Title: -J~-~ ~-/'4c-, -/r-~.,~.j,/:Z-.~, ]/. ? ~(:~/r_/-~s~,c City of Rancho Cucamonga NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Negative Declaration is being circulated for pubtic review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Tentative Tract 15912 Public Review Period Closes: October 14, 1998 Project Name: Project Applicant: John Friedman, RBF Associates Project Location (also see attached map): Located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way - APN: 227-131-005. Project Description: A residential subdivision of 26 single family lots 10 acres of land in the Low- Medium Distdct (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Related File: Tree Removal Permit 98-16. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is proposing this Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. [] The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted, the Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. Reasons to support this finding are included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division at t0600 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Negative Declaration during the review period. October 14, 1998 Date of Determination Adopted By RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15912, AND RELATED TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 98-16, A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 26 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND AN INTERIM DETENTION BASIN ON 10 ACRES OF LAND IN THE LOW- MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) OF THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF EASTAVENUEAND THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-131-005 A. Recitals. 1. John Friedman has filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 15912, and related Tree Removal Permit 98-16, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map and Tree Removal Request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of October 1998, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said headng on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: ... 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on October 14, 1998, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located at the southwest comer of East Avenue and the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way, with a street frontage of 660 feet, a lot depth of 660 feet, and which presently contains one single family residence and undeveloped acreage; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is the railroad right-of-way; the property to the south consists of the 1-15 Freeway and vacant land; the property to the east is single family residential and vacant land; and the property to the west contains a plant nursery, single family residential, and vacant Iand; and c. The application contemplates a residential subdivision of 26 single family residential lots and an interim detention basin on 10 acres of land within the Low-Medium Residential Distdct (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15912 - FRIEDMAN October 14, 1998 Page 2 d. The General Plan and the Etiwanda Specific Plan designate a public Community Trail off-site within the railroad easement to the south; and e. The property is one block away from Etiwanda High School and approximately two blocks away from Etiwanda Intermediate School and will generate traffic and school children that will use East Avenue and Victoria Street. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dudng the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above. this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Etiwanda Specific Plan; and b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Etiwanda Specific Plan; and c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and ' e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and f. The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all wdtten and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the ' ' 'project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therofore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project. no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15912 - FRIEDMAN October 14, 1998 Page 3 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Plannin~ Division 1) A wall plan shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The wall plan shall include the design of the theme wall on East Avenue (stone pilasters with stucco walls and dver rock planters), the noise attenuation wall, and the remainder of the tract boundary wall. 2) The developer shall secure the intedm basin with wrought iron on the north and west boundaries. 3) The spillway for the intedm basin shall be treated with river rock, compatible and complementary with the river rock treatment on the East Avenue theme wall. 4) The developer shall submit a detailed landscape and irrigation plan for the interim detention basin and the replacement Eucalyptus windrow along the entire northern boundary for review and approval by the City Planner prior to final map approval. EnqineerinQ Division {All Engineering Conditions annotated with an astedsk (*) shall be mitigation measures for the project.} 1) The full width of the existing portion of East Avenue shall be removed and reconstructed to Secondary Artedal standards simultaneous with widening along the project frontage, Widening shall extend across the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way. Provide pavement transitions sufficient to accommodate left turn stdping into the proposed tract from the south and AC berm south to Base Line Road for drainage purposes. 2) An in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the opposite side of East Avenue shall be paid to the City pdor to final map approval. The fee shall be one-half the City-adopted unit amount times the length from the center of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way to the center of the Caltrans right-of-way. 3) Construction of improvements within East AvemJe shall take into consideration the Route 30 Freeway construction and Etiwanda High School traffic and maintain two-way traffic on East Avenue at all times. *4) Construct a 6-foot wide paved shoulder on the west side of East Avenue from this development to Victoria Street, within existing rights-of-way, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15912 - FRIEDMAN October 14, 1998 Page 4 *5) Transportation Development Fees shall be paid prior to final map approval in anticipation of a City project to install a traffic signal at the intersection of East Avenue and Victoria Street. 6) Construct "C" Drive full width, including curb, gutter, and street lights, to the west tract boundary. Install sidewalk and street trees on the north side. Grade the 5-foot parkway on the south side, adjacent to Lot E, at 2 percent. *7) Construct Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area 8 Master Plan Storm Drain facilities in East Avenue from north of the Southern Pacific Railroad right-of-way to, and including, the interim basin in Lot E, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The developer shall receive credit for the cost of permanent master plan facilities up to the amount of the related drainage fees in effect at the time reimbursement is requested and shall be reimbursed for excess costs from future fee collection in accordance with City policy. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. '8) Construct Etiwanda/San Sevaine Intedm Master Basin No. 5 as follows, justified by a final drainage report approved by the City Engineer: a) Provide an ultimate design for the basin to serve the entire Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area 8 developed tributary area north of Base Line Road. b) Provide for maintenance vehicle access in the basin design. o) Install sufficient capacity to mitigate the increased runoff from this development, with an outlet system capable of handling the ultimate basin design (entire tributary area) with a minimum amount of modification as incremental development occurs. d) Provide an easement to the City for all of Lot E. e) An assessment distdct shall be formed for maintenance of the detention basin or a maintenance agreement with a refundable deposit shall be executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing pdvate maintenance of the facility, but providing the City with the right of access to maintain the facility if pdvate maintenance is insufficient and allowing the City to assess those costs to the developer. Said agreement shall be recorded to run with the property. f) The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover the proportionate cost of the land and ultimate basin related facilities (outlet, etc.) from future development using the basin. If the developer fails to submit said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City. all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15912 - FRIEDMAN October 14, 1998 Page 5 9) Design the ultimate local storm drain connection from "C" Ddve to East Avenue to include Q100 sump catch basins on both sides of the street, so the storm drain easement will not be required to convey surface overflows in the future. Provide all necessary easements. lo) Parkway improvements along East Avenue shall be consistent with Figure 5-28A of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Tract perimeter walls shall be located at the top of slope, just outside the landscape easement. Portions of the river rock planter wall or the perimeter wall may be used for retaining, if needed. 11) Landscape Maintenance District plans shall incorporate cost efficient, low maintenance designs, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The maximum slope within publicly maintained landscape areas shall be 3:1. Where slopes occur, a 1-foot flat area behind the sidewalk shall be provided. Slopes higher than 6 feet shall have a 2-foot bench at the top of slope, as measured from the wall. Fire Distdct 1) Fire sprinklers for residential dwellings are required in lieu of secondary access. Notwithstanding, if an adjoining property subsequently provides secondary access to the project, the developer may submit a written request to the Fire Distdct for a waiver of this condition. Mitieation Measures 1) A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval pdor to the issuance of building permits. The acoustical report shall evaluate exterior noise impacts from the 1-15 Freeway. The acoustical report shall provide recommendations for a noise attenuation barrierwhich allows access to the interim detention basin. The design of the project shall comply with recommendations in the report. 2) A 6-foot noise barrier will be necessary to mitigate freeway noise. The noise barrier may be a combination of berming and masonry walls. In addition, interior noise levels will be mitigated through the imposition of a "Windows Closed" condition by the means of mechanical ventilation and upgraded windows. A final acoustical analysis shall be required prior to obtaining building permits for the project. The design of the project shall follow the recommendations and mitigation measures of the acoustical engineer, and shall comply with the current building standards and codes at the time of construction. 3) The noise attenuation wall shall be installed in its ultimate location at the south tract boundary. Structural design of the wall shall allow its use as a retaining wall upon the future development of Lot E, with provisions for increasing the height of the wall to accommodate noise attenuation at that time. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15912 - FRIEDMAN October 14, 1998 Page 6 4) The developer shall provide replacement windrows of 15-gallon Eucalyptus maculata (spotted gum), planted 8 feet on center, pursuant to the approved landscape plan, prior to occupancy. All Engineering Conditions annotated with an asterisk shall be mitigation measures for the project. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 1998. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of October 1998, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: TENTATIVE TRACT 15912 & TREE REMOVAL PERMIT 98-16 SUBJECT: a RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 26 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON 10 ACRES APPLICANT: JOHN FRIEDMAN LOCATION: SWC EAST AVENUE AND THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2790, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees. because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City. its agents. officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may. at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. Completion Date The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of a fire station to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed, and built to all specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. and shall became the District's property upon completion. The equipment shall be selected by the District in accordance with its needs. In any building of a station, the developer shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs:' Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District for the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of such existing District prior to the reccrdation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. Further, if the affected school district has not formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval of the project and prior to the recordation of the final map or issuance of building permits for said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void. Proiect No. Th is condition shall be waived if the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school impacts as a result of this project. Prior to recordation of the final map or prior to the issuance of building permits when no map is involved, written certification from the affected water district that adequate sewer and water facilities are or will be available to serve the proposed project shall be submitted to the Department of Community Development. 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. A copy of the sig ned Resolution of Approval or City Planner's letter of approval, and all Standard Conditions, shall be included in legible form on the grading plans, building and construction plans, and landscape and irrigation plans submitted for plan check. B. Time Limits Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Pranning Commission, if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. C. Site Development The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, extedor materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 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. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 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 concrate or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. For single family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners'association, orother means acceptabletotheCity. Proofofthis landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 7. On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between walls/fences and sidewalk. 8. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. / I/ / / / / / / / / Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured products. D. Landscaping 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 City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. Existing trees required to be preserved in place shall be protected with a construction barrier in accordance with the Municipal Code Section 19.08.110, and so noted on the grading plans. The location of those trees to be preserved in place and new locations for transplanted trees shall be shown on the detailed landscape plans. The applicant shall follow all of the arborist's recommendations regarding preservation, transplanting, and trimming methods. All private slopes of 5 feet or less in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1 -gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigations shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thdving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Pdor to releasing occupancy forthose units. an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. All walls shall be providedwith decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. On projects which abut the 1-15 Freeway, the developer shall provide landscaping within the freeway right--of-way along the boundary of this project or pay an in-lieu of construction cash deposit. The landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared in conformance with Caltrens and City Standards through the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and City Engineer. Landscape and irrigation shall be installed prior to the release of occupancy of the project. If final approvals and/or installation is not complete at that time, the City will accept a cash deposit for future landscaping of the Caltrans right-of-way. New windrow planting of Eucalyptus Maculata (Spotted Gum) is required at a ratio of 50 linear feet per acre. The size, spacing, staking, and irrigation of these trees shall comply with the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance (RCMC 19.08.100). Project No TT 15912 Comt)letlon Date Eo Environmental A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provided, and if appropriate, vedfy the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the amount of $719.00, prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. In those instances requiring long term monitoring (i.e.) beyond final certificate of occupancy), the applicant shall provide a written monitoring and reporting program to the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. Said program shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. F. Other Agencies The applicant shall confact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mail boxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mail boxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval pdor to the issuance of building permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DNISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: G. Dedication and Vehicular Access Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all intedor public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): 44 total feet on East Avenue 3. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. Private drainage easements for cross-tot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or noted on the final map. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map. I/ i/ Project No. ~F159t2 Completion Date H. Street Improvements All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 2. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Street Name East Avenue Curb & A.C, Side- Ddve Street Street Comm Median Bike Other Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail / / / / / · f Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. (e) Stdpe for Class II Bike Lane. (f) Post R26 signs. 3. Improvement Plans and Construction: 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. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineers Office in addition to any other permits required. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 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 widng. 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 (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all comers of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. 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 Project NO. 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. 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 City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. 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. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the Cit./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. 6. A permit shall be obtained from Caltrans for any work within the I-15 Freeway right-of-way Public Maintenance Areas A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs firat. The East Avenue landscaped parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District. Public landscape areas are required to incorporate substantial areas (40%) of tooflared cobble or other acceptable non-irrigated surfaces. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. :4. ' ' All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City. Parkway landsca ping on East Avenue shall conform to the results of the respective Beautification Master Plan. J. Drainage and Flood Control A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. Utilities Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 7F 15912 Completion Date ProlectNo. ~'F15912 Completion Date 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environ mental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD 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 pdor to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. L. General Requirements and Approvals Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Regional Mainline, Secondary Regional, and Master Plan Drainage Fees shall be paid prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved, A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new street lights for the first six months of operation, pdor to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: M. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Mello RoDs Community Facilities Distdct requirements shall apply to this project. 2, Fire flow requirement shall be 1,000 gallons per minute, A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel pdor to water plan approval. For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional fire flow test of the on-site hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel after construction and prior to occupancy. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed, and operahie prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be withesseq by fire department personnel. Existing fire hydrant locations shall be provided prior to water plan approval. Required hydrants, if any, will be determined by the Fire District. Fire District standards require a 6-inch riser with a 4-inch and a 2-1/2-inch outlet. Substandard hydrants shall be upgreded to meet this standard. Contact the Fire Safety Division for specifications on approved brands and model numbers. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Fire District that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of the required fire protection system. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final inspection. All roadways within project shall comply with the Fire Distdct's fire lane standards per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance No. 22 (attached). 7 Projeot No $132.00 in Fire District fee(s), and a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District pdor to Building and Safety permit issuance. ** A Fire District fee in the amount of $132.00 shall be paid at the time of Water Plan submittal. **Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC, UPC, UMC, NEC, and RCFD Standards 22 and 15. Completion Date / / H September 28.1998 : C ~ ~ v O O ~- F J C : .D : E H : .~.: .:, v O .2 Barbara J. Armstrong 6686 Mimosa Place Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Dear Ms. Armstrong: Thank you for your letter regarding the proposed trac~ of homes on the former Edison corridor west of your property. I appreciale your interest in the project and encourage your participation in ~he public hearing process Staff is available to mee~ with you at your convenience to discuss the project in more detail. Rebecca Van Buren is ~he project planner and can be reached at (909) 477- 2750, ext 226l. As requested in your letter. the following is the current status of the project: The developer. Lewis Homes. is proposing single family detached homes in the former Edison corridor from Base Line Road to Highland Avenue. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the project on October 14, 'I998. The notices for all hearing items on this agenda were mailed to surrounding property owners on September 24. 1998. I confirmed lhal your name and address is on the mailing list for this project. Le`,vis Homes recently revised the northern cul-de-sac between Silverberry S[ree~ and Highland Avenue ~o provide larger Io~ sizes (7.200 to 11.500 square feet). which are consistent with the prope~ies in your tract. The proposed houses behind your Iol are 60 fee~ from the rear ',,,,,all. The Ic~s are deeper allo`,,:ing ~he houses to be located a grea~er distance from ~he rear wall. which helps resaec~ the privacy of existing lots A 5 V'.--foo[ high masonry ,,vail is also proposed w~[h !he proloci along your rear prope~y line Please note tha~ the circulation system in the V~ctoria Community Plan has always indicated S~lverberry Street as a ~hrough s~reet connecting ~o the future Day Creek Boulevard The ~hrough- s~reet design existed even when ~he Edison land was designa[ed as a u~lh~y corridor. This circulation system is designed to avoid traffic congestion at key imersec~ions. to provide adequa!e fire access to all homes. and provide access [o schools and parks. I hope this information is helpful. If you have additional queslions. please feel free to comacl Ms. Van Buren, the project p anner or me. ,',:ayor ',"'l J,;, .~,'IB mlg .'.::a:hm-:n' S~e Plan ~ Barbara J, Armstro~g~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 Dear Mr. Mayor: I reside at 6686 Mimosa Place, Tract 12046-1, Lot 9, Rancho Cucamonga. am the original owner of my home which was purchased in April, 1985. I selected the lot on which my home is located based on its orientation to the open space behind my home. I relied on information provided to me by representatives of the developer, William Lyon Co., that the vacant land behind my property was a Southem California Edison easement and would remain vacant. Due to complications of a chronic illness, I have been unable to remain current on the issues or attend the various hearings regarding the transfer of the properly from Southem California Edison to a developer. Regrettably, I was not able to participate in the discussions about an issue which is of great concern to llle. Upon recently becoming aware that there are plans to build a tract of homes behind me on the vacant property, I xvent to City Hall to view the blueprints. The blueprints indicate there will be a row of two-story homes built behind me, and that both Victoria Park Lane and Silverberry will be cut through to the new tract. I purchased my home located on its lot because it provided added privacy, less noise, fewer adjacent neighbors and minimal vehicular traffic. While I recognize the reality of the release of the Southem California Edison easement and the plans for a new tract of homes behind me, I am very concerned that the proposed new tract introduces the possibilities of some major problems for me and my neighbors. I do not wish, nor do I believe it is necessary for me to be placed in an inferior position than that which would have existed should I have originally chosen a different lot. Page I of 3 Cont. Barbara J..,L~rnsn ong to Mayor My anxiety arises from the following concerns should the proposed development plans be approve& · My home, whose rear property line is currently adjacent to vacant land, would then be backed by two(2) homes. The proposed lot sizes would be incompatible with the lot sizes in the existing tract, creating an incredibly unfair disadvantage to Victoria homeowners. Such a lot distribution would double my exposure to noise and possibilities for neighbor disputes. · The grading plan (or plan for elevations) does not provide for enough of a differential in the ground elevations of our existing homes and the new tract homes to preserve the level of privacy to which we have come to expect and which was both considered and included in the development of e:,dsting Tract 12046-1. My single-story home would be backed by a line of two-story homes at the same elevation. Two of those two-story homes would be immediately adjacent to my rear property line. The proposed plan for two-story homes at nearly the same grading/elevations as the existing homes would deprive me and my neighbors of all privacy and reduce the number of hours and/or access to afternoon stm. The addition of trees at the extreme rear of the back yards of any of the properties at the proposed elevations could additionally deprive us of enough sun to have our choices of plants or gardens which require full san. · Vehicular traffic patterns within the tract are currently safe for children and minimize noise levels. The proposed plans for the new tract include opening both Victoria Park Lane and Silverberry (two streets within very close proximity to each other) to the new tract. Our tract will be safer and less noisy if these two street are left dosed. Additionally, opening Silverberry would significantly and needlessly increase through-traffic in the area of the elementary school and noise in the area of the homes in close proximity to the sweet. That action would alter the quiet environment we currently enjoy. Our children should not be exposed to undue safety risks and oar residents should not be exposed to unnecessary' noise and traffic. Should there be a legal need to open one of the streets for ingress and egress for the new tract, Victoria Park lane would be the safer and better choice. Under no circumstances should Silverberry be subjected to additional traff~c. · The rear wall which was constructed along the line of homes is insufficient for privacy and a fair separation of neighbors. It mnst be elevated if a tract of homes is to be constn~cted behind us. Page 2 of 3 Cont. Barbara J. Pu-Tnstrong tO Mayor When I visited City Hall to review the plans for the proposed tract, I was told that the plans had not been fmalized and that I ~vould receive notification of a hearing to consider approval of the tract plans. [ have not received notice, and I am unaware of the status of the plans. To minimize the mental, emotional, visual, and environmental effects of the proposed new tract on existing residents and to preserve the integrity of the existing tract, my requests for modification of the proposed plot plans are as follows: · Subdivide the lots so that their ~vidths are compatible with the existing homes, eliminating the necessity for existing homeo~vners to have two new neighbors on their rear property lines. · Require that the plans include grading that would place second-story windows below the line of vision ofe,,dsting back yards to ensure the privacy of both existing and new homeowners. · Leave Silverberry closed off from the new tract of homes. Select Victoria Park Lane, if absolutely necessary, to be opened to provide access to and from the new tract. Victoria Park Lane, if opened, would be less than a short block away from a proposed opening of Silverberry for anyone who would require ingress and egress via the existing tract. Opening Silverberry would cause undue environmental and safety risks. · The existing wall is less than five feet is some areas. Add to the existing wall between the tracts to elevate it to a level that will ensure privacy and appropriately separate the lots of the homeowners in the two tracts. These measures, if incorporated in the proposed plan, ~vould maximize privacy, sun exposure, safety, peace and quiet, and they would leave residents of the existing tract whole. Your consideration of these concerns and a timely response would be appreciated. Sincerely, Page 3 of 3 CITY OF P, ANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: October 14, 1998 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15875 - LEWIS HOMES -The proposed subdivision and design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 158 single family homes on 32.6 acres of land in the Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) zones of the Victoria Community Plan, located east of Day Creek Boulevard, between Highland Avenue and Base Line Road - APN: 227-351'-65; 227-393-01 and 02; 227-401-78; and 227-091-41. Related Files: General Plan Amendment 96-03 and 97-01 and Victoria Community Plan Amendment 96-01 and 97-01, approved by the City Council in April 1998. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Project Density: 4.8 dwelling units per acre. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoning: North - Future Route 30 Freeway; Foothill Freeway South- Vacant land and an historic winery; Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) East - Single family dwellings and a mini-warehouse; Low, Low-Medium, and Medium Residential (2-4, 4-8, and 8-14 dwelling units per acre, respectively) West - Vacant land; Village Commercial, Medium and Low-Medium Residential (8-14 and 4-8 dwelling units per acre) General Plan DesiGnations: Project Site - Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) between Highland Avenue and Silverberry Street; and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) between Silverberry Street and Base Line Road North Foothill Freeway South - Medium Residential East Low, Low-Medium, and Medium Residential West Neighborhood Commercial, Medium and Low-Medium Residential ITEH E Y PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 15875 - LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 2 Site Characteristics: The subject site was formerly owned by Southern California Edison for the future construction of a utility corridor located on the east side of future Day Creek Boulevard from Highland Avenue to Base Line Road. Southern California Edison has abandoned the corridor and has sold the surplus land. The corridor is 330 feet wide while over 4,000 feet long, totaling 32.6 acres. The site is generally flat with slope inclinations of 3-4 percent. An existing 6-foot high block wall runs the length of the east side of the site adjacent to existing development in the Victoria W~ndrows area. The southernly portion of the project between Base Line Road and the railroad right-of-way abuts a mini-warehouse facility where buildings are constructed on the property line. The majority of the site is coastal sage scrub habitat consisting almost exclusively of California buckwheat. The coastal sage scrub habitat was determined to be poor quality in the pdor Environmental Impact Report (EIR) due to its lack of topographical relief and its mono-species composition. The site also includes a remnant parcel north of Highland Avenue, south of the future Route 30 Freeway. This parcel will be used for the next several years as a temporary construction staging area while the freeway is under construction. ANALYSIS: Backaround: The tentative tract map application follows a General Plan Amendment and Victoria Community Plan Amendment recently adopted for this land area (April 1998), which changed the land use designation from Utility Corddor to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) between Highland Avenue and Silverberry Street, and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) from Silverberry Street to Base Line Road. As part of the General Plan and Victoria Plan Amendments, the City Council certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Mitigation Monitoring Program, which are applicable to the tentative tract. General: Lewis Homes will be constructing Day Creek Boulevard to access the tract, and extending Sugar Gum Street, Victoda Park Lane, and Silverberry Street accordingly. The developer is proposing 158 single family lots, ranging in size from 5,282 to 11,595 square feet. The developer is proposing five floor plans with four elevations each (see Exhibit "F"). Dwellings range in size from 2,000 to 2,943 square feet. All have 2-car attached garages with an optional 3rd car tandem space on the largest floor plan. The design of the tentative tract map includes an expanded parkway, 25 feet in width, on the east side of Day Creek Boulevard to accommodate a multi-use trail. Lewis Homes placed a deposit with the City to pay for a consultant to design the special Day Creek Boulevard parkway, the landscape edge treatment, the residential and community entdes design, the sound wall, and the plant palette for Planning Commission review and approval at a future date, pursuant to the amended Victoria Community Plan. C, Desian Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee on three occasions, August 18, September 1, and September 15, 1998 (see Exhibit "G"). The Design Review Committee's emphasis was to create an interesting and enhanced view corridor on a long, linear, north/south-oriented site abutting the future Day Creek Boulevard, a major divided arterial and Special Boulevard in the General Plan. The Committee requested PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 15875 - LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 3 a complete redesign of the single-story plan, comprehensive revisions to side and rear elevations fronting on Day Creek Boulevard, second-story decks on 50 percent of the lots along Day Creek Boulevard, and rear yard landscaping on lots adjacent to the mini- warehouse to soften the appearance of storage buildings constructed on the common property line. The Committee acknowledged that it is not feasible to eliminate the double wall situations along the majority of the eastern boundary due to grade differences. The Committee noted that where double walls are necessary, the design should be sensitive to aesthetic and maintenance issues. At its final meeting, the Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission. D= Technical Review Committee: The Technical Review Committee reviewed the project on August 19, 1998. The Committee recommended approval of the project subject to the conditions contained in the attached Resolution. Environmental Assessment: The project shall comply with the Mitigation Measures adopted for the EIR for General Plan Amendments 96-03B and 97-01 and Victoria Community Plan Amendments 96-01 and 97-01, certified by the City Council on April 15, 1998 (SCH No. 97071043), which includes measures to mitigate drainage, air quality, traffic, noise, public services, aesthetic, and recreational impacts to below a level of significance. Staff recommends the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the analysis addressed in the earlier EIR, and the mitigation measures imposed on the project pursuant to the EIR (see Exhibit "H"). FACTS FOR FINDING: A. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed use is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code and the Victoria Community Plan in which the site is located. C. The proposed use is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code and Victoria Community Plan. 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. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted. and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 300 foot radius of the project site. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TT 15875 - LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 4 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract 15875 through adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with Conditions and the issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:RVB:mlg Attachments: Exhibit"A" Exhibit "B" Exhibit "C" Exhibit "D" Exhibit "E" Exhibit "F" Exhibit "G" Exhibit "H" Site Utilization Map Tentative Tract Map Detailed Site Plan Grading Plan Landscape Plan Elevations Design Review Committee Comments September 1, and September 15, 1998 Initial Study Pad II Resolution of Approval with Conditions Resolution Approving Design Review with Conditions dated August 18, SITE UIILIZATION NAP TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15875 SIIE UIILIZATION HAP TENIATIVE TRAC[ NO. 15875 TENIAT]VE TRACT HAP 1ENTATIVE TRACT NO. 1,5875 /// ....... TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15875 TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15875 TENTATZVE TRACT HAP TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15875 / TRACT NO. 11041 I APRIL, 1998 D~TAILEO SIIE PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15875 I.. ;; T - I ) / DEIAILED SITE PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15875 OETA[LEO SITE PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15875 OETAILEO SITE PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15875 * L ~I'R&CT I i I ~ k,, ~,J ....L_ J I il 1ENTAFIVE TRAC[ NO. 15875 CONCEPIUAL GRADING PLAN TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15875 / / ," I lENTAlIVE TRACI' NO. 15875 d CONCEPTUAL GRADING PL~,N TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 15875 TEN'I'AI'IVE TRACT NO. 1,5875 ;i PLAN 561- ELEVATION PLAN 501 -ELEVATION , I EXTERIOR MATERIALS OclOi'lnDD PLAN 561-ELEVATION "C" REAR ELEVATION % LEFT SIDE ELEVATION LXTERIOR MATERIALS RIGlIT SIDE ELEVATION ]C]DDD PLAN 504- ELEVATION PLAN 504' ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION . / LEFT SIDE ELEVATION RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION - ~ mtJUUUllUUIJ , W PLAN 505' ELEVATION 'B" PLAN 505' ELEVATION PLAN 505- ELEVATION 'C" PLAN 505' ELEVATION LEFT SIDE ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION WITH OPT. DECK RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION PLAN ~06- ELEVATION "B' PLAN 506- ELEVATION EX'rERIOR MATERIALS Ill 4~' , , DDCIDCIRD ClDRDCiODD PI. AN 506- ELEVATION "C' ~o~,~/PLAN 506- ELEVATION 'D' t REAR ELEVATION "A & B" LEFT SIDE ELEVATION RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION ~A-I:IA /I ................. REAR ELEVATION 'C & D' ,~c~.~o~,~ LEFT SIDE ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION WITH OPT. DECK RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION PLAN 560 - ELEVATION 'B" PLAN 560 - ELEVATION *A" tlIIIIIIH! PLAN 560- ELEVATION 60 ' ELEVATION "D" REAR ELEVATION "~ & D* REAR ELEVATION WITH OPT, DECK LEFT SIDE ELEVATION RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION A-14 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 8:10 p.m. Rebecca Van Buren August18,1998 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15875 - LEWIS HOMES -The proposed subdivision and design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 165 single family homes on 32.6 acres of land in the Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) zone of the Victoria Community Plan, located east of Day Creek Boulevard, between Highland Avenue and Base Line Road - APN: 227-351-65; 227-393-01 & 02; 227-401-78; and 227-091-41. Design Parameters: The subject site was formerly the Edison utility corridor located on the east side of future Day Creek Boulevard from Highland Avenue to Base Line Road. The corridor is 330 feet wide yet over 4,000 feet long, totaling 32.6 acres. Lewis Homes will be constructing Day Creek Boulevard to access the tract, and extending Sugar Gum Street, Victoria Park Lane, and Silverberry Street. Lewis Homes is proposing 165 single family lots, ranging in size from 5,200 to 11,000 square feet. There are 5 floor plans with 4 elevations each. Dwellings range from 1,829 to 2,920 square feet. The site also includes a remnant parcel north of Highland Avenue, south of the future Route 30 freeway. This parcel will be used for the next several years as a temporary construction staging area while the freeway is under construction. Backaround: The Edison Utility Corridor was recently the subject of a General Plan and Victoria Community Plan Amendment (GPA 96-03 & 97-01 and VCP 96-01 & 97-01), approved by the City Council in April 1998. The General Plan and Victoria Community Plan Amendments changed the land use designation of the site from Edison Utility Corridor to Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) between Highland and S~Iverberry, and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) from Silverberry to Baseline. The Tentative Tract Map was designed following the Low-Medium standards for the entire site. As a result, the northern cul-de-sac between Silverberry Street and Highland Avenue, which is designated Low, is inconsistent with the zone. Lewis Homes is cooperating with the City to pay for a consultant to design the special Day Creek Boulevard parkway, the landscape edge treatment, the residential and community entries design, the sound wall, and the plant palette, as required in the Community Plan, for Planning Commission review and approval at a future date. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Technical Issues: The following technical issues will be addressed at the Technical Review Committee meeting and will require substantial revisions in the Tentative Tract Map and design review application in order to comply with the Victoria Community Plan, as amended: The northern cul-de-sac between Silverberry Street and Highland Avenue will have to be revised · to provide a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet and average lot size of 10,000 square feet to meet the density range of 2-4 dwelling units per acre. 2. A street scape setback of 25 feet is required along Highland Avenue between the curb and perimeter wall. (See attached page 156 of Victoria Community Plan). "e" DRC COMMENTS TT15875- LEWIS HOMES August18.1998 Page 2 3. Side setbacks must total 15 feet. Lots 9, 11, 12, and 33 must be revised accordingly. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project: The intersection of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road is designated as a "Major Residential Entry" by the Victoria Community Plan. (See attached pages 152-153). Special landscape treatment should be provided. The southern cul-de-sac between Base Line Road and the railroad right-of-way abuts a public storage facility where buildings are constructed on the property line. Rear yard landscaping should be required to soften the appearance of these existing storage buildings. Although elevations have been revised significantly from the original submittal to include additional architectural enhancements, staff recommends brick and stone veneer treatment be expanded on front elevations, particularly on the single story plan (Plan 561). Secondary Issues: Once all of the majo{ issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues: Revisions to the northern cul-de-sac to increase lot size should also include lining up the rear property lines with the tract east of the site to avoid offset yards and the sense that more than one house backs up to existing tots. In order to facilitate a viable trail system with maximum use opportunities, slopes along the Day Creek Boulevard are to be avoided wherever possible, and minimal, when necessary. The Tract grading should attempt to balance grades with this objective in mind. Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion: Developer should make a good faith effort to work with adjoining residents to eliminate double wall conditions along east boundary. A minimum 5-foot wide landscape area should be provided between the back of sidewalk and any walls in corner side yard situations to breakup the massing of the walls and minimize graffiti potential, per Planning Commission policy. All retaining walls exposed to public view should be treated with a decorative exterior finish or be composed of a decorative block material. 4. Perimeter walls should match Victoria theme walls. 5. Taper driveways down to 16 feet if they exceed 25 feet in length. Perimeter walls and landscaping shall be consistent with established theme for the Victoria Planning Community. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be revised and come back to Design Review Committee. DRC COMMENTS TT 15875 - LEWIS HOMES August 18, 1998 Page 3 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Rich Macias, Larry McNiel, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Rebecca Van Buren The Committee recommended the project be brought back to the Design Review Committee with the following revisions: 1. Redesign the single story plan. ' Revise the rear elevations of units along Day Creek Boulevard to provide a more interesting and enhanced view comdor. A combination of various techniques should be used, including but not limited to, adding balconies and patio trellises as standards instead of options, adding window pop-outs and bay windows, a variety of window shapes and decorative shutters, brackets, breaking up the horizontal roof line, and adding those architectural embellishments that were depicted on front elevations to the sides and rear elevations. Revise Site Plan, Grading Plan, and Tentative Tract Map to address technical issues identified in staff comments. The developer agreed to do the following: help soften the appearance of existing public storage buildings constructed on the property line with rear yard landscaping on impacted lots; line up rear property lines more closely with the abutting lots east of the project on the northern cul-de-sac; provide textured and/or patterned ddveway paving; provide decorative block wall returns between houses; and address the Policy Issues listed in the staff report. The Committee acknowledged that it is not feasible to eliminate double wall situations along the majority of the eastern boundary due to grade differences, Where double walls are necessary, the design should be sensitive to aesthetic and maintenance issues, TYPICAL EDGE CONDITIONS MILLIKEN, HIGHLAND, BASELINE, FOOTHILL Section at Residential Land Uses Ran Section at Commercial Land Uses ./ ' '1[ ~.~,Jb-.- ENTRY HIERARCHY PLAN LEGEND: l%.,~ Major Community ,.v Minor Commercial Entry T~ E~ HF~"~/~, Pb~- ,~,~ ~ Entry Major Residential Entry Special Entry Minor Community Entry 153 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Rebecca Van Buren September 1, 1998 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTAND TENTATIVE TRACT 15875 - LEWIS HOMES -The proposed subdivision and design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 165 single family homes on 32.6 acres of land in the Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) zone of the Victoria Community Plan, located east of Day Creek Boulevard, between Highland Avenue and Base Line Road - APN: 227-351-65; 227-393-01 & 02; 227-401-78; and 227-091-41. (Continued from August 18, 1998). Backaround: The Design Review Committee reviewed the project on August 18, 1998, and directed the applicant to address design concerns and technical issues. The applicant will provide revised plans at the meeting. Attachment: Design Review Committee Action Comments dated August 18, 1998 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Rich Macias, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Rebecca Van Buren The Design Review Committee reviewed revised plans and recommended the project return on a consent calendar basis with the following modifications: 1. Add an architectural feature (cupula or dormer) to the roof area above the garage on the single story plan. 2. · Add brackets to Elevation A of the single story plan. 3. Provide additional enhancements to rear elevations facing Day Creek Boulevard and side elevations on corner lots to replicate distinguishing features on front elevations, such as the half-round window shapes, shutters, and exaggerated window sills. 4. Provide decks on approximately 50 percent of the houses backing up to Day Creek Boulevard. 5. Provide a street scape vignette to show mixture of elevations along Day Creek Boulevard. 6. The Committee reviewed the site plan, which was revised to address technical issues (minimum lot size, lot width, setbacks, and secondary access issues) and approved modifications. 9:15 p.m. CONSENT CALENDAR Rebecca Van Buren September 15, 1998 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT 15875 - LEWIS HOMES -The proposed subdivision and design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 165 single family homes on 32.6 acres of land in the Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) zone of the Victoria Community Plan, located east of Day Creek Boulevard, between Highland Avenue and Base Line Road - APN: 227-351-65; 227-393-01 & 02; 227-401-78; and 227-091-41. (Continued from August 18, 1998). Background: The Design Review Committee reviewed the project on August 18 and September 1, 1998, and recommended the project return on a consent calendar basis with the modifications identified at the meeting. The applicant will provide revised plans at the meeting. Attachment: Design Review Committee Action Comments dated August 18 and September 1, 1998 Design Review Committee Action: Members Present: Rich Macias, Larry McNiel, Nancy Fong Staff Planner: Rebecca Van Buren The Committee reviewed'revised elevations presented at the meeting and recommended the Planning Commission approve the project subject to the following: 1. Plan 561 shall include dormers n Elevations A. B, and C only. The dormer on Elevation A shall be expanded in width to accommodate double window or shutter details on front elevation. Stone veneer shall be extended to the garage column and courtyard wall on Elevation D. City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: Tentative Tract 15875 Related Files: General Plan Amendments 96-03B and 97-01; Victoria Community Ran Amendments 96-01 and 97-01 Description of Project: The proposed subdivision and design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 158 single family homes on 32.6 acres of land in the Low Residential (2-4 dwetling units per acre) and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) zone of the Victoria Community Plan, located east of Day Creek Boulevard, between Highland Avenue and Base Line Road -APN: 227-351-65; 227-393-01 and 02; 227-401- 78; and 227-091-41. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Lewis Homes Enterprises and 1156 N. Mountain Avenue P.O. Box 670 Upland, CA 91786 ADR Development, Inc. 18692 Villa Woods Circle Villa Park, CA 92861 General Plan Designation: Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) between Highland Avenue and Silverberry Street; and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) between Silverberry Street and Base Line Road. Zoning: Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) between Highland Avenue and Silverberry Street; and Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) between Silverberry Street and Base Line Road. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: North: future Route 30 Freeway South: vacant land and an historic winery East: low density residential, low-medium density residential, and a public storage facility West: vacant land Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Contact Person and Phone Number: Rebecca Van Buren, Associate Planner (909) 477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval is required: None. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15875 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ( ) Land Use and Planning ( ) Population and Housing ( ) Geological Problems (X) Water (X) Air Quality (X) Transportation/Circulation (X) Biological Resources ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources ( ) Hazards (X) Noise ( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance (X) Public Services ( ) Utilities and Service Systems (X) Aesthetics ( ) Cultural Resources (X) Recreation DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: () I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. () I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. () I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. () I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based upon the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. (x) Signed: I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. ~an Buren Associate Planner August 25, 1998 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15875 Page 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. Issues an(~ Supporting Information Sources: LAND a) b) c) d) USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal.' Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community? ) ( ) ( ) (x) ) ( ) ( ) (x) ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a) The tentative tract map application follows a General Plan Amendment and Victoria Community Plan Amendment recently adopted for this land area (April 1998) which changed the land use designation from Utility Corridor to Low and Low-Medium Residential. The tentative tract map is consistent with the General Plan and Victoria Community Plan pursuant to the amendments adopted in April of 1998. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal.' a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15875 Page 4 GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) b) c) d) e) 0 g) h) i) Fault rupture? ( ) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) Seiche hazards? ( ) Landslides or mudflows? ( ) Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) Subsidence of the land? ( ) Expansive soils? ( ) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ) ) ) ) ) ) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) WATER. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? b) d) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity)? Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations. or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? () (x) () (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15875 Page 5 h) i) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? ( ) Potentially Signrticant Impact Less Unless Than MItigation SignScant () () No (x) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a) Adoption of the proposed project will increase the amount of paved surface area which could result in a decrease in absorption rates and an increase in the amount of surface water runoff. All runoff will be conveyed to existing and proposed drainage facilities designed to handle the subject water flows. The project shall comply with the Mitigation Measures adopted for the Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendments 96-03B and 97-01 and Victoria Community Plan Amendments 96-01 and 97-01 certified by the City Council on April 15, 1998, (SCH No. 97071043), which includes measures to mitigate drainage impacts to below a level of significance. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Comments: a & b) The project will generate dust during construction. Theproject shall comply with the Mitigation Measures adopted for the Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendments 96-03B and 97-01 and Victoria Community Plan Amendments 96-01 and 97-01, which includes measures to mitigate air quality impacts to below a level of significance. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15875 Page 6 Potentially Significant Impacl TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( ) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ( ) d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( ) g) Rail or air traffic impacts? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ) ( ) (x) ) (x) ( ) ) ( ) (x) ) ( I (Xl Comments: a&b) The project includes the construction of Day Creek Boulevard from Highland Avenue to Base Line Road. Day Creek Boulevard is designated in the General Plan as a proposed Major Divided Arterial and a Special Boulevard. Day Creek Boulevard is also proposed to have freeway on-ramp and off-ramps upon the construction of the future Route 30 Freeway. The Mitigation Measures adopted for the General Plan and Victoria Community Plan Amendments include requirements to address traffic conditions, including payment of a traffic fee as the project's fair share contribution to circulation improvements in the vicinity. As a result, the proposed project will provide necessary infrastructure and contribution of traffic fees to reduce traffic congestion in the area. The project shall comply with the Mitigation Measures adopted for the Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendments 96-03B and 97-01 and Victoria Community Plan Amendments 96-01 and 97-01, which include measures to mitigate traffic impacts to below a level of significance. e) The Mitigation Measures adopted for the General Plan and Victoria Community Plan Amendments include a requirement to provide a 25-foot wide parkway on the east side of Day Creek Boulevard for a multi-use trail. The project includes the expanded parkway and trail improvements in accordance with the mitigation measures. The project shall comply with the Mitigation Measures adopted for the Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendments 96-03B and 97-01 and Victoria CommUnity Plan Amendments 96-01 and 97-01, which include measures to mitigate pedestrian and bicycle circulation impacts to below a level of significance. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15875 Page 7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? ( ) b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? ( ) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? ( ) d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? ( ) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) Potentrally Signcficant Impact Less Unless Than Mihgal~on Signrficant IncorporatedIrnpacl No ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) Co11111rlertt,s; a&c) The biological impacts were considered in the Environmental Impact Report certified for the General Plan and Victoria Community Plan Amendments. The EIR included habitat assessment and biological protocol surveys to determine potential impacts, including impacts to the federally-listed threatened California gnatcatcher and the endangered San Bernardino kangaroo rat. The surveys indicated negative results (no species were observed on the site), No further surveys or mitigation are required by the EIR. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal.' a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15875 Page 8 HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? ( ) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? ( ) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? ( ) e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? ( ) Potentially SignrF~cant impact Less Unless Than Mitigation Signr~cant ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) 10. NOISE. Will the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? () () () () (x) (x) No Irnpac~ () () Comments: a) The noise impacts were considered in the Environmental Impact Report certified for the General Plan and Victoria Community Plan Amendments. The EIR includes analysis and mitigation for noise associated with grading, construction, and increase in noise levels from traffic on proposed streets. The mitigation measures require a noise study to be reviewed and approved by the City Planner, prior to final map approval. A noise impact study (LSA April 14, 1998) was prepared for the project which provides recommendations for noise barriers arong major roads and building upgrades (double-pane windows and mechanical ventilation) for impacted lots. The project provides noise barriers and building upgrades pursuant to the recommendations in the noise study. The project shall comply with the Mitigation Measures adopted for the Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendments 96-03B and 97-01 and Victoria Community Plan Amendments 96- 01 and 97-0t, which include measures to mitigate noise impacts during construction activities to below a level of significance. b) The noise impacts were considered in the Environmental Impact Report certified for the General Plan and Victoria Community Plan Amendments. The EIR includes analysis for noise associated with the future Route 30 Freeway. The mitigation Initial Study for Tentative Tract 15875 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 9 measures require a noise study to be reviewed and approved by the City Planner prior to final map approval. A noise impact study (LSA April 14, 1998) was prepared for the project which recommends a 14-foot high freeway sound attenuation wall along the northern boundary. The project shall provide sound attenuation walls and building upgrades pursuant to the recommendations in the noise study. The project shall comply with the Mitigation Measures adopted for the Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendments 96-03B and 97-01 and Victoria Community Plan Amendments 96-01 and 97-01, which include measures to mitigate noise impacts to below a level of significance. 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) b) c) d) e) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) Police protection? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) Schools? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) Other governmental services? ( ) ( ) (X) ( ) Comments: a - e) The public service impacts were considered in the Environmental Impact Report certified for the General Plan and Victoria Community Plan Amendments. The mitigation measures include developer participation in the Mello-Roos Community Facilities District and Law Enforcement Community Facilities District to provide fire and police protection services to the site. School mitigation plans are required between the developer and the Etiwanda and Chaffey School Districts. School mitigation plans provide for a per dwelling unit fee rate for the Etiwanda School District, and require the developer to join the existing Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD No. 2) for the Chaffey School District. If the developer declines to execute mitigation agreements, full mitigation shall be required as a condition of approval. The project shall comply with the Mitigation Measures adopted for the Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendments 96-03B and 97-01 and Victoria Community Plan Amendments 96-01 and 97-01, which include measures to mitigate fire, police, and school impacts to below a level of significance. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15875 Page 10 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS, Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a) b) c) d) f) g) Power or natural gas? Communication systems? Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? Sewer or septic tanks? Storm water drainage? Solid waste disposal? Local or regional water supplies? Potentially Significant ~mOact ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) (x) 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) Comments: a) The project is on land originally planned for a utility corridor which served as an open space corridor. Development of the site will remove the scenic vista created by the open space corridor. The aesthetic impacts were considered in the Environmental Impact Report certified for the General Plan and Victoria Community Plan Amendments. The EIR mitigation for the loss of scenic vista and open space was a requirement for an expanded trail along the east side of Day Creek Boulevard. The project design includes the trail area; therefore, the impact is considered less than significant. The project shall comply with the Mitigation Measures adopted for the Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendments 96-03B and 97-01 and Victoria Community Plan Amendments 96-01 and 97-0t, which include measures to mitigate aesthetic impacts to below a level of significance. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15875 Page 11 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal.' a) b) c) d) Potentially SignScant Impact e) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? () () () No Irnoact (x) (x) (x) (x) (x) 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal.' a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? No Impact ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) ( ) ( ) (x) ( ) Comments: a & b) The development of 158 homes will increase demand for parks and recreational facilities and affect recreational opportunities. The project shall comply with the Mitigation Measures adopted for the Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendments 96-03B and 97-01 and Victoria Community Plan Amendments 96-0'1 and 97-0'1, which include measures to mitigate recreational impacts to below a level of significance through payment of park fees or dedication of land pursuant to Ordinance No. 105. Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15875 Page 12 16. Issues and Supporling Inforrnat~n Sources: Potentially SignScant Irnpac~ Less PotentiallyUnlesa Than MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) b) Short term: Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) c) Cumulative: Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulativety considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ( ) ( ) ( ) (X) EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where. pursuant to the tiering, program El R, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlierdocument(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices. 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract 15875 Page 13 (x) Victoria Planned Community EIR (Certified May 20, 1981) (x) General Plan Amendments 96-03B & 97-01 and Victoria Community Plan Amendments 96-01 & 97-01 EIR (SCH #97071043, certified April 15, 1998) Summary of Adopted Mitigation Measures are Attached APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures, Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur. ~_,~,--~ Print Name Date: cl" Z~5 ' '~ Table 1.1~1 -Enviromental Summary of the Edison Company General Plan and Victoria COnllDnnity Plan Atnendments Issues/impacts 4.1 Drainage Impact 4.1.1. The proposed project would substantiaUy increase the Impervious surface coverage, resulting in an increase in the total quantity and rate of water draining from the site. Existing drainage system to the east can not accommodate the increase and stormwater flow. The proposed project has the potential to have a significant impact on existing drainage facilities. 4.2 Traffic Impact 4,2.1 - Eight key study area intersection~ are forecast to exceed the CMP LOS E standard under 2015 traffic conditions in one or both peak hours, with the without the project. The intersection of Etiwanda Ave- sue/Base Line Road is forecast to operate at LOS E without the project. Addition of the project increment would impact the intersection and degrade operations to LOS F in the p.m. peak hour. This is a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measures 4.1. 1A. Any development proposed between Highland Avenue and Base Line Road shah be condinoned to convey on-site drainage to the west to Day Creek Channel by storm drain systems in Victoria Park Lane and Base Line Road. 4.1.10. The developer shall amend the City's Final Master Plan of Drainage Report prior to Final Map approval to account for the change in land use ~rom open space to residential uses. .4,1,1C. The develoF~r shall remove the existing 96-Inch RCP_ ~tubout. located approximately 462 feet from Victoria Park LanCE and install an lOB-inch RCp from Day Creek Boulevard to Dal~ Cn:ek Channel. with the Dl~e entelNpg lhe ¢:haOnel one foot abov~ the channel invert! 4.2.1A. The project proponent shah contribute a traffic fee in accordance with the Clty's adopted traffic fee program (Transpor- tation Department Impact Fee Ordinance No. 445) as the project's fair share contribution to circulation improvements identified as necessary at the time of issuance of building permits/ These improvements shall consist of the following: MIIliken Avenue/Foothjll Boulevard. Additiogl cffa thi,d Bouk.,,,d. Modify the castbOund and westbound ap- nroaches be modified to include a third through lane in ¢~ach direction on Footh!l! Boulevard as Well as convert the eastbound dght t~ro lane to a through plus fieht turn lane. · _ ]Rochester Avenue/lIighland Avenue. Signal phasing of |he exist!ng lraffic signal shall be u~graded to accommodate the future {raffic volumes: · = ]Rochester Avenue/Base Line Road. Signal phasing of the existing traffic signs! shall be upgraded to accommodate the Analysis of Significance Mitigated to below a level of significance. Mitigated to below a level of significance. 2/4/98(R:VZZRG73OXFEIR\TABLEI_i.FNL) ] -4 Issues/Impacts 4.2 Traffic (Continued) Mitigation Measures ~ochCster Avenue/Foothill Boulevard. Signal phasing of |he existires tic sitehal shall I;~ u~r~led to i~ccommodatc ih~ bmr~ ,tMlic v~Jumea~ · Day Creek Boulevard/Highland Avenue. Co,,,,.~si,,, ,~f th,~ c~utL, otsad ~nd ~scstla~u,d ~ight tu,,, lanes to ~ls.ucd thaou$i, phss sight tu,t ha...s.~he lot O~Og is rccom: mitjg~tlon fQr thl$ .Imerzc¢Ijon: ~onstmc;Ion of a northbound left mm lane. ; IAddltl00 ofa secopd nOrthbound throMgh lane and a~ shared through olus right turn lanes i Con~tfuctloO of a southbound lea turn lane. Mdltlon o( g $eo~nd southbound theouch lane aBd a ~ha~ed through plus right turn lane~ Coqsttu~;llon of C'astbound left turn lane, 4~ddltIOO of an_ ¢:astlx2Mnd thvJZ.ueh pJqs right turq lane. ~onstructiop of a westbound left turn lane. ant1 ,AdditiOn of a Wcstboui~d thrush nlus rieht turn lane. · _ pay Creek Boulevard/Base lane Road. The following is recO0amcnded mitttattoO for this inter~ecttoO.._ ; Construction of dual northbonnd left mm lanes. ; tAdditign Q[ Jeco0d aO¢l third Oorthbound through lanes. Construelion of a northbound right turn lane, Construction of dual sou{hbound left turn lanes. ; AdditiOn of seco0d and third sOuthbound hrouglt lanes. Construction of a soulhbound right lurn lane, Constcuction of dual eastbound left turn lanes, ; Addition of a third eastbound through lane. ; Construction of an eastbound right lurn lane, Analysis of Significance 2/4/98(R:x'CRG730~FEIR\TABLEI'i'FNL) l '5 Issues/Impacts 4.2 Traffic (Continued) Mitigation Measures ; .Construction of dual westbound left turn lanes. ; Addition of a~ third westbound through lane. ; ~nslpAcUgn of a westlt~Bd d~ht mm IqO~, Day ~ ~~lhlll Bo~. ~mmv~ma~mm ~ ice ~i~t t,,,, hnd.~c foll~n~ II mootam,Baled mitleg¢l~n {of ~i) tnte~cctloB~ ~nstmction of dUal nonh~und left turn lanes. Addition of a ~B~ ~d ~ no~und ~u~ ; CoB${mction of a no~h~und free right ~rn lanex ~onstmclion of dual ~uth~uD~ Jeff ~m lanes, AddltioB Qf ~¢cond and thir~ lQBtb~und th~u~ ~nst~ct~on of a f~e south~und right turn lane, ~nst~ction of dual ¢ast~und left ~m lanes. ; ~ddllioO Of an east~qd [hmugh plus dght lure lane. ~nstmction of a we$t~und left turn lane. ~ddilion of a rough wesl~und through lane, and ; · ~Bst~c{ionofawest~undfmerightturnlanex E~w~da Avenu~e ~e bad. ~Shd~l~aa ~a thhd cnt~und th,~dsh lane and a th;,d ,~ot~nd th,~u~h B~ L;,Ic ~ad. Thc cast~und and west~und ~pproachcs shall k m~ified to pm~dc a third th~ue~ I~ne i~ea~h diteqion oq ~ti~nda Avenue. EU~da Avcnue~oo~ BodeyaM. Addition of a ~uth~und fi~t mm lane grid a third cast~und lhroueh lane. Analysis of Significance 2/4/98(ii:xCRG730~FEiR\TABLEi_i. FNL) 1-6 Issues/Impacts 4.2 Traffic (Continued) Mitigation Measures 1-15 Southbound Ramps/Base L/me Road. Add;;:,~.. ,~f d~,al ,.,.ot[~u,,d k.ft t~,,, h,,,~o.Addition of a second westbound left turn lane (dual left turn lane) for on-ramp !raf~c a¢ !he westbound aopfoach aOd a.;~outh~i~ound free ~ght turn fQr off-CamO tra~c. !-1.5 hlrol tld~m,d It~h~f,s/B~.,c Llac Rc,ad. Add;tk, o ..~a s..,.,,,,d ao, dxbou~d l..ft t,~,,, Lt,,c (dual left tu,, I,,,Q, a .gcoad c~tl~,,.,d I..ft t,,., hh,,. (d~,,l tl,l=d ,,,-otbo,~ad tl,,.,.~gh lafi.., a,,d c,,~.c,~i t~o,thi~,uad sight rut,, I,h... ~ a fi,~.. ,-'~l,I · East Avenue/Base Line Road. Aclditioa ~,f bou,,d th,,,u8L la,.c. The weslbQund soproach shall include a third through lalle. 4.2.1B. Circulation improvements have been identified to achieve $1andavds levels of service (i.e., local jurksdictlon and/or SANBAG) at study area intersectloss. To address the timing, funding, and implementation of these improvements, the fogowing mitigation measure or condition of General Plan Amendment approval is recommended. Prior to the approval of an)' tract map. a traffic study shag be completed to deteunlne whether the incremental increase in tralic from the tract map area causes any of the intersec- tions under investigation to result in unsatisfactory levels of service. If unacceptable levels of service result, this traffic analysis shall determine the portion of the ultimate intersec- tions' improvements that are required, the phasing of the improvement, and the funding source. Analysis of Significance 2/4/98(R:XERG730NFiiIIt\TAlILliI_I.FNL} 1-7 Issues/Impacts 4.2 Traffic (Continued) Mitigation Measures Analysis of Significance Impact 4.2.2. The proposed project will contribute to 4.2.2. 'the project shall contribute on a fair share basis m the cost Mitigated to below a level of signi~- deficlenciesalongl-15betweenJumpaAvenueandl-10and ofprovidingthefollowingfreewayfaneaddltlons: cance. be~veen 4th Sireel and Foothill Boulevaz'd. · 1-15 between Juropa Street and 1-10 - two lane mainline lanes In each direction. 1-15 between 4th Street and Foothill Boulevard - two mainline lanes in each direction. 4.3 Air Quality Impact 4.3.1. Construction equipment emissions would exceed the SCAQMD dally thresholds for the criteria polht- ant of N0x, which is 2.5 tons per quarter or 100 pounds pet day. Emissions of other criteria pollutants would be below the standards. This is a significant impact. 4.3.1A. The Construction Contractor shah select the construction equipment used onslte based on low emission factors and high energy efficiency. The Construction Contractor shah ensure that construction grading plans include a statement that all construe- lion equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manulacturees specifications. Mitigated to below a level of significance. 4.3.1B. The Construction Contractor shall utilize electric or diesel-powered equipment in lieu of gasoline-powered engines where feasible. 4.3.1C. The Construction Contractor shall ensure that coastroe- lion grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. During smog season (May through October), the overall length of the construction period should be extended, thereby decreasing the size of the area prepared each day, to minimize vehicles and equipment operating at the same time. 4.3.1D. The Coostruction Contractor shah time the construction activities so as to not interfere with peak hour traffic and minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes adjacent to the site; if neces- sary, a flagperson shall be retained to maintain safety adjacent to existing roadways. :2/4/98(RixCRG730NFE]R\TABLEi_LFNL) l~B Issues/Impacts 4.3 Air Quality (Continued) Impact 4.3.2. During grading activities dust emission would exceed the SCAQMD threshold of 150 pounds per day. This is a significant impact. Mitigation Measures 4.3.1E. The Construction Contractor shall support and encour- age fidesharing and transit incentives for the construction crew. The Construction Contractor shah support and encourage ridesharing and wansit incentives for the construction crew. ~.3.4F. The developer shall contract with a mitigation monitor to assure compliance and jmnlementa0on with the mitigatio0 Inonito~nu procram, 4.3.2A. Dust generated by the development activities shall be retained on site and keep to a minimum by following the dust control measures listed below. During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fiH materials. water trucks or sprinkler systems shah be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each ds~s activities cease. Dudng comtruction, waler trucks or sprinkler systems shall be used to keep all areas of vehicle movement damp enough to prevent dust from leaving the site. At a mini- mum, this would include wetting down such areas in the htcr morning and after work is completed for the day, and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour. After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation is completed, the entire ires ofdistorbed soil shah be treated immediately by piclaip of the soil until the area is paved or otherwise developed so that dust generation will not occur. Soil stockplied for more than two days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. Trucks transporling soil. sand, cut or fill materials and/or construction debris to or from the site shall be tarpcd from the point of origin. Analysis of Significance Mitigated to below a level of significance. · 2/4/98(R:~CRG730~I:EIR\TABLEI_i. FNt) 1-9 Issues/Impacts 4.3 Ah- Quality (Continued) Impact 4.3.3. Volatile Organic Compound 0tOC) emis- sions associated with architectural coatings are not calcu- lated because theBe is no sufficient information available for emissions produced by the painting of residential and cummercial facilities. VOCs produced during construction may bca potentially significant i~lpacL Impact 4.3.4. Vehicuhr trips associated with the proposed project would produce cmmlons that would exceed the SCAQMD daily thresholds for the criteria pollutant of CO, ROC, and NOx. This is a significant impact: Mitigation Measures 4.3.3. The Construction Contractor shall utilize as much as possible preeoated/natural colored building materials. water- based o¢ Iow-vOC coating, and coating transfer or spray equip- ment with high transfer efficiency, such as high volume low pressure (HVLP) spray method, or manual coatings application such as paint brush, hand roller, trowel, spatula, dauber, tag, or sponge. 4.3.4A. The project shall comply with Tide 24 of the California Code of Regulations eslabllshed by the Energy Commission regarding energy conservaUon standards. The project applicant shall incoq~otate the following In bu~ding plans: Phnting ttte~ to provide shade and shadow to building; Solar or inw-emissinn water heaters shall be used with combined spare/water heater unit; · Refrigerator with vacuum power insulation; Double-pained glass or window treatment for energy conser- vation shall be used in all exterior windows; and Energy-efficient low-sodium parking lot lights shall be used. 4.3.4B. Use of transportation demand measures (TDM) such as preferential parking for vanpooling/carpooling, subsidy for transit pass or vanpooling/carpooling, flextime work schedule, bike rach. lockers, showers, and onsite cafeteria shall be incorporated in the design of the commercial land uses. Analysis of Significance Mitigated to below a level of significance. Operational emissions of the pro- posed project would result in a total of 851 Ibs./day of CO, 64 Ibs./day of ROC, 136 lbs./day of NOx. 15 lbs./day of SOx, and 19 Ibs./day of PMI0. Among them, the emissions for CO, ROC, and NOx would ex- ceed the SCAQMD thresholds for daily operations by a large margin (especially NOx). Even after inlple- menration the mitigation measures identified, it is not guaranteed that the emissions would be reduced to below the thresholds. Therefore, it would remain a significant impact. :2/4/98(R:'CRG730'xI:EIR\'rABI. El=I:FNL)= = ~ 1-1{3 ~ ,,,ms, mmm, Issues/Impacts 4.3 Air Quality (Continued) Noise Impact 4.4.1. Noise levels from grading and other con- stmction activities for the proposed project may range up to 91 dBA at the closest residences immediately to the east of the northern part of the project site between Highland Avenue and Base Line Road for very limited times when construction occurs near them. The construction-related noise impacts of the proposed project would be a poten- tially significant impact. Mitigation Measures 4.3.4C. The protect proponent shall determine with the City and the elecerlcal purveyor if it is feasible to pre-wire houses for electrical charEe$ for EV cars and/or OPtic-fibers for home oqlces. |fleasibis. jnst;~ll EV char~es and/or optic-fibers r, er the clectricaA p,Jrvevor'$ ¢Jtrection orior to Certificate of Occuoancv. 4.3.4D. Install EVchar~ers or alternative fuel stations (natural ga~) for commq,lltlt wljde use at key commercial and pub!!¢ [ocatlon(s~ such a~ Dark.and ride Iot~, Metrpli0k ~tations' anti ¢PmmcrCla[ cCBtcrl, ~,.~,IE, The develoncr shilL,submit Io the City's-,Park and fiecreation Departmcnt,fo~lts review and i, plc6;al iandscat-,e plans for all stpceIse~pcs wilhin the pxeje~t area. Those plans prcoared h/~-,~l'!iccnsed lands architect shall InclUde tre~ 4.4.1A. During all project site excavation and grading on-site, the project contractors shall equip all construction equipment, Cooed or mobile, with propsfly operating and maintained mufflers consistent with manufacturers standards. 4.4.1B. The project contractor shall place ag stationary construc- tion equipment so that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive receptors to the east of the site. 4.4.1C. The construction contractor shall locate equipment staging in areas that wig create the greatest distance between construction-related noise sources and noise sensitive receptors to the east of the site during all project construction. Analysis of Significance Mitigated to below a level of significance. 2/4/98(R:\CRG730~FEIR\TABLEi_i .FNL) 1-11 Issues/Impacts 4.4 Noise (Continued) Impact 4.4.2. Increases in noise levels could result from pvoj~"ct-related traffic on access roads leading to the project site, est~ecia0y given the higher noise generation associated with trucks. Project-related IonS-term vehicular trip In- creases are anticipated to be modeale. The incremental traffic noise level increases would be less than significant. No significant traffic boise impacts on off-she sensitive uses are anticipated. However, proposedon-site residential uses would potentially be exposed to tralBc noise levels exceed- lag the 60 dBA Ldn standard recommended for residential uses. Mitigation Measures Analysis of Significance 4.4.1D. During all project site construction, the constroction conlractor shall limit all constn~ction-related activities that would result in high noise levels to between the hours of 6:30 a.m. and 8:00 p.ta. M~nday through Saturday, unless such construction activities do not result in noise levels exceeding 45 dBA at residences to the east of the site. No cunstntction shall be allowed on Sundays and public holidays. 4.4.2.NolsesmifiesshaHbeteqult~'.dtobesubmtttedtotheCity Mitigated to below a level of for revlew and approval pttor to ~nal map approval for resldenttal significance. units proposed within the following areas: · Within 408 feel of Base Line Road centerline; · Withln770feetofFoothillBoulevardcenterline; · Within 337 feet of Day Creek Boulevard centerline between Highland Avenue and Base Line Road; · Within 438 feet of Day Creek Boulevard centerline between Base Ijne Road and Church Street; and · Within 344 feet of Highlaffd Avenue centerline. Mitigation such as setback, concrete block wall, or earthen berm or their combination along the property line, proper building orientation, building facade upgrade, doubie-paned windows, and/or mechanical ventilation shall be provided. 2/4/98(R:x'CRG730~FF'lR\TMtLEI:I:FNL) 1-12 !ssues/Impacls 4.5 Public Services Schools hapact 4.5.1. As a result of the overcrowding in the classrooms of the Etiwanda and Chalfey School Districts, beth districts have urged and continue to urge the City not to approve development applications unless adequate school lacilitles ate available to serve the development project. Future development will generate more students for the already Impacted .school districts and is consldettd significant. School mitigation plans would be enacted between the ESD/CJUHSD and the project developer providing for a per dwelling unit fee rate for the residential portion of the project site. Mitigation Measures 4.5.1A. A school mitigation plan shah be enacted between the ESD and the developer to provide for a per dwelling unit fee rate for the residential portion of the project site. The fees will off~set the additional demand placed on school district facilities by the residential portion of the project 'LS.1B. The developer shall join Chaffey School District Mello- Roos Community Facilities District No.2 (CFD No. 2), In order to provide an alternative method to finance the mitigation of school impacts of development. 'i.5.1C. The developer shall be required to execute an agreement with ESD nnd CJUHSD to provide adequate mitigation. Such an agreement shall be executed prior to Planning Commission approval for any residential project within the General Plan Amendment area. Actual Implementation of the agreement by the payment of fees, dedication of sites or other mitigation wit take place as building permits are obtained. 4.5.1D. In the event that the developer declines to execute a mitigation agreement, the City shall require full mitigation as a condition of approval. Full mitigation shall be accomplished by means of a requirement to form a Mello-goos Community Facilities district for school facilities. In order to reduce the burden on the future homeowners, it is possible to structure the community facilities district such that some of the special taxes would be prepaid by the developer. Analysis of Significance Mitigated to below a level of significance. 2/4/98(R:\CRG730%FEIR\TABLEl~i. FNt) 1-13 Issues/Impacts 4.5 Public Sew ices (Continued) Recreatio0 4.5.2(1). The residential portion of the proposed project would increase the demand for active veerration facilities causing a significant impact to park facilities. To mitigate this shortage of active recreation, future development proposals must provide additional acreage to meet the recreational needs of this eonununlty. Impact 4.5.2(2). The residential and commercial areas proposed would increase the demand for active recreational facilities causing a significant impact to trail use in the City. To mitigate the potential impacts to trails and to also implement the City's Master Plan of Trails. future develop- ment proposal must provide additional acreage for trails to meet the need within the City. 4.5 Public Services (Continued) Mitigation Measures 4.5.2(1)A. The developer shall be subject to Ordinance No. 105 set by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga to establish regulations for dedication of land, payment of fees, or both, for park and recreational land in subdivisions and planned communities. The developer is responsible for 113 acres oA~ PigrklaO~ ettbcr by fee Qr bvCled~atioB~ 4.5.2(1)B, At the time of ~fing a tentative tract map or a minor subdivision plat for approval, the City park and Recreation ~ shall determine whether dedication of property 11.3 acres 9[park and recreational purposes or in lieu of fees are necessap/. If the City desires dedication, the area shall be designated on the tentative tract map when submitted god a General Plan amendment indicat!ng the location of any pariS'shall be processed subject t0 park and Becreatiop Co~mi$§jon review and fecommefiClatlOn, 4.5.2(1)C. Where dedication is offered and accepted it shall be accomplished in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivi- sion Map Act. NaPhere fees are required, the same shah be depos- ited with the City prior to the issuance of building pertnits. 4.5.2(2). The parkway on the east side of "future" Day Creek Boulev'afd shah be widened by 20 to 25 feet to provide a muhi-use trail fxom Ilighland Avenue south to terminate at the City's adult sports complex. Specific deMgn of the trail shall be determined by the City at the time development plans are submitted for review and approval for any development proposals adjacent to "future" Day Creek Boulevard. The specific design shah tie in with the City's Day Creek Boulevard Master Plan design. The trail shall be designed to connect to planned and existing trail systems in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and shall connect the residential areas north and south of Base Line to the regional commercial areas adjacent to Interstate 15. Analysis of Signillcance Mitigated to below a level of significance. Mitigated to below a level of signifi- cance. 2/4/98(R:NCRG730',FEIR~TABLE I:I:FNL) 1 - | 4 Police Issues/Impacts Mitigation Measures Analysis of Significance Impact 4.5.3. The proposed project will result in a 4'5'3A'Asstated in lheGeneralRequirememsandAppmvalsfur Mitigated to belowa levclof potentially significant impact as an increase in demand for the Police Department for the City, a signed consent and waiver significance. police services. An additional live police personnel would form to join and/or form the Law Enforcement Community be required for the proposed residential and commercial Facilities District shall be filed with City Engineering prior to final development. Mitigation of this impact would require that map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever the City exact fees from the developer through an t~l~qng - occurs tint for any projects within the project area between Developer. Impact 4.5.4. Impacts of the Proposed project on fire service for the City of Rancho Cucamonga are potentially significant. Based on the standard response time threshold of five minutes, and the project's location rehtive to Stations 3, 4, and 5, the site is anticipated to fall within the 5 minute response time criteria. 4.6 Aesthetics/Visual 4.5.4A. The developer shall join the Mego-Roos Community Facifities District to provide fire protection services to the site. 4.5.4B. The City shall encourage cluster developments to provide for more localized and effective fire protection measures such as consogdatinn of fuel buildup and abatement, firebreak realhie- nance, firefighting equipment access, and water service provi- sions. 4.5.4C. The developer shall install automated fire sprinkler systems in commercial, industrial, and multi-family residential units in accordance with Foothill (Rancho Cucamon~a.) Fire Protection District Ordinance No. 15 and Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protectinn District Ordinance No. 22. Mitigated to below a level of significance. Impact 4.6.1. The proposed project would replace an 4.6.1A. New buildings within 100 feet of future Day Creek Mitigated to below a level of 84.15-acre undeveloped, open space corridor with weslden- Boulevard shall be restricted to 35 feet in height to protect the significance. tial and commercial uses, and would significantly alter view con-idor of the mountains for motorists traveling north. The extsling and future view corridors. This is a potentially City Planning Department shall ensure that this condition is significant impact. applied prior to approval of the proposed General Plan amendments. 2/4/98(R:\CRG730~FEIR\TABLEi_l.FNL) 1-15 4.6 Issues/Impacts AesthericsNisual (Continued) hnpact 4.6.2. New light and glare would be created by the addition of residences and commercial establishments In an area previously proposed as a utility corridor. The most significant glare would be generated by commercial uses at the routhem end of the project site, especially in association with outdoor puking that may be lit at night and that would be visible from roadways such as the future Day Creek Boulevard and Foothifi Boulevard, as well as minor roads to the east of the project site such as Victoria Loop, Church Street, and Day Creek Boulevard East. Mitigation Measures 4.6.1B. Noise walls along future Day Creek Boulevard shah be no more than eight feet tall to avoid a sense of'visual enclosure" for this Scenic Corridor, and should be set back an adequate distance to allow landscaping on the road side of the sound wall. 'this requirement shall be attached as a condition of approval by the City Planning Department prior to approval of any dexqelopment bordering future Day Creek Boulevard. 4.6.1C. The City Planning Department shall amend the Commu- niP/DeMgn Ctttcriz Part I1 of the VIctoria Community Plan at tlme pf ~ll~g ~gn[atlve lnap or minor subdivis!on DIal for its "recom- mended edge conditions" for future Day Creek BouleraM to show a similar landscape and sethack treatment on both the east and west sides of Day Creek Boulevard. While a rowof palm trees is now m:ommended for the west side of Day Creek Boulevard, this proposed landscaping shall be enhanced by short and tall drought-tolerant shrubs adjacent to round walls to redue~ the visual impacts of such walls. 4.6.1D. Landscape requirements shall be established for the far routhem end of the project site to screen new development from the viewof motorists along 1-15 looking north. However, this landscaping should also allow views north towards the moun- taim, using the view corridor provided by the future Day Creek Boulevard. The City Planning Department shall address such landscaping as a condition of approval for any development in the areaofl-15. 4.6.2. The Design Review process for commercial establishments shah ensure that no significant light or glare impacts shall result from the proposed project. Specific issues to be evaluated at the time of design review shah include the following: proposed exterior lighting and landscaping of parking areas to reduce visible lighting from outside these areas; use of shielding on exterior lights to focus light onto the ground; and, proposed architectural materials to ensure that reilective materials are minimized. Analysis of Significance Mitigated to below a level of significance. 2/4~98(R:x~RG730~FEIR\TABLEI_I-FNL) 1-16 Issues/Impacts 4.6 Aesthetics/Visual (Continued) Impact 4.6.3. The project could conflict with policies of the CiP/'s General Plan Community Design ELement and landscape recommendations found In the Victoria Cornran- nit,/Plan. This is a potentially significant impact. 4.7 Biological Resources Impact 4.7.1. 1'he proposed project would replace 84.15 acres of undeveloped land with residential and commercial uses resulting in the loss of 47.35 acres of coastal sage scrub, 25.22 acres of abandoned vineyard, and 11.59 acres of mdcral habitat. These impacts arc not considered to be significant and no mitigation is required. Mitigation Measures Analysis of Significance 4.6.3A. Provisions shall be made to account for protection of viewsbeds and plant palette plans shown in the Victoria Commu- nity Elan for major intergctions along illlure Day Creek Boule- vard. Such provisions may include the fogowing: building setbacks within the project site; varied allowable heights with lower heights nearest the interchanges; clustering of buildings; and, landscaping to complement the viewsbed. These issues shall be addressed by the City Planning Department as recommenda- tions for the Design Review pe~ at the time of developing conditions of approval for any projects within the proposed project corridor. 4.6.3B. To reduce potential conflicts with policies of the City's Community Design Element, recommended mitigation measures found under 4.6.1 shall also be Implemented. 4.6.3C. The Community Design Criteria Part 11 of the Victoria Cotnmunlp/Plan shall be mended immediately following project approval to addre$,s new uses proposed as part of the project. However, as part of this amendment, some requirements shall be included to reduce visual impacts of new development by inclusion of landscaping near major roads that matches that proposed by the Victoria Community Plan. For ~'~rzt~ple, trees shall be planted along the site's property lines and along road- ways to screen new development from view. Within the site and adjacent to major east-west corridors, the City shall designate areas for landscaping, ensuring that land adjacent to the roads is planted with low-growing vegetation to maintain a degree of visual open space on the project site. Mitigated to below a level of significance. 4.7.1. Not considered to be significant and no mitigation is Not considered to be significant and required. no mitigation is required. 2/4/98(II:XCRG730XFEIR\TABLEi_i. FNL) 1-17 Issues/Impacts Mitigation Measures Analysis of Significance 4.6Biological Resources (Continued) Impact 4.7.2. Construction of the proposed project site 4.7.2 Not considered to be significant and no mitigation is Not considered to be significant and would result in the loss of San Bernardino Merriam's required. no mitigation is required. kangaroo rat habitat. 'fhe lass of the habitat Is considered adverse but not significant. Impact 4.7.3. The coastal sage scrub present on the site 4.7.3. Not considered to be significant and no mitigation is Not considered to be significant and may constitute potential (but unoccupied) habitat for the ~quited. no mitigation is required. California gnatcatcher. The loss of potential habitat Is considered adverse but is not a significant Impact. 4.8 Cultural Resom'ces Impact 4.8.1. The potential for historic human burials may 4.8.1. In conjunction with the submittal of applications for rough Mitigated to below a level of be present in the portion of the project area that contains grading permits, the applicant shall provide written evidence to significance. Site PI084-27H. This Is a potentially aignlfieant Impact. the Community Development Department that an archaeologist, listed on the County of San Beroardlno list of qualified archeologlsts, has been retained and will be present on site during all rough grading and other significant ground disturbing activities. The archeologist shall meet with the Community Development Department to review procedm-es to be used during such activities. 2/4/98(R:\CRG730~FElR\TABLEI_I.FNL) 1-18 Z ITI m~ Z RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15875, A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 158 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON 32.6 ACRES OF LAND IN THE LOW RESIDENTIALAND LOW- MEDIUM DISTRICTS OF THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN, LOCATED EAST OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD, BETWEEN HIGHLAND AVENUE AND BASE LINE ROAD, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-351-65; 227-393-01 AND 02; 227-401-78; AND 227-091-41. A. Recitals. 1. ADR Development and Lewis Homes Enterprises have filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 15875, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of October 1998, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites pdor 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 dudng the above- referenced public hearing on October 14 1998, including wdtten and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. TheapplicationappliestopropertylocatedeastofDayCreekBoulevard, between Highland Avenue and Base Line Road with a street frontage on Day Creek Boulevard of over 4,000 feet and lot depth of 330 feet and is presently undeveloped; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is the future Route 30 Freeway, the property to the south is undeveloped and a winery, the property to the east is single family dwellings and a mini-warehouse, and the property to the west is undeveloped; and c. The application contemplates a residential subdivision of 158 single family residential lots on 32.6 acres of land within the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan; and d. The application applies to property for which an Environmental Impact Report (SCH No. 97071043) was certified by the City Council on April 15, 1998. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15875 - LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 2 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 I and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Victoria Community Plan; and b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Victoria Community Plan; and c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d, The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and f. The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 4.. Based upon.the fact~ and information coptained in the proposed Mitigated Negative project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative ~ Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5c of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15875 - LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 3 Planninq Division 1) Perimeterwalls and landscaping shall be consistent with established theme for the Victoria Planning Community. 2) The design of the Day Creek Boulevard parkway shall conform with the Day Creek Boulevard Scenic and Recreational Corridor Master Plan as approved by the Planning Commission. 3) The developer shall submit detailed plans of the Day Creek Boulevard parkway for review and approval by the City Planner and City Engineer, prior to recordation of the final map. Enqineerinc~ Division 1) Construct Day Creek Boulevard, full width including a landscaped median, from Base Line Road to Highland Avenue. A City project to complete portions of this segment is currently under design. 2) The City project installing a portion of Day Creek Boulevard will establish the centerline of the street. Any right-of-way dedications will be from this centedine. The east side from centerline shall be 76 feet (25-foot parkway). 3) The lettered lots indicated on the tentative map for parkway areas shall be required to be dedicated as street right-of-way on the final map. 4) Right turn lanes and bus bays shall be inclusive of a 20-foot wide number three lane for northbound Day Creek Boulevard. 8) Median openings along Day Creek Boulevard between Base Line Road and Highland Avenue will only be allowed at Sugar Gum Street, Victoda Park Lane, Silverberry Street, and for the future site of the Fire Department facility. 6) Construct Base Line Road, full width including a landscape median, from Day Creek Boulevard to east area boundary. 7) This development is responsible for completion of Highland Avenue full improvements. Acknowledgment is given to Sandbag's realignment of Highland Avenue. This development shall provide for the completion of public improvements after Sanbag construction, including but not limited to, AC pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, traffic signal, striping, parkway landscaping, and undergrounding utilities. However, should the Route 30 Freeway project not progress in a timely manner, this development shall also provide improvements to Highland Avenue in its current location. 8) Completion of Victoria Park Lane, full width including parkways on both sides from Rochester Avenue to the existing terminus east of the proposed project (old Southem California Edison property). PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15875 - LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 4 9) Silverberry Street from Day Creek Boulevard easterly to the new local street shall have a 65-foot right-of-way. From centerline, the north side shall have 23 feet to curb and a 12-foot parkway, the south side shall have 18 feet to curb and a 12-foot parkway. lo) If the City project of Day Creek Boulevard is completed, this development will be required to complete the rest of the improvements. This development shall not receive transportation fee credit for the backbone system, however, is eligible for a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the cost of street improvements (including street lights but not including parkway improvements) from development on the west side of Day Creek Boulevard. 11) Install traffic signals along Day Creek Boulevard at the intersection of Victoria Park Lane, Base Line Road, and Highland Avenue. The developer shall receive credit against, and reimbursement of costs in excess of, the Transportation Development Fee in conformance with City policy. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. If any of the above are already installed then itwill be the responsibility of the developer to modify the signals' as required. 12) Install traffic signals along Day Creek Boulevard at the intersections of Silverberry Street and Sugar Gum Street. This development is eligible for a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the cost of traffic signal improvements from development on the west side of Day Creek Boulevard. 13) Install Master Plan Storm Drains in Base Line Road, Victoria Park Lane, and Day Creek Boulevard. The area bounded on the north and south by Highland Avenue and Base Line Road and east and west by Victoda Windrows tract homes and approximately 300 feet east of Day Creek Channel (Edison tower lines) will be considered as a drainage boundary for this area. The cost of the drainage systems shall be borne by all the properties lying within the drainage boundary in proportion to the land areas. Rights-of-way, government properties, and utility corridors are exempt from the calculation. The mechanics of creating such a fee district is now being pursued. 14) Install local storm drains to convey all development drainage to the previous mentioned master planned storm drains. The cost of local storm drains shall be borne by this development. 15) The following comments pertain to the preliminary Landscape Plans: a) Street trees shall be per the City's approved Street Tree List (attached). b) Street trees along the interior streets shall be placed in accordance with City Standard Plan No. 501 adhering to the recommended minimum spacing of trees as called for by the City. There are not placed clusters. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15875 - LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 5 16) 17) 18) 19) 20) c) The interior parkway landscaping along the interior street will not be maintained by the City. d) The end of cul-de-sac bulbs will not be maintained by the City, unless dedication is made for trail access, future trail access, and/or emergency access purposes. Any dedications for emergency access shall have a clear area of 24 feet provided and shall be hardsoaped. This hardscaping shall consist of grouted rackscape with a 4-foot minimum width sidewalk (sidewalk necessary only if provided for a trail access). Removable bollards shall be placed as well for keeping unauthorized vehicles from using said access. e) City maintained landscape areas, Landscape Maintenance District Plans (LMD). shall incorporate cost efficient, low maintenance designs, including drought resistant species and substantial areas of rockscape (up to 40 percent). f) Slopes within City maintained areas shall not exceed 3 to 1. g) Planting areas for shrubs should have a minimum width of 3 feet, clear of wall footings. Trees will require wider planting areas, as called for in the City's approved Street Tree List. The sidewalk Connections at the end of the cul-de-sac's with Victoria Park Lane shall join the existing sidewalk along Victoria Park Lane in a "Y" shape similar to other connections along Victoria Park Lane. The dedications shall be wide enough to accomplish this and also to comply with ADA requirements. The connections to the railroad right-of-way (future trail) shall be rockscaped (no sidewalk at this time) and a gate installed, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The first development along Day Creek Boulevard will be required to prepare a Beautification Master Plan for the parkways and median. Grading shall be designed to allow for separate sidewalk and trail facilities, The City wile attempt to proportion the cost of the Master Plan to those developments required to install the landscaping or fronting the landscaped areas, Written verification shall be obtained from Caltrans that sufficient freeway right-of-way has been provided, prior to approval of the Final Map. The project is located adjacent to the future Route 30 Freeway backing up to Highland Avenue, which will be relocated as a frontage road to the freeway. The tentative map's blue border or map boundary encompasses the area north of Highland Avenue as well; however, the call-out is labeling this area as a temporary construction easement. The area should be labeled as a lot. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15875 - LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 6 21) Day Creek Channel contribution fee in the amount of $4,675.00 per net acre is required and shall be paid, prior to final map approval. 22) The proposed project required a Congestion Management Program/Traffic Impact Analysis (CMP/TIA) study. The study shall be approved by Sanbag, prior to final map approval. As determined by the City Engineer, make a fair share contribution to traffic mitigations. 23) The existing overhead utilities located along the northerly boundary shall be undergrounded from the first pole east of the east tract boundary to the first pole on the west side of Day Creek Boulevard, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. All service crossing shall be undergrounded at the same time. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the City adopted cost for undergroundin9 from future development (redevelopment) as it occurs on the adjacent side of the northerly boundary. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all dghts of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. If the proposed development is not allowed to underground then an in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities shall be paid. Environmental Miticlation Measures 1) The project shall comply with the Mitigation Measures adopted for the Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendments 96-03B and 97-01 and Victoria Community Plan Amendments 96-01 and 97- 01 certified by the City Council on Apdl 15, 1998 (SCH No. 97071043), which includes measures to mitigate drainage; air quality; traffic, pedestrian, and bicycle circulation; noise; fire; police; school; aesthetic; and recreational impacts to below a level of significance. 2) The project shall provide sound attenuation walls and building upgrades pursuant to the recommendations in the final acoustical study. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 1998. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 'FT' 15875 - LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 7 I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of October 1998, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: Tentative Tract 15875 and Design Review 158 single family homes on 32.6 acres of land Lewis Homes East of Day Creek Boulevard, between Highland Avenue and Base Line Road ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACTTHE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements cornpletion Date The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not r~lieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities Distdct (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of a fire station to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed. and built to all specifications of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the Districrs property upon completion. The equipment shall be selected by the DiStrict in accordance with its needs. In any building of a station, the developer shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District for the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of such existing District prior to the recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. Further, if the affected school district has not formed a Mello-Roos Community Facifities District within twelve months from the date of approval of the project and prior to the recordation of the final map or issuance of building permits for said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void, This condition shall be waived if the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school impacts as a result of this project. A copy of the signed Resolution of Approval or City Planners letter of approval, and all Standard Conditions, shall be included in legible form on the grading plans, building and construction plans, and landscape and irrigation plans submitted for plan check. B. Time Limits / / / i,/ / !1/ / / J/ / / / !1/ / Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. C. Site Development 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 Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Victoria Community Plan. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval pdor to the issuance of building permits. 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 pdor to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 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 watls, berming, and/orlandscapingtothesatisfactionoftheCity Planner. For single family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy pdor to approval of the final map. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a cleat and concise manner, including proper illumination. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the proper'h/ owner, homeowners'association, orothermeans acceptable tothe City. Proofofthis landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. Project No. TT 15875 Completion Date The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for City Planner and City Engineer approval; including, but not limited to, public notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. 10. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double wall condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project's perimeter. 11. For single family residential development, a 2-inch galvanized pipe shall be attached to each support post for all wood fences, with a minimum of two '/=-inch lag bolts, to withstand high winds. Both post and pipe shall be installed in an 18-inch deep concrete footing. Pipe shall extend at least 4 feet, 6 inches above grade. 12. Wood fencing shall be treated with stain, paint, or water sealant. 13. On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between walls/fences and sidewalk. 14. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. 15. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured products. D. Landscaping 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 City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. All private slopes of 5 feet or less in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer pdor to occupancy. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1 -gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. f~. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. tt. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer pdor to occupancy. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigations shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy forthose units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed for model homes to conserve water through the principles of Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. E. Environmental The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Fourth Street Rock Crusher project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer wdtten notice of the City Adopted Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault. in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Foothill Freeway project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provided, and if appropriate, verity the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked for conformance with the mitigation ,measures contained in the final report. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the amount of $1,000.00, pdor to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. In those instances requiring long term monitoring (i.e.) beyond final certificate of occupancy), the applicant shall provide a written monitoring and reporting program to the City Planner prior to issuance of building permits. Said program shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. F. Other Agencies The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mail boxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mail boxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval pdor to the issuance of building permits. / / / / / / SC - BI27/98 Completion Date ,APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: G. Site Development Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number (i.e., CUP 98-01 ). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please contact the Building and Safety Division for copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition to existing un it(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees. St~'eet addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tractJparcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday. H. Grading Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards. and accepted gradin9 practices. The final gradin9 plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. 3. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved pdor to issuance of building permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DNISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. Dedication and Vehicular Access Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. SC-8127198 Dedication shall be made of the following perimeter streets for right-of-way, sidewalk, parkway, trail per Tentative Tract Map: Base Line Read See special conditions, Day Creek Boulevard Victoria Park Lane Highland Avenue 3. Corner propert,/line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. 4. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for approved openings: Base Line Road, Day Creek Boulevard, Victoria Park Lane, and Highland Avenue. 5. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map. 6. Easements for public sidewalks, trails, and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. 7. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site property interests necessary to construct the required public improvements, and if he/she should fail to do so, the developer shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the property interests required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision, Security for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at developers cost, The appraiser shall have been appreved by the City prior to commencement of the appraisal,: This condition applies in particular, but not limited to: Day Creek Boulevard and Victoria Park Lane. J. Street Improvements All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 2. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: / / Curb & A.C. Side- Ddve Street Street Comm Median Bike XOther Street Name Gutter Pvrnt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Base Line Road X X X X X X. X Day Creek B~vd. X X X X X X X Victoria Park La. X X X X X X X Highland Avenue X X X X X X SC - 8127198 Project NO FT 15~75 Completion Date Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item: parkway landscaping. 3. Improvement Plans and Construction: 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. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineers Office in addition to any other permits required. 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 ccnd uit 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 othenNise specified by the City Engineer. (2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all comers of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. 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. 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 City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. Street improvement plans per City Standards for all private streets shall be provided for review and approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed on the private streets, fees shall be paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the City Engineers Office in addition to any other permits required. 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. A permit shall be obtained from Caltrans for any work within the following right-of-way: Highland Avenue. K. Public Maintenance Areas A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall be submitted to the City Engineer for.review and approval prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. The following landscaped parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District: Sugar Gum, Silverberry Street, Base Line Road, Day Creek Boulevard, Victoria Park Lane, and Highland Avenue. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. All required public landscaping and .irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beautification Master Plan: Base Line Road, Day Creek Boulevard, and Victoria Park Lane. L. Drainage and Flood Control A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer pdor to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 2. ' Trees are prohibited within 5 feet ofthe outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in a surnp catch basin on the public street. M. Utilities Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. SC-Bi27198 Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernard ino. A letter of compliance from the CCWD 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 prier to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 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. Project No TT ~5875 Comptetion Date ~N. General Requirements and Approvals A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new street lights for the first six months of operation, }rior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient smprovement plans shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries to assure secondan/access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map, APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Mello Rods Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. 2. Fire flow requirement shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. X a. A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. X b. For the purpose of final acceptance, an additional fire flow test of the on-site hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel after construction and prior to occupancy. 3. Fire hydrants are required. All required public or on-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed, and operable prior to delivery of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. 4. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Fire Distdct that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of the required fire protection system. 5. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final inspection. 6. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted: X All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection Distdct Ordinance 22. 7. All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14 feet, 6 inches from the ground up, so as not to impede fire apparatus. 8. $132.00 Fire District fee(s), and a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District prior to Building and Safety permit issuance. ** A Fire District fee in the amount of $132.00 shall be paid at the time of Water Plan submittal. **Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans. 9. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC, UPC, UMC, NEC, and RCFD Standards 22 and 15. A PP LICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: P. Security Hardware 1. A secondan/locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors. 2. One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doors. If windows are within 40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used. 3. All garage or rolling doora shall have slide bolts or some type of secondan/locking devices. Q. Windows 1. All sliding glass windows shall have secondan/locking devices and should not be able to be lifted from frame or track in any manner. R. Building Numbering 1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall, be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime visibility. [/ !/ RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 15875, A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION OF 158 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON 32.6 ACRES OF LAND IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL AND LOW-MEDIUM DISTRICTS OF THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN, LOCATED EAST OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD, BETWEEN HIGHLAND AVENUE AND BASE LINE ROAD, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-351-65; 227-393-01 AND 02; 227-401-78; AND 227-091-41. A. Recitals. 1. ADR Development and Lewis Homes Enterprises have filed an application for the approval of the Design Review for Tentative Tract Map No. 15875, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 14th day of October 1998, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on October 14, 1998, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property located east of Day Creek Boulevard, between Highland Avenue and Base Line Road with a street frontage on Day Creek Boutevard of over 4,000 feet and lot depth of 330 feet and is presently undeveloped; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is the future Route 30 Freeway. the property to the south is undeveloped and a winery, the property to the east is single family dwellings and a mini-warehouse, and the property to the west is undeveloped; and c. The application contemplates a residential subdivision of 158 single family residential lots on 32.6 acres of land within the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre) and Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) of the Victoria Community Plan; and 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code. and Victoria Community Plan; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15875 DR - LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 2 b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Victoria Community Plan; and c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and f. The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared! therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative! Declaration with regard to the application. b. That, based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5c of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that thei proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitall upon which wildlife depends. Further based upon substantial ev dence contained in the Mitigated l Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the Planning] Commission during the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption[ of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of! Regulations. 5. Based upon the f nd ngs and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each'and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference: Planninq Division 1) 2) All conditions of approval for Tentative Tract 15875 shall apply. The developer shall provide rear yard landscaping on Lots 12 through 30 adjacent to the mini-warehouse to soften the appearance of storage buildings constructed on the common property line. Rear yard landscape materials shall be shown on plans submitted for plan check prior to issuance of building permits and installed prior to final occupancy. EgO0 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15875 DR - LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 3 3) The developer shall provide second-story decks on 50 percent of the lots abutting Day Creek Boulevard. Decks shall be shown on plans submitted for plan check prior to issuance of building permits and installed prior to final occupancy. 4) The developer shall provide textured and/or patterned driveway paving on all lots. Enclineerincl Division 1) Construct Day Creek Boulevard, full width including a landscaped median, from Base Line Road to Highland Avenue. A City project to complete portions of this segment is currently under design. 2) The City project installing a portion of Day Creek Boulevard will establish the centerline of the street. Any right-of-way dedications will be from this centerline. The east side from centerline shall be 76 feet (25-foot parkway). 3) The lettered lots indicated on the tentative map for parkway areas shall be required to be dedicated as street right-of-way on the final map. 4) Right turn lanes and bus bays shall be inclusive of a 20-foot wide number three lane for northbound Day Creek Boulevard. 5) Median openings along Day Creek Boulevard between Base Line Road and Highland Avenue will only be allowed at Sugar Gum Street, Victoria Park Lane, Silverberry Street, and for the future site of the Fire Department facility. 6) Construct Base Line Road, full width including a landscape median, from Day Creek Boulevard to east area boundary. 7) This development is responsible for completion of Highland Avenue full improvements. Acknowledgment is given to Sandbag's realignment of Highland Avenue. This development shall provide for the completion of public improvements after Sanbag construction, including but not limited to, AC pavement, curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lights, traffic signal, striping, parkway landscaping, and undergrounding utilities. However, should the Route 30 Freeway project not progress in a timely manner, this development shall also provide improvements to Highland Avenue in its current location. 8) Completion of Victoria Park Lane, full width including parkways on both sides from Rochester Avenue to the existing terminus east of the proposed project (old Southern California Edison property). 9) Silverberry Street from Day Creek Boulevard easterly to the new local street shall have a 65-foot right-of-way. From centerline, the north side shall have 23 feet to curb and a 12-foot parkway, the south side shall have 18 feet to curb and a 12-foot parkway. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15875 DR - LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 4 lo) If the City project of Day Creek Boulevard is completed, this development will ,be required to complete the rest of the improvements. This development shall not receive transportation fee credit for the backbone system, however, is eligible for a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the cost of street improvements (including street lights but not including parkway improvements) from development on the west side of Day Creek Boulevard. 11) Install traffic signals along Day Creek Boulevard at the intersection of Victoria Park Lane, Base Line Road, and Highland Avenue. The developer shall receive credit against, and reimbursement of costs in excess of, the Transportation Development Fee in conformance with City policy. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. If any of the above are already installed, then it will be the responsibility of the developer to modify the signals as required. 12) Install traffic signals along Day Creek Boulevard at the intersections of Silverberry Street and Sugar Gum Street. This development is eligible for a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the cost of traffic signal improvements from development on the west side of Day Creek Boulevard. 13) Install Master Plan Storm Drains in Base Line Road, Victoria Park Lane, and Day Creek Boulevard. The area bounded on the north and south by Highland Avenue and Base Line Road and east and west by Victoria Windrows tract homes and approximately 300 feet east of Day Creek Channel (Edison tower lines) will be considered as a drainage boundary for this area. The cost of the drainage systems shall be borne by all the properties lying within the drainage boundary in proportion to the land areas. Rights-of-way, government properties, and utility corridors are exempt from the calculation. The mechanics of creating such a fee district is now being pursued. 14) Install local storm drains to convey all development drainage to the previous mentioned master planned storm drains. The cost of local storm drains shall be borne by this development. 15) The following comments pertain to the preliminary Landscape Plans: a) Street trees shall be per the City's approved Street Tree List (attached). b) Street trees along the interior streets shall be placed in accordance with City Standard Plan No. 501 adhering to the recommended minimum spacing of trees as called for by the City. There are not placed clusters. c) The interior parkway landscaping along the interior streetwill not be maintained by the City, PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15875 DR - LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 5 16) 17) 18) 19) 20) 21) d) The end of cul-de-sac bulbs will not be maintained by the City, unless dedication is made for trail access, future trail access, and/or emergency access purposes, Any dedications for emergency access shall have a clear area of 24 feet provided and shall be hardscaped. This hardscaping shall consist of grouted rockscape with a 4-foot minimum width sidewalk (sidewalk necessary only if provided for a trail access). Removable bollards shall be placed as well for keeping unauthorized vehicles from using said access. e) City maintained landscape areas, Landscape Maintenance District Plans (LMD), shall incorporate cost efficient, low maintenance designs, including drought resistant species and substantial areas of rockscape (up to 40 percent). Slopes within City maintained areas shall not exceed 3 to 1. g) Planting areas for shrubs should have a minimum width of 3 feet, clear of wall footings. Trees will require wider planting areas, as called for in the City's approved Street Tree List. The sidewalk connections at the end of the cul-de-sac's with Victoria Park Lane shall join the existing sidewalk along Victoda Park Lane in a "Y" shape similar to other connections along Victoria Park Lane. The dedications shall be wide enough to accomplish this and also to comply with ADA requirements. The connections to the railroad right-of-way (future trail) shall be rockscaped (no sidewalk at this time) and a gate installed, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The first development along Day Creek Boulevard will be required to prepare a Beautification Master Plan for the parkways and median. Grading shall be designed to allow for separate sidewalk and trail facilities. The City will attempt to proportion the cost of the Master Plan to those developments required to install the landscaping or fronting the landscaped areas. Written verification shall be obtained from Caltrans that sufficient freeway right-of-way has been provided, prior to approval of the Final Map, The project is located adjacent to the future Route 30 Freeway backing up to Highland Avenue, which will be relocated as a frontage road to the freeway. The tentative map's blue border or map boundary encompasses the area north of Highland Avenue as well; however, the call-out is labeling this area as a temporary construction easement. The area should be labeled as a lot. Day Creek Channel contribution fee in the amount of $4,675.00 per net acre is required and shall be paid, prior to final map approval. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15875 DR o LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 6 22) The proposed project required a Congestion Management Program/Traffic ImpactAnalysis (CMP/TIA) study. The study shall be approved by Sanbag, prior to final map approval. As determined by the City Engineer, make a fair share contribution to traffic mitigations. 23) The existing overhead utilities located along the northerly boundary shall be undergrounded from the first pole east of the east tract boundary to the first pole on the west side of Day Creek Boulevard, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. All service crossing shall be undergrounded at the same time. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover one-half the City adopted cost for undergrounding from future development (redevelopmerit) as it occurs on the adjacent side of the northerly boundary. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within six months of .the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. If the proposed development is not allowed to underground then an in-lieu fee as contribution to the future undergrounding of the existing overhead utilities shall be paid. Environmental Mitiqation Measures 1) The project shall comply with the Mitigation Measures adopted for the Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendments 96-038 and 97-01 and Victoria Community Plan Amendments 96-01 and 97- 01 certified by the City Council on Apdl 15, 1998 (SCH No. 97071043), which includes measures to mitigate drainage; air quality; traffic, pedestrian, and bicycle circulation; noise; fire; police; school; aesthetic; and recreational impacts to below a level of significance. 2) The project shall provide sound attenuation walls and building upgrades pursuant to the recommendations in the final acoustical study. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 14TH DAY OF OCTOBER 1998. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Brad Buller, Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. TT 15875 DR - LEWIS HOMES October 14, 1998 Page 7 I, Brad Buller, Secretan/of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 14th day of October 1998, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: LOCATION: Tentative Tract 15875 and Design Review 158 single family homes on 32.6 acres of land Lewis Homes East of Day Creek Boulevard, between Highland Avenue and Base Line Road ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLAN N ING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING 3ONDITIONS: A. General Requirements The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. Completion Date / The developer shall commence, participate in, and consummate or cause to be commenced, participated in, or consummated, a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) for the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to finance construction and/or maintenance of a fire station to serve the development. The station shall be located, designed, and built to all specifications of the Rancho C ucamonga Fire Protection District, and shall become the District's property upon completion. The equipment shall be selected by the District in accordance with its needs. In any building of a station, the developer shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations. The CFD shall be formed by the District and the developer by the time recordation of the final map occurs. Prior to recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first, the applicant shall consent to, or participate in, the establishment of a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District for the construction and maintenance of necessary school facilities. However, if any school district has previously established such a Community Facilities District, the applicant shall, in the alternative, consent to the annexation of the project site into the territory of such existing District prior to the recordation of the final map or the issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. Further, if the affected school district has not formed a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District within twelve months from the date of approval of the project and SC - 8127198 prior to the recordation of the final map or issuance of building permits for said project, this condition shall be deemed null and void. This condition shall be waived if the City receives notice that the applicant and all affected school districts have entered into an agreement to privately accommodate any and all school impacts as a result of this project. A copy of the signed Resolution of Approval or City Ptanner's letter of approval, and all Standard Conditions, shall be included in legible form on the grading plans, building and construction plans, and landscape and irrigation plans submitted for plan check. Bo Time Limits Approval shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, if building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 24 months from the date of approval. C. Site Development 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 Division, the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Victoria Community Plan. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 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. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformere, 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 City Planner. For single family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. Street names shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear .and concise manner, including proper illumination. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. SC* ~27198 10. Project No ~ 15875 Completion Oate The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all / lots for City Planner and City Engineer approval; including, but not limited to, public notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of construction activity, dust contro measures, and security fencing. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. Ira double wall / condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project's perimeter. 11. For single family residential development, a 2-inch galvanized pipe shall be attached to each support post for all wood fences, with a minimum of two '/,-inch lag bolts to withstand high winds. Both post and pipe shall be nstalled in an 18-inch deep concrete footing. Pipe shall extend at least 4 feet, 6 inches above grade. 12. Wood fencing shall be treated with stain, paint, or water sealant. 13. On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between wails/fences and sidewalk. 14. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. 15. VVhererockcobbleis used, itshall be real riverrock. Otherstoneveneers maybe manufactured products. Landscaping 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 City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. All private slopes of 5 feet or less in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. / /__ 3. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1 -gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq. ft. ofslope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 4. For single family residential development, all slope planting and irrigations shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy forthose units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. / / / / Prolect No 17 15975 CornpletionJ[Date 5. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Division. 6. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division. 7. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed for model homes to conserve water through the principles of Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 19.16 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Environmental 1. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Fourth Street Rock Crusher project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 2. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the City Adopted Special Studies Zone for the Red Hill Fault, in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any properbJ. 3. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the Foothill Freeway project in a standard format as determined by the City Planner, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 4. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise attenuation to below 45 CNEL, the building materials and construction techniques provided, and if appropriate, verify the adequacy of the mitigation measures. The building plans will be checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report. 5. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the amount of $1,000.00, prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. In those instances requiring long term monitoring (i.e.) beyond final certificate of occupancy), the applicant shall provide a written monitoring and reporting program to the City Rannet prior to issuance of building permits. Said program shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. / / / / / Other Agencies 1. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of mail boxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mail boxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mail boxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits, / / Project No. TT Completion Date ~.PPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR ~MPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: G. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number (i.e., CUP 98-01 ). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, National Electric Code, Title 24 Accessibility requirements, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of issuance of relative permits. Please contact the Building and Safety Division for copies of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential dwelling unit(s) or major addition to existing unit(s), the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Checking Fees, and School Fees. 3.Street addresses shall be provided by the Building Official, after tractJparcel map recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday. H. Grading 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with the Uniform Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial conformance with the approved grading plan. 2.A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. 3. The final grading plans shall be completed and approved prior to issuance of building permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: I. Dedication and Vehicular Access Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, streettrees, traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. + Dedication shall be made of the following perimeter streets for right-of-way, sidewalk, parkway, trail per Tentative Tract Map: Base Line Road See special conditions, Day Creek Boulevard Victoria Park Lane Highland Avenue 3. Corner propert,/line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. Vehicular access rights shall be dedicated to the City for the following streets, except for approved openings: Base Line Road, Day Creek Boulevard. Victoria Park Lane, and Highland Avenue. , All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map. Easements for public sidewalks, trails, and/or street trees placed outside the public right-of-way shall be dedicated to the City. The developer shall make a good faith effort to acquire the required off-site properb/interests necessary to construct the required public improvements, and if he/she should fail to do so, the developer shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the final map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the improvements pursuant to Government Code Section 66462 at such time as the City acquires the property interests required for the improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by the developer of all costs incurred by the City to acquire the off-site property interests required in connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of these costs shall be in the form of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the developer, at developer's cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the City prior to commencement ofthe appraisal. This condition applies in particular, but not limited to: Day Creek Boulevard and Victoria Park Lane. J. Street Improvements All public improvements (interiorstreets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Intedor street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 2. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Street Name Base Line Road Curb & A.C. Side- 0dye Street Street Comm Median Bike XOther Gutter Pvrnt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail X X X X X X X Day Creek Blvd, X X X Victoria Park La, X X X X X X X X X X X Highland Avenue X X X X X X Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item: parkway landscaping. Improvement Plans and Construction: Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b, Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, Signal conduitwith 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 interconnectwidng. Pullboxesshallbeplacedonbothsidesofthestreetat3feetoutside 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 (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. 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. 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 City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. Street improvement plans per City Standards for all private streets shall be provided for review and approval by the City Engineer. Prior to any work being performed on the private streets. fees shall be paid and construction permits shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. 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. 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. A permit shall be obtained from Caltrans for any work within the following right-of-way: Highland Avenue. Completion Date ]1, K. Public Maintenance Areas A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. The following landscaped parkways, medians, paseos, easements, trails or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District: Sugar Gum, Silverberry Street, Base Line Road, Day Creek Boulevard, Victoria Park Lane, and Highland Avenue. 2. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 3. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City. 4. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective Beautification Master Plan: Base Line Road, Day Creek Boulevard, and Victoria Park Lane. Drainage and Flood Control 1. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 2. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. J/ / / / Public storm drain easements shall be graded to convey overflows in the event of a blockage in a sump catch basin on the public street. Utilities Provide separate utility sen/ices to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Cucamonga County Water Distdct (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Depar~ment of the County of San Bernardino. A letterof compliance from the CCWD 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 pdor to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. ,.-.,,,,, ProjectNo [T15875 Cornl~letion Date N. General Requirements and Approvals A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all new street lights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. Prior to finalization of any development phase, sufficient improvement plans shall be completed beyond the phase boundaries to assure secondary access and drainage protection to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Phase boundaries shall correspond to lot lines shown on the approved tentative map. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE PREVENTION/NEW CONSTRUCTION UNIT, (909) 477-2730, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: O. General Fire Protection Conditions 1. Mello Roos Community Facilities District requirements shall apply to this project. 2. Fire flow requirement shall be 1,000 gallons per minute. X a. A fire flow shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel prior to water plan approval. X b. For the purpose of final acceptance. an additional fire flow test of the on-site hydrants shall be conducted by the builder/developer and witnessed by fire department personnel after construction and pdor to occupancy. Fire hydrants are required. All required public oron-site fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed, and operahie prior to de very of any combustible building materials on site (i.e., lumber, roofing materials, etc.). Hydrants flushing shall be witnessed by fire department personnel. Prior to the issuance of building permits for combustible construction, evidence shall be submitted to the Fire Distdct that an approved temporary water supply for fire protection is available, pending completion of the required fire protection system. Hydrant reflective markers (blue dots) shall be required for all hydrants and installed prior to final inspection. 6. Roadways within project shall comply with the Fire District's fire lane standards, as noted: X All roadways per Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Ordinance 22. , All trees and shrubs planted in any median shall be kept trimmed to a minimum of 14 feet, 6 inches from the ground up, so as not to impede fire apparatus. $132.00 Fire District fee(s), and a $1 per "plan page" microfilm fee will be due to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District prior to Building and Safety permit issuance. ** A Fire District fee in the amount of $132.00 shall be paid at the time of Water Plan submittal. **Note: Separate plan check fees for fire protection systems (sprinklers, hood systems, alarms, etc.) and/or any consultant reviews will be assessed upon submittal of plans. Project NO Completion Date 9. Plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 1994 UBC, UFC, UPC, UMC, NEC, and RCFD Standards 22 and 15. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: P. Security Hardware 1. A secondary locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors. 2. One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doors. Ifwindows are within 40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used. 3. All garage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices. Q. Windows 1. A~~slidingg~asswind~wssha~~havesec~ndary~~ckingdevicesandsh~u~dn~tbeab~et~be~ifted from frame or track in any manner. R. Building Numbering 1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime visibility. i / CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' STAFF REPORT DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: October 14, 1998 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Brent Le Count, AICP, Associate Planner UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-25 - RODRIGUEZ - A request for review and approval of a Uniform Sign Program for an approved master planned shopping center with Phase One development consisting of a 2,900 square foot drive-thru restaurant (Burger King) and a 5,548 square foot restaurant (previously Zendejas) on 3.7 acres of land in the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 207-211-12 and 13. BACKGROUND: Conditional Use Permit 95°25 was approved by the Planning Commission on May 14, 1997. The Commission conditioned the project to require the preparation of a Uniform Sign Program subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of building permits. The applicant is currently in plan check for the Burger King restaurant and has prepared a Uniform Sign Program for consideration by the Commission. The Commission reviewed the draft Program at its meeting on August 12, 1998, at which time the Commission continued the matter to allow the applicant time to revise the document per staffs comments. A revised Program has been submitted for review. ANALYSIS: Staff believes that the revised Uniform Sign Program addresses the concerns discussed on August 12, 1998. The signs proposed are in conformance with the Sign Ordinance; however, based upon the ongoin9 discussions of the Sign Task Force, there are two items the Commission may wish to consider: The Program proposes a mixture of colors for signs with red as the primary color and up to 10 percent of the sign to be blue, green, or white or a combination of two of the three (blue, green, white). This would result in a maximum of three colors for any given sign. Planning Commission sign design policy currently limits sign colors to a maximum of two. The Program permits shop tenant wall signs to include Iogos with no maximum percentage of the sign established for the logo. The Commission may wish to establish an area percentage limit (such as 10 percent of the sign area) for the logo portion. Y ITEM F PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CUP 95-25 - RODRIGUEZ October 14, 1998 Page 2 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the draft Uniform Sign Program through minute action with any modifications the Commission considers appropriate. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:BLC/jfs Attachments: Exhibit "A" Exhibit "B" Exhibit "C" Planning Commission Staff Report dated August 12, 1998 Planning Commission Minutes dated August 12, 1998 Draft Uniform Sign Program DATE: TO: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: August12,1998 CITY OF RANCHO CUC, ,MONGA -- STAFF REPORT Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Brad Buller, City Planner Brent Le Count, AICP, Associate Planner UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-25 - RODRIGUEZ - A request for review and approval of a Uniform Sign Program for an approved master planned shopping center with Phase One development consisting of a 2,900 square foot drive-thru restaurant (Burger King) and a 5,548 square foot restaurant (previously Zendejas) on 3.7 acres of land in the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at the southwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 207-211-12 and 13. k BACKGROUND: Conditional Use Permit 95-25 was approved by the Planning Commission on May 14, 1997, for a master planned shopping center, including two restaurants. The Commission conditioned the project to require the preparation of a Uniform Sign Program, subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission, pdor to issuance of building permits for Phase One. The applicant is currently in plan check for the Burger King restaurant (Phase One) and has prepared a Uniform Sign Program for consideration by the Commission, ANALYSIS: The applicant has been working with staff to develop the Uniform Sign Program. While many of the issues identified by staff have been addressed, there remain some outstanding items, they are as follows: Page 3, "Project Identification Sign - Type A" - The maximum allowable height per the Sign Ordinance is 6 feet, the Program specifies 8 feet in the text, but the illustration shows 6 feet. Two sides are specified in text, yet the drawing and Site Plan imply a single-sided monument sign. These minor inconsistencies should be revised. Page 4, "Project Tenant Monument Sign - Type B" - The Sign Ordinance limits monument signs on the Foothill Boulevard frontage to 24 square feet because two signs are proposed (see Sign Type I). The text says 48 square feet and the drawing shows 24 square feet (4 feet x 6 feet). This minor inconsistency should be revised. The Sign Ordinance requires a minimum of 300 feet between these two monument signs on Foothill Boulevard; however, the Site Plan indicates 240 feet. Either a single monument sign should be shown on Foothill Boulevard or their locations shifted to provide a minimum of 300 feet of separation, The Sign Ordinance will allow a 48 square foot monument sign on Vineyard Avenue because the project has more than 500 feet of frontage, yet a single sign is shown on the Program. PLANNING COMMISSIOk ,~TAFF REPORT USP FOR CUP 95-25 - RODRIGUEZ AugUSt 12, 1998 Page 2 Page 5, "Major Tenant Signage" - A Major Tenant is defined as greater than 40,000 square feet, which means only Building A would qualify, Building A has only one street frontage (faces Foothill Boulevard) because it is separated from Vineyard Avenue by Sub Major B, Shops Building D, and the Zendejas restaurant pad. Therefore, Item A should be revised to delete any reference to any additional wall mounted identification signs. See Exhibit "A" for the text which should be deleted. Page 6, "Major Tenant Signage"- Item F refers to multiple major tenants instead of just one. Again, there is only one Major Tenant with greater than 40,000 square feet as defined by the developer. This minor inconsistency should be revised. Page 7, "Sub Major Tenant Signage" - Item A references a building with frontage on Vineyard Avenue, the approved Master Plan shows the Sub Major tenant building only having frontage on Foothill'Boulevard. The Program allows the Sub Major tenant "one sign per entry facing Foothill Boulevard" but the Sign Ordinance only allows one wall sign per building face. Therefore, Item A should be revised to delete any reference to any additional wall mounted identification signs. See Exhibit "A" for text which should be deleted. A maximum letter height of 24 inches is proposed for the Sub Major, Building B, which is the same maximum letter height as for the Major Tenant, Building A. Sub Major, Building B is about one-tenth the size of Major Tenant, Building A. Staff suggests that either Sub Major wall signs be limited to 18 inches or the Major Tenant wall signs be increased to 36 inches. Page 9, "Pad or Restaurant Signage o Type E" - Item A proposes that pad tenants can have a monument sign; however, there are no standards or drawings for them. The Sign Ordinance does not allow monument signs for individual pad buildings; rather it allows for shopping center monument signs which can list multiple tenant names (Sign Type B). This minor inconsistency should be revised by deleting any reference to monument signs. A maximum letter height of 24 inches is proposed for all pad buildings, which is the same as that. proposed for the Sub Major Tenant. Planning Commission policy has been to limit pad buildings to 18 inches because of their proximity to the street. Page 9a, Burger King wall sign appears to be typical corporate canister (i.e., "can") sign while the Program specifies no "can" signs. Provide more detail for Burger King wall signs and design it for compatibility with the center rather than generic corporate specifications. Page 16, "Historic Sign Type I" - Proposes a monument sign for the Klusman House, with multiple tenant names, in the same design treatment as the Project Tenant Monument - Sign Type B. Sign Ordinance requires a minimum of 300 feet between these two monument signs on Foothill Boulevard; however, the Site Plan indicates 240 feet. Either a single monument sign should be shown on Foothill Boulevard or their locations PLANNING COMMISSION .., rAFF REPORT USP FOR CUP 95-25 - RODRIGUEZ August 12, 1998 Page 3 shifted to provide a minimum of 300 feet of separation. Also, text states 12-inch maximum letter height, whereas the drawing shows 16 inches which is too large for sign panels. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission direct the applicant to provide the above-referenced revisions and come back to the Commission for final review. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:DC:mlg Attachments: Exhibit"A" Exhibit "B" Draft Uniform Sign Program Sign Ordinance Excerpts 14.20.100 Permitted Siqns - Commercial and Office Zones - The following signs may be permitted in the commercial and office zones subject to the provisions listed: CLASS (business not within shopping centers including 2. us ess identification (businesses within shopping centers) SIGN TYPE Wall MAXIMUM NUMBER one per building face, a maximum of three per business. MAXIMUM SIGN AREA 10% of the building face, not to exceed 150 square feel. MAXIMUM HEIGHT Not to project above Ihe roof and in no case be higher than 20 feet from finished grade. and Monument One per sheet fronlage, a 24 square feel. Up to 8 feet maximum ol 2 per business. One per building face, a maximum of 3 for any one business. Wall 10% of the building face, not to exceed 150 square feel. To be included as pad of the 10% of the building face maximum sign Subtenant wall sign. One per subtenant. Not to project above the roof and in no case be higher than 20 feet from finished grade. REMARKS a. A combination of monumenl and wall signs may be used. however, only a maximum ol three signs may be used to identify any one business. b. Wall signs and monument signs shall be architecturally designed to be COmpatible with the developmenl c. Monument signs shall be placed entireFy on Ihe subject properly and shall not overhang into privale or public properly. a. A combination of monument and wall signs may be used: however, only a maximum of 3 signs may be used to identify any one business. b. Wall signs are limited to business identilicafion only. A center is one in which businesses and structures are designed in an integrated and interrelaled developmenl Such design is independent of the number ol structures, lots. or parcels making up the conlet d. AIIshoppingcente~shalldevelopacoordinatedsignprogram for all tenants and uses This includes size, cnlor. sign type, and location. Liralied variahon is permitled. such as color, as long as the remaining COmponents ol Ihe program remain Ihe same. Not to projed above the roof a. and in no case be higher than 20 feel from finished grade The Uniform Sign Program may establish crileria fol the placement of subtenant signs of a major or anchor tenant A subtenant is defined as a business that is owned or operaled by the major or anchor lenanL and/or franchisee or subsidiary of the major or anchor tenanl; and whose operalion is separate born, unrelated to, and differenl from the major or anchor tenanl, c, A major or anchor tenant occupying a floor area in excess of 50,000 square feel may provide subtenant signage. A subtenant must occupy a minimum of 400 sguare feet el floor area. e. Only one subtenant of a major or anchor tenant will be permitted signage. f Subtenant identification may be allowed on the monument sign. g Only a manned subtenant may be provided signage. Interior or exterior ATM machines ale not COnsidered sublenanls. 20 Revised 1/98 14.20.100 Permitted Signs - Commercial and Office Zones - The following signs may be permitted in the commercial and office zones subject to the provisions listed: CLASS 2 Business idenlification (businesses within shopping centers) (Conlinued) SIGN TYPE MAXIMUM NUMBER MAXIMUM SIGN AREA MAXIMUM HEIGHT and Monumenl One per street fronlage 24 square feel, Up Io 8 feel, or Monument Two per street frontage. 24 square feet. Up to 6 feet. minimum 300 feet apad. or Monument One per street frontage of 500 feet or more 48 square feet. Up to 8 feel and Business To be determined' through 15 square feet, Up to 6 feel. D i r e c I o r y approval by the City Planner. (Monumenl) Signs may be placed to form a single structure or kiosk. and Project I.D. One per sireel fronlage. not to 24 square feel Up th 6 leer. Monumenls exceed 2 per center. 3 Business idenli~calion Wall To be determined by the City (multiple professional Planner based on each lenants morn than three) individual building design. The number and placement of wall and directory signs shall be subjed Io review by and Monument One per streel, maximum of 24 square feet. Ihe City Planner. IWO. 10% of the face of the structure where sign is to be placed. not to exceed 50 square feet. and Business To be delermined by the City 12 square feet Directory Planner based on each individual building design Not th projed above the roof, Up to 8 feet. Up Io 8 feet. REMARKS a, Monument signs may contain up to Ihree idenldications per side; either the theme name of the conlet and two tenants or three lenahis. The design (COlor, maledal, style) of all monument signs Shall be consislent and COmpatible to the design of the Center Monumenl signs facing different streets need not COntain Identical thformatidn. Additionally, a two- sided sign need not COntain the same COpy. b Monument signs shall idenlity major anchor tenants and provide sufficient area to identity minor lenahis as determined by the property owner. c. An 8-inch minimum leher height is recommended. d Address of cenler required. bul not courtled as pad of monument sign area e. The business directory Signs are inlended to provide direction and idenldicalion to the smaller individual shop lenahis. All strJI signs shall maintain a minimum 60-foot setback from Ih street (as measured from the face of Curb) f. Project IO signs are limimd to only identifying the theme nam, and/or graphic logo of the center. Projecl ID. signs shall be located al a major inlerseclion o project entry. h. Project I.D. signs shall be pad oi an architectural theme wall (not freestanding sign) A pair of. projed ID signs flanking a project enlry shall counl as one slg~. a. Ac~ncePlualsignprogramforeachbuirdingshafiberequired at the time ot design review, b. The City Planner shall review all office sign programs through the permit procedure to poletrained that il is wilhin the cdleria heroin sol fodh and meets Ihe thlenl d/Ihis Ordinance, C, Monument signs shall be limiled to identifying the name of the professional COmplex d. Business diredory signs may be placed throughout the site as needed at enlrances and shall be limited Io lieling Ihe lenahis name and Suite number 21 Revised 1/98 Mr. Buller clarified by stating that the recommendation is to approve the time extension for the map but to defer approval for the time extension of the design, and that a recommendation b forwarded to the Commission from the Design Review Committee. Commissioner Macias clarified his position in that he did not want to give a false impr he was not in favor of the existing design. He simply requested the chance to revi~ in greater detail. ect Motion: Moved by Macias, seconded by Barker, to issue a resolution approving Time Extension for Tentative Tract 14509, Extension for Design Review until reviewed by the Design Review the following vote: adopt the action on Time Motion carried by AYES: BARKER, MACIAS NOES: MCNIEL ABSENT: TOLSTOY - carried CONDITIONAL USE PERN_ )DIFICATION - RODRIGUEZ - A request to modify a condition of approval rel to preparation of Design Guidelines for an approved master planned shopping ~hase One development consisting of a 2,900 square foot ddve-thru restaur ~ and a 5,548 square foot restaurant (previously Zendejas) on 3.7 acres in the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific the southwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 1-12 and 13. UNIFORM SIGN PROGRAM FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-25 - RODRIGUEZ - A request for review and approval of a Uniform Sign Program for an approved master planned shopping center with Phase One development consisting of a 2,900 square foot ddve-thru restaurant (Burger King) and a 5,548 square foot restaurant (previously Zendejas) on 3.7 acres of land in the Community Commercial designation of the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan, located at the southwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue - APN: 207-211-12 and 13. Brent LeCount, Associate Planner, gave the staff report. Chairman McNiel asked what guidelines were going to be deferred to Phase 2 and what guidelines will be used for Phase 1. Brent LeCount responded that the design for the Burger King is approved and permits could be issued. Forthe remaining buildings in Phase I. He said the other buildings have not gone through Design Review. Chairman McNiel asked if the pedestrian facility and the related amenities were going in at the same time. Mr. LeCount responded that they were and were currently in plan check. EXHIBIT "B" 10/14/98 Chairman McNiel asked if the applicant had indicated as to whether both buildings were going together in Phase 1. Mr. LeCount responded that the applicant had only applied for Burger King at this time. Chairman McNiel asked if there was a reason the Commission had not received the design guidelines and further commented that it had been a long time. Mr. LeCount responded that guidelines had been received but were not to the design review Committee's satisfaction. Commissioner Barker commented he had hoped this issue was concluded before the end of his term. He asked what they were to address. Brad Buller, City Planner, explained that the Commission felt from the beginning of the project that a comprehensive master plan with the design guidelines was needed. He further observed that along with the review, they had the specific tenant; i.e., Burger King and in order to meet the needs of the tenant, the applicant came in with a design for Burger King and Zendejas that was acceptable and deferred the remaining master plan design guidelines for the remaining buildings to a later date and that a condition was put into place that the design guidelines for the remaining buildings were in place before any other buildings went in other than Burger King or Zendejas. He noted that the applicant put before the Committee his critical need to move forward with the Burger King. He commented that this was uncharactedstic of the steps and procedures a developer must attain before gaining approval but that this project had not been able to gain approval. He pointed out that the recommendation of staff and the Committee was to allow Burger King, which had already been approved, and its public improvement amenities to move forward. He stated that Burger King would bear the weight of the improvements which would in turn, help get the improvements in sooner rather than waiting for the remaining design review. Commissioner Macias commented that this was one of the first projects he had dealt with as a Commissioner. He stated he felt nothing had changed and that this was the best we could get out of this sight at this time. He remarked that the Burger King was ready to go, along with everything connected with it and it was accepted through the design review process. He suggested they weigh the value of what they were receiving. Chairman McNiel opened the public headng, Joe Ramos, 1202 Monte Vista #1, Upland, commented regarding the lack of definition in the footprints of the buildings in the area. He noted that many of the site amenities are not tied in due to the lack of definition but all drawings of the amenities had been tied in. He indicated nothing would be developed on the Zendejas building until the design guidelines were developed. He said they were looking for another restaurant tenant. He remarked that the main reason they were looking for the modification is so they could get going on the Burger King and the improvements, thereby bringing about the rest of the development. He mentioned they have revised the sign and they intend to be back by the end of the week. Chairman McNiel asked if the one tenant, Burger King could handle the burden of those improvements and would the Planning Commission be asked later for a request to relieve the financial burden for those improvements. Mr. Ramos indicated that it is was a large burden, but that their marketing efforts towards bringing in other tenants was aggressive. He stated that Mr. Rodriguez had paid the fees and had assembled cost proposals. Chairman McNiel asked if Mr. Ramos would be working on the design guidelines. Mr. Ramos responded that he would. Chairman McNiel welcomed him. Mr. Ramos commented on his apprehension but felt Brent had done an exceptional job, and together with staff and Mr. Buller, felt that they could handle it. Chairman McNiel stated he was now much more at ease with Mr. Ramos on board. Mary Byer, 8167 Vineyard #112, Rancho Cucamonga, commented that she lived on the opposite comer of the project and she stated her concern over moving ahead with the project without the approval generally asked of an applicant. She stated that concept was not clear to the petitioner. She thought there should be an architect that can give structure to the entire project pdor to beginning. Once a structure had been built, one is limited as to what one can add and/or change and still maintain the integrity of the project. She asked why we would expect that Mr. P, oddguez could now add a structure and then come up with a pleasing design later if he could not meet our standards now. She asked if there would be a covered bus stop with a trash receptacle there. Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer, asked if she was referring to a southbound bus stop. Ms. Byer responded that it was. She indicated that she had contacted Code Enforcement regarding the trash problem. She felt that this would be a good time to do more than provide a municipal stop. Dan James said that bus shelters are installed and maintained by developers, not the City. He indicated the maintenance of them is in conjunction with the development of the site, He stated he was unclear as to the plan for a stop and shelter, but that he would check on it and call her the following day. Ms. Byer also expressed concern over the traffic in the area, noting traffic on Vineyard is a problem with people making illegal left turns. She felt a median would be a remedy for the situation. She asked for a review of the traffic situation traveling south on Vineyard at the Shell station. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, interjected that a full bus bay and shelter is a stated condition as one of the improvements required with the building of the Burger King. Chairman McNiel responded to her concern over the design by stating a certain amount of review cdteda had already been established. He expressed his great comfort with Mr, Ramos' credentials and ability and integrity. Ms. Byer stated she still felt just a time extension was in order to let him show what he could do rather than moving ahead at this time, Commissioner Barker commented he was concerned about the possibility of running into a problem they encountered with a different project where things were "piece mealed" in depending upon their circumstances from week to week. He said this was the reason for asking the applicant for a master plan and that the designs submitted at that time seemed to be headed in the right direction. He commented on the expense of the improvements required and asked if Burger King would be able to carry all the costs of the improvements. He stated a lack of comfort level with his concern of not just moving on anything, but the right thing on that corner. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Chairman McNiel asked if item H could be continued. Mr. Buller suggested it be continued to a date due to not knowing the status. Mr. Ramos concurred with a continuance. Commissioner Barker indicated most of his notes were in regard to the sign program. Commissioner Macias moved for adoption of the resolution amending the Conditional Use Permit and that the sign program discussion be continued. Motion: Moved by Macias, seconded by Barker, to adopt the resolution approving Conditional Use Permit 95-25 and to continue Item H, the Uniform Sign Program for Conditional Use Permit 95-25. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: MCNIEL, MACIAS, BARKER NOES: NONE ABSENT: TOLSTOY - carried EVELOPMENT REVIEW 98-13 - THE HEIGHTS AT HAVEN VIEW ESTATES, LLC - A In review of the detailed site plan and building elevations for Tract 14771, consisting of lie family homes on 25.35 acres of land in the Very Low Residential Distdct (less than 2 units per acre), located east of Haven Avenue and north of Ringstem Drive - APN: ~gh 31 and 1074-621-01 through 35. (Although not necessarily this item was noticed at the direction of the City Council.) Chairman McNiel help those present to counsel to define the issues at hand and to clarify them so as to he purpose and their function in focus. Michael Estrada, Deputy Declaration were not the issue; ~rney, responded that the approved map and the Negative sue at hand was the lot specific design review. Dan Coleman, Senior Planner g; report. Chairman McNiel opened the public hearin John Allday, Lauren Development, Inc., ign would be different all displays shown were displayed as they are plotted in the tract. the set backs are as the Hillside Ordinance requires. He pointed c ~revious features offered as options are now standard. He explained that the footprints are but room locations have been changed, garages now face different directions, adding itectural variations. He added that now there are five architectural styles as opposed to three. style has changed in that now only the garage is slab, the foundation. He stated that they were as thorough as possible in their a that although footprints were similar, there were many variations appearance ofthe homes. He commented that modelswere prep~ details that have been added that could not be properly represented by that the foundation Lhe home is on a raised He also noted the outward City the many drawing. Richard Stone, 333 S. Hope St., Los Angeles, stated he was representing the View Estates Home Owners Association. He said his clients requested a cont because he only received copies of the staff report with exhibits today, no technic~ project had taken place, and the applicant had not waited the one year period since the last denial. SIGN PROGRAM LOCATION Southwest Comer of Foothill Blvd. and Vineyard Ave. PROJECT NAME To be decided ? DEVELOPED BY Gil Rodriguez Jr. SIGN PROGRAM PREPARED BY Joe A. Ramos, A.I.A, Architect DATE September 8,1998 TABLE OF CONTENTS Pa~e Name TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION PROJECT IDENTIFICATION ( SIGN TYPE - A-) PROJECT TENANT MONUMENT ( SIGN TYPE-B-) MAJOR TENANT ( SIGN TYPE - C-) SUB - MAJOR TENANT ( SIGN TYPE -D-) PAD TENANT OR RESTAURANT ( SIGN TYPE - E - SHOP TENANTS ( SIGN TYPE - F & G - ) TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS ( SIGN TYPE -H-) LOCATION PLAN GUIDELINES Pa~e Number i 2 3 .4 5-6 7-8 9-10 11 - 14 15 16 17 - 20 Foothill & Vineyard Project Sign Program INTRODUCTION This program has been developed for the purpose of assuring a coordinated Signage theme, and continuity for all types of Signage throughout the project for the mutual benefit for all tenants and the public. All Signage contained within the Foothill & Vineyard Project shall be consistent with this criteria and shall be submitted for review and approval to the landlord, and the City of Raneho Cucamonga. SIGN TYPE -A- PROJECT IDENTIFICATION SIGN The shopping center may be identified by street oriented signs ( Project Identification ) at the main entrance on Foothill Blvd. and Vineyard Ave. All signs shall be in accordance with the criteria in this program unless in the opinion of the landlord and the City of Rancho Cucamonga, that the design contributes to the overall benefit of the project. QUANTITY MAXIMUM HEIGHT NO. SIDES MAXD,/KJM AREA PER SIDE MINIMUM LETI'ER HEIGHT MAXIMUM LEITER HEIGHT MAXIMUM LENGTH OF SIGN AREA LETTER TYPE TYPE OF ILLUMINATION PERMITI'ED USERS COLORS One per street frontage, not to exceed 2 per center 6"0" One side each 24 sf. . 12" · 6'(}' Helvetica, channel letters Ground mounted flood lights or intemally illuminated individual letters. Theme name or center logo White stucco with concrete cap Sign Face, White # 7328 Letters, Red # 2793 CONC, CAP .W/UNDER LIGHT FRONT ELEVATION 3 SIGN TYPE - B- PROJECT TENANT MONUMENT SIGN Tenant Monument sign will be located on Foothill Blvd. and Vineyard Avenue sides of the project. This monument sign may display the shopinS center name and may also be used to identify the tenants. QUANTITY 1 MAXIMUM HEIGHT 6'0 NO. SIDES 2 MAXIMUM AREA PER SIDE 48 sf. MINIMUM LETTER HEIGHT MAX]MUM LETTER HEIGHT MAXIMUM LENGTH OF SIGN AREA LETTER TYPE TYPE OF ILLUMINATION PERMll-i~O USERS COLORS Helvetica, or individual letter styles of tenant Grotmd mounted flood lights or internally illuminated individual letters with opaque background ( 2 per side plus project name ) Project name & Major tenants River rock veneer and wood stain to match center elements Sign Face, white # 7328 Letters, red # 2793 SIDE FRONT Foothill Boulevard Frontaue Monument PROJECT TENAN~ SCALE 3/8 = 1' 0" SIDE MONUMENT FRONT me Vineyard Avenue Frontaqe Monu nt II. MAJOR TENANT SIGNAGE -SIGN TYPE - C - ( Greater than 40,000 sq.fO Building -A- A. Tenant shall be allowed to install one (I) wall mounted identification sign. The Major tenant may also be identified on street monument signs. B. The Major Tenant sign shall bd of a size which is appropriate to the exterior elevations of the proposed Major tenant. These signs will be submitted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga during the Design review process. The maximum sign area allowed shall be one hundred fifty square feet (150 s.f.). C. Signs shall be in accordance with criteria contained within this program, unless in the opinion of the landlord and the City ofRancho Cucamonga, the design contributes to the unique benefit of the complex. D. Major Tenant signage shall be as follows: I. Internally illuminated individual letters shall consist of(l) channel letters (2 neon illumination, (3) plastic face and (4) trim cap. ' 2. Channel letters shall be made of.063 aluminum returns with .090 aluminum backs. 3. Letters shall be internally illuminated via neon lighting. Transformers shall be housed within the individual letters or in a raceway located behind the sign fascia. Exposed · raceways are prohibited. 4. All metal surfaces shall be primed and painted to match colors specified in design drawings. · 5. Individual letter styles of the Major Tenant shall be allowed, provided however that design, color and spacing of letters are subject to written approval by Landlord and the City ofRancho Cucamonga. 6. Sign area shall be the entire area within a perimeter defined by a continous line composed of right angles which enclose the extreme limits of lettering, logo, trademark or other graphic representation. The height of each sign shall be measured from top to bottom. E. Promotional or special event signs, banners or flags shall be in conformance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Sign Ordinance and must be 'approved by Landlord prior to submission to the City. F. Individual letter styles of Major Tenant shall be allowed· Major user tenant shall be limited to the following Plexiglass colors: red # 2793 with a maximum choice of one (1) of the following colors not to exceed 10 % of the total letter area; blue # 2214, white # 7328, green # 2108 by Rohm and Haas Co. or approved equal. Tenants with a trademark/logo that is "registered" or nationally recognized trademark may be allowed subject to review and written approval by Landlord and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. SIGN TYPE - C- MAJOR TENANT WALL SIGNS QUANTITY One per building face, a maximum of 3 for any one business ~ZOLORS . Not to project aboye the roof and in no case be higher than 20 feet from finished grade Per item "F" above MAXIMUM AREA PER SIDE 150 SQ.FT. MINIMUM LETTER HEIGHT MAXIMUM LETTER HEIGHT MAXIMUM LENGTH OF SIGN AREA 10% of the building face Not to exceed 150 sq.fi. ' LETTER TYPE Channel Letters Only Individual letter Styles of Major Tenant : ........ od~o,~alwood Sidi,!/~F: ....': ""' ')'=~ ...."="' '5" L~ · ............ .. Ill. SUB MAJOR TENANT SIGNAGE - SIGN TYPE - D- ( Maximum of 39,999 sq.ft..) Building -B- 7 A. Tenant shall be allowed one sign per building elevation up to a maximum of three (3) signs per business. The maximum sign area shall not exceed 150 square feet. The height of each sign shall be no higher than 20 feet above finished grade. Sub Major Tenants that require a larger sign area, height or length, must submit sign specifications and drawings, composed on the building elevation, to the City of Rancho Cucamonga review and approval. I. Two line signs shall not exceed 36" in total height including the space between the line and no line shall be more than 2 feet high maximum. The space between lines shall not exceed one third of the letter height of smallest letter. 2. Upper and lower case letters shall not exceed 36" including downstrokes. 3. Single line signs in all upper case letters shall not exceed 18" letter height. 4. Length of sign shall not exceed 70 % of shop frontage, or thirty-five feet (35'), whichever is less. Shop frontage shall be defined as, storefront dimension or average lease bay width, whichever is greater. B. A trademark/logo may be combined With individual letters if said trademark/logo is "registered" or nationally recognized with afteast six (6) open stores and is within the allowable area and size requirements. . C. Each sign shall consist of internally illuminated letters. Internally illuminated individual letters shall consist of(l) channel letters, (2) neon illumination, (3) plastic face, and (4) trim cap. D. Channel letters shall be made of 22 gauge sheet metal, 5" deep (minimum), sides painted medium bronze. Channel letters shall be fastened to and be centered on the sign 'fascia. E. Letters shall be internfilly illuminated via neon lighting. Transformers shall be housed in a raceway located behind the sign fascia and exposed raceways are prohibited. 7 F. Individual letter styles of Tenants shall be allowed. All major user Tenants shall be limited to the following Plexiglas colors: red # 2793 with a maximum choice of one (1) of the following colors not to exceed 10% of the total letter area; blue #2214, white #7328, green #2108 by Rohm and Haas Co. or approved equal. Tenants with a trademark/logo that is "registered" or a nationally recognized trademark may be allowed subject to review and written approval by Landlord and the City of Rancho Cucamonga G. Plastic faces shall be trimmed with a 3/4" trim cap (medium bronze) to match letter returns. H. Sign copy shall contain Tenants trade name only. No other services or product advertising will be allowed unless it is part of the Tenants nationally registered trademark or logo name, subject to Landlord approval and the City ofRancho Cucamonga. I. In addition to the signs described above, each Tenant shall be pemiitted to place white vinyl lettering (Helvetica Medium letter style) to provide store name and hours information as specified on attached detail sheet (Sign Type "F"). The total area for this sign shall not exceed 2 square feet. J. Promotional or special event signs shall be in conformante with the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Sign Ordinance and must be approved by Landlord prior to submission the City. K. Sign area shall be the entire area within a perimeter defined by a continous line composed of right angles which enclose the extreme limits of lettering, logo, trademark or other graphic representation. The height of each sign shall be measured from top to bottom. 'SIGN TYPE -D- SUB MAJOR TENANT QUANTITY One per building face, a maximum of 3 for any one business Not to project above the roof and in no case be higher than 20 feet from finished grade. MAXIMUM SIGN AREA MINIMUM LETTER HEIGTH MAXIMUM LETTER HEIGTH MAXIMUM SIGN AREA LETTER TYPE TYPE OF ILLUlv[INATION 150 SQ.FT. 12'] 10% of the building face not to exceed 150 square feet Individual letter styles of Tenants Internal F2.,o PAD OR RESTAURANT SIGNAGE - SIGN TYPE -E~ Building - C - A. Single users/Tenant in a flee standing building pad. Each tenant shall be allowed two (2) wall- mounted identification signs, one sign per elevation or building face and on the Project tenant monument sign - Type "B". Or as an option, each tenant shall be allowed (3) wall-mounted identification signs one (1) sign per elevation or building face. Only a maximum of three (3) signs may be u~ed to identi~7 any one business and only in the combinations described herein. 1. Wall Mounted Signs - Sign area shall be the entire area within a perimeter defined by a continuos line composed of right angles which enclose the extreme limits of lettering, logo, trademark or other graphic representation. The height of each sign shall be measured from top to bottom and shall not exceed the following guidelines: a. Two line signs shall not exceed 24" in total height, including space between lines, and no line shall be more than 18". The space between lines shall exceed one third of the letter height of smallest letter. b. Upper and lower case signs shall not exceed 24" includi~g downstrokes. c. Single line signs in all upper case shall not exceed 18". d. Length of sign shall not exceed 70 % of shop frontage, or twenty-five feet (25'), whichever is less. Shop frontage shall be defined as storefront dimension or average lease of bay width, whichever is greater. e. Wall sign shall be limited to 10% of building face and not to exceed 150 Square feet. Signs shall be constructed with individual channel letters. No CAN signs allowed. ' ' ~is°hnal°lfbt~en]a~c~l°o~dc~c8 tw~ 'tceot~unttaesir~eoc~ei~udi~ uthe%~nroe~ nless · , q an~'t~e o C. Multi-Tenant Pad. In the event that there are multiple tenants in a free standing pad signs shall be as shown in Shop Tenant Criteria (SIGN TYPE - "F"). ' NOTE: The location of wall signage per the individual building elevation 9 D. A registered trademark/logo, without adjacent individual letters, may be included within the calculated sign area provided the allowable sign area for the trademark/logo letters is reduced to thirty-three percent (33%) of the allowable area and that the logo may not exceed five feet in any dimension. Logo sign shall also be sized to be in proportion to the building face to which it is attached. Sign area shall be the entire area within a perimeter defined by a continous line composed of right angles which enclose the extreme limits of lettering, logo, trademark or other graphic representation. The height of each sign shall be measured from top to bottom. This sign is also subject to approval by the Landlord and the city of Rancho Cucamonga. E. A trademark/logo may be combined with individual letters if said trademark/logo is a "registered" or nationally recognized trademark and is within the allowable area and size requirements. F. A sign shall consist of intemally illuminated individual letters. Internally illuminated individual letters shall consist of (1) channel letters/logo, (2) neon illumination. (3) plastic face. and (4) trim cap. G. Channel letters/logo shall be made of 22 gauge sheet metal, 5" deep, sides painted medium bronze. Channel letters shall be fastened to and be centered on the sign fascia. H. Letters shall be internally illuminated via neon lighting. Transformers ,shall be housed in a raceway located behind the sign fascia and exposed raceways are prohibited. I. Individual letter styles of Tenants Shall be allowed. In the case of a single user for a pad building Tenants with a trademark/logo that is registered or a nationally recognized trademark may use their national colors subject to written approval by Landlord. All other pad Tenants shall use the following colors: red #2793 with one (1) of the following colors not to exceed 70 % of the total letter area; blue #2214 whim #7328 green #2108 by Rohm and Haas Co. Or approved equal. J. Plastic faces shall be lrimmed with a 3/4 trim cap medium bronze to match letter returns. 'K. Sign copy shall contain legally registered name only. No other services or product advertising will be allowed. L. In addition to the signs described above each Tenant shall be permitted to place white vinyl letter (Helvetica Medium letter style) to provide store name and hours information as specified on attached detail sheet. ( SIGN TYPE "G" ) The total area for this sign shall not exceed 280 square inches. Each restaurant may also display One (1) menu provided it is contained within a display area incorporated within the overall architectural theme. M. Promotional or special event signs banners and flags shall be in conformance with the City of Raneho Cucamonga s Sign Ordinance and must be approved by Landlord prior to submission to the City. : 10 PAD OR RESTA~URANT S!G>i,^,Cu- Building - C - ~ Burger King building sign is to be channel letter format [] ~ NO CAN SIGNS PERMl i rind ELEVATION: LOGO WALL SIGN #1 LOCATION. ELEVATION: LOGOWALLSIGN#2LOCATION- DAT~_9/2/98 FILS_ BK ELEV 1 RE~. 9/3/98 DURANODIC TRIM CAR RETURN. INTERNAL ILLUMINATION. - -- BEHINDWALL TRANSFORMER BOX/RACEWAY. -- FLEX CONDUI~ '- ~DEDICATED POWER TO SIGN. FRONT VIEW. END VIEW / SECTION. NEW, INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED LOGO WALL SIGN. DATg 9/2/98 Z;'ZLg BK ELE~' 2A THIS DESIGN IS THE EXCLUSIVE PROPERTY OF I.E.A., INC. ALL STANDARD COPYRIGHT LAWS APPLY. SHOP TENANTS & MULTI TENANT - SIGN TYPE F & G Building - D - A. Tenants shall be allowed one (1) sign per building elevation with a maximum of three (3) signs allowed. The height of each sign shall be measured from top to bottom and shall not exceed the following guidelines (SIGN TYPE - "F"): 1. Two line signs shall not exceed 24" including the space between the lines in total height and no line shall be more than 18". The space between lines shall not exceed one third of the letter height of the smallest letter. 2. Upper and lower case signs shall not exceed 18" including downstrokes. 3. Single line signs in all upper case shall not exceed 12". 4. The length of sign shall not exceed 60 % of Shop frontage, or twenty-four feet (24') whichever is less. Shop frontage shall be defined as storefront dimension or average lease bay width, whichever is greater. B. A trademark/logo may be combined with:. individual letters if said trademark/logo is "registered" or nationally recognized with a least six (6) open stores and is within the allowable area and size requiremepts. Logo area shall be limited to a maximum of 10 % of the overall sign area. C. Each sign shall consist of intemally illuminated individual letters shall be of (1) channel letters,. (2) neon illumination, (3) face, and (4) trim cap. D. Channel letters shall be made of 22 gauge sheet metal, 5" deep (minimum), sides painted medium bronze. channel letters shall be fastened to and be centered on the sign fascia. E. Letters shall be intemally illuminated via neon lighting. Transformers shall be housed in a raceway located behind the sign fascia and exposed raceways are prohibited. 'F. Individual letter styles of Tenants shall be allowed. Tenants with a trademark/logo that is registered or a nationally recognized trademark may use their national colors subject to written approval by Landlord. All other Tenants shall use the following colors: red #2793 with one (1) of the following colors not to exceed 70 % of the total letter area; blue #2214 white #7328 green #2108 or yellow #2037 by Rohm and Haas Co. or approved equal. G. Plastic faces shall be trimmed with a 3/4" trim cap (medium bronze) to match letter returns. 11 H. Sign copy shall contain Tenant's trade name only. No other services or product advertising will be allowed unless it is part of the Tenants trade name without Landlords Prior written consent. Sign Type "G" I. In addition to the signs described above each Tenant shdlt be permitted to place white vinyl lettering (Helvetica Medium-letter style ) to provide store name and hours Information as specified on attached detail sheet (Sign Type "F") . The total area for this sign shall not exceed 280 square inches. J. Promotional or special event signs, banners and flags shall be in conformante with the City ofRancho Cucamonga's Sign Ordinance and must be approved by the landlord prior to submission to the City. K. Sign area shall be the entire area within a perimeter defined by a continous line composed of right angles which enclose the extreme limits of lettering,logo, trademark or other graphic representation. The height of each sign shall be measured from top to bottom. 12 SIGN TYPE - F - QUANTITY Multi Tenant Buildings one per shop space; two wall signs & monument sign, or three wall signs for pad tenants including multiple tenant pad buildings 15Ft. for shop space and 9 R.- 15t~ on pad buildings MAXIMLq~ AREA 10% of the building face, not to exceed 150 square feet MINIMUM LETTER HEIGHT MAXIMLvM LETTER HEIGHT 12" for single line signs, Upper and lower case signs shall not exceed 18" MAX[MUM LENGTH OF SIGN Shall not exceed 60 % of shop frontage or 24 i~. Which ever is less LEt-rh.RXNG TYPE Individual channel letters TYPE OF ILLUMINATION Intemal or internal PERM1 t't ED USERS Typical tenant shop tenants Multitenant Buildinis, Note: Elevations may vary depending on final building design concepts 13 SIGN TYPE - G - QUANTITy MAXIMUM HEIGHT NO. SIDES MAXIMUM AREA NOMINAL LETTER EIGHT MAXIMUM LENGTH TYPE OF ILLUMINATION LETTER TYPE PERMITTED USERS ( 1 ) Per tenant entrance (Not applicable) 1 230 SQ.IN. 3/4" for hgurs, 2~t/2" for address and store name (Not applicable) None Helvetica, white vinyle Major users, shops, pad tenants and restaurants TYP. STOREFORNT DOOR. DOOR FRAME & MULLIONS TYP. STORE NAME 2 1/2' MAX. LETTER HEIGHT TYP. STORE HOURS & ' VARIES T TYP. STORE ADDRESS - 2 1/2' HIGH NUMBERS ~ I r~me~ TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS - SIGN TYPE - H- A. Signage required to control and manage the movement of traffic and pedestrians shall be installed in accordance with the criteria of this program. Traffic signs shall be standard sizes, heights and colors and shall be in accordance with all requirements of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the State of California. Signs shall be mounted on fabricated metal sign backgrounds painted in colors complementary to the approved colors and materials or the center. B. Traffic signs shall be installed in locations as needed by the landlord. Sign locations shall be reviewed and approved by the City ofRancho Cucamonga prior to installation and shall be reviewed again after one (1) year to determine if they are adequate in managing traffic with an acceptable degree of efficiency and safety. SIGN TYPE - H- QUAN'flIY' MAXIMUM HEI GIlT NO. SIDES MAX]MUM AREA PEK SIDE MAXIMUM LE'Fr~t. HEIGHT MAXIMUM LENGTH TYPE OF ILLUIvlINATION PER1VII I I k.O USERS (As required) 9' O" 1 (Not applicable) (Per local or state jurisdiction) (Not applicable) None (Not applicable) ~ TYPICAL HANDIC~,P SIGN ~ TYPICAL TRAFFIC · STOP SIGN PAINTED STEEL Tu.E 15 LOCATION PLAN TENANT MONUrvIENT SIGN FOOTHILL BLVD. · ~o~ ')s" 't ' ~\~~.~.~_cr t.n ~.~7~ .~ Esub ~ Future Retail Shopl Type "D" ~Type "F and G" ~ [] MAJOR A ~ /./ Typ~ "c" ---~tllllllllllllllllll FOOTHII ,L & VINEY~ PROIECT (SOUT~ST CORNER) SIGNAGE PROGRAM GLIDELINES - BUILDING SIGNAGE FOR TENANTS A. General Requirements: 1. Each Tenant shall submit to the Landlord for written approval before fabrication, not less than four (4) copies of detailed drawings of the Tenants proposed signs indicating the location, size, layout, design, materials and color graphics. Such drawings shall be submitted concurrently with architectural drawings, sufficient in Landlores opinion, to show the exact relationship with the store design, Ten.ant's store location on site and the dimensions of the building frontage. 2. Prior to fabrication, detailed drawings of all signs shall be submitted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division for review and approval. These drawings must be signed and stamped as approved by the Landlord prior to submittal to the City. 3. Tenant shall obtain and pay the entire cost of all permits, and approvals, construction, installation and maintenance of its respective sign. No sign shall be installed until all required approvals and permits have been obtained. 4. Tenant shall be responsible for fulfillment of all of these Sign Criteria to the extent applicable. 5. No Tenant-shall affix or maintain upon any glass or other material on the storefront of within twenty-four inches (24") of any window, any signs unless such signs or materials have received the written approval of the Landlord and comply with this Sign Criteria. B. General Specifications: 1. All primal3' identification of Tenant shall be illuminated. Secondary Signage may be · non-illuminated if total allowable sign area is not exceeded in height and width. 2. Two lines of copy may be used as long as the total height of sign does not exceed maximum sign height for the applicable type of Signage and the design is approved by the Landlord and the city ofRancho CUcamonga 3. The width of the tenant fascia sign (unless covered elsewhere in this program) shall not exceed 70% ( 60% for shop tenants) of the storefront dimension based on the average lease bay width, whichever is less. Sign shall center on the storefront unless prior written approval is obtained from the Landlord. 4. Tenant shall be solely responsible for the installation and maintenance 0fits own signs. 5. Tenants sign contractor shall repair any damage to the premises or other property in the Shopping Center caused by the contractor s work. Should Tenant's contractor fail to adequately repair such damage, Landlord may, but shall not be required to, repair such damage at the tenant expense. 17 6. Tenant shall be fully responsible for the actions of Tenants sign contractor. 7. Electrical service to Tenants signs will be connected to Tenants meter and shall be connected to a time clock supplied by Tenant. Time clock hours shall be subject to Landlord approval. C. Conslruction Requirements: 1. Landlords representative shall be given adequate notice prior to installation of all signs. Failure to notify Landlord may result in removal of sign to inspect penetration in building face. 2. All signs shall be fabricated and installed per UL and city standards. 3. Letter fastening and clips are to be concealed and be of galvanized, stainless, aluminum, brass or bronze metals. 4. No labels will be permitted on the exposed surface of the signs, except those required by local ordinance, which shall be placed in an inconspicuous location. 5. Tenants shall have identification signs designed in a manner compatible with and '~' complimentary to adjacent and facing stOrefronts and the overall design concept of the Shopping Center. 6. Design, layout and materials for Tenant signs shall conform in all respects with the sign · design drawings included in this criteria. The maximum heights for letters in the body of the sign shall be as indicated in these criteria. 7. All penetrations of the building structure required for sign installation shall be sealed in a watertight condition and shall be patched to match adjacent finish to Landlords 'satisfaction. 8. No wood backed letter material will be allowed on the internally illuminated channel letters. F. Insllrarlce: ; 1. Tenant shall cause Tenant's sign contractor to submit to Landlord prior to such contractor entering upon the Shopping Center, a certificate of insurance, evidencing that such contractor has in effect commercial general liability insurance and worker's compensation coverage as required by the State of Ca,lifomia in an mount and issued by a company acceptable to Landlord. 2..All Tenants are to carry liability insurance naming themselves and Landlord as additional insured in accordance with terms and conditio/~s specified in the lease. G. RESTRICTIONS: All tenants are subject to the following: 1. No animated, revolving, flashing, audible, or odor producing signs will be allowed. 2. No vehicle signs will be allowed. 3. No formed plastics or injection-molded plastic .signs will be permitted. 4. No exposed raceways, cross-overs or 'conduits will be permitted to be visible. 5. No other types of signs except those specifically mentioned within this criteria will be allowed. i. Tenant will be required to remove any sign considered to be in bad taste or that does not contribute positively to the overall design of the center. Miscellaneous Signs: A. It is understood that there may be the need for additional signs for information and directional purposes. These signs will be reviewed by Landlord for consistency of design with the shopping Center. B. City, State and Federally required signs shall be installed as required by the g~verning agency. D. Sign Installation: 1. All work to fabricate, erect, or install signs (including connection to electrical junction box) shall be contracted and paid for by Tenant and subject to approval by Landlord. 2. All signs shall be designed, constructed and installed in accordance with local codes and ordinances. All permits shall be obtained by Tenant s sign contractor, at Tenant s sole expense. 3. ~igns not installed in strict accordance with previously approved plans and specifications shall be immediately corrected by Tenant, at Tenant's cost and expense, upon demand by Landlord. If not corrected within fifteen'(15) days, sign may be removed or corrected by Landlord at Ten~t's expense. 4. Erection of any sign shall be promptly and safely effected with as little disruption to business and traffic as possible and with minimum of inconvenience to the Landlord and to the other Tenants. 5. Upon removing any sign, Tenant shall, at its own expense, repair any damage created by such removal and shall return the area from which the sign was removed back to its original condition. All debris from removal shall be promptly removed from the site. E. Protection of Property: 1. Tenant's sign contractor shall design, install or erect Tenant's sign in such a manner that it will not over stress, deface, or damage any portion of the building or grounds. 2. Any sign, temporary or permanent, capable of exerting damaging pressures on the building due to its size, weight or design shall have its design examined by a structural engineer. Prior to installation of such sign, Tenant shall submit to Landlord such engineer' a written approval verifying that no unsafe condition will be imposed upon the building or other structure to which the sign will be attached. 3. All exposed.parts of any sign or sign support subject to corrosion or other similar damage shall be protected in a manner acceptable to Landlord. 4. Any sign on which stains or rust appear or which becomes damaged in any way or which in any manner whatsoever is not m~intained properly shall be promptly rep~r~d by Tenant. Landlord may remove and store, at Tenant s ek'pense, any signs not maintained properly or not in accordance with sign'program. F,55'