HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-056 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 02-056
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CALIFORNIA,CERTIFYING THE FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH#20010301028) AND
APPROVING THE STATEMENT OF FACTS AND FINDINGS AND
THE STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR
VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 01-01,
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 01-02,TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
SUBTT15716, AND A DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA
DEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND VICTORIA GARDENS-C, L.L.C.,
("THE DDA") CONCERNING A PROPOSED PROJECT KNOWN
AS VICTORIA GARDENS, A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 2.45 MILLION SQUARE FEET
OF RETAIL, OFFICE AND CIVIC USES, AND UP TO 600
RESIDENTIAL UNITS, ON APPROXIMATELY 175 ACRES OF
LAND, GENERALLY BOUNDED BY FUTURE CHURCH STREET
TO THE NORTH, FOOTHILL BOULEVARD TO THE SOUTH, 1-15
FREEWAY TO THE EAST, AND FUTURE DAY CREEK
BOULEVARD TO THE WEST, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN
SUPPORT THEREOF-APNs: 227-161-35,36 AND 38,227-171-22
AND 23, 227-201-30, 33, 35, AND 36, AND 227-211-24 AND 39
THROUGH 43.
A. RECITALS.
1. A Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Victoria Community Plan
Amendment 01-01, Development Agreement 01-02, and Tentative Parcel Map
SUBTT15716 Forest City Development California, Inc. entitled "Final
Environmental Impact Report, Victoria Gardens Project, City of Rancho
Cucamonga, SCH#20010301028" has been presented to this Council with the
Council's consideration of the Victoria Community Plan Amendment 01-01 and
Development Agreement 01-02.
2. The public comment period for the EIR was duly and lawfully closed on
November 5, 2001, following due notices to the public and all applicable public
agencies.
3. On January 9, and continued to January 23, 2002, the Planning Commission of
the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing to
review and consider the information contained in the Final EIR,the Statement of
Facts and Findings,and the Statement of Overriding Considerations,prior to the
Planning Commission's consideration of the proposed project entitled "Final
Environmental Impact Report, Victoria Gardens Project, City of Rancho
Cucamonga, SCH#20010301028," and recommended approval per Planning
Commission Resolution No. 02-19.
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 2 of 42
4. On February 20, 2002, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a duly noticed public hearing to review and consider the information
contained in the Final EIR, the Statement of Facts and Findings, and the
Statement of Overriding Considerations, prior to the Council's consideration of
the proposed project entitled "Final Environmental Impact Report, Victoria
Gardens Project, City of Rancho Cucamonga, SCH#20010301028."
5. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. RESOLUTION.
NOW,THEREFORE,it is hereby found,determined,and resolved by the City Council
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-
referenced public hearing on February 20, 2002, including written and oral staff
reports, together with public testimony, and the consideration of the contents of
the Final EIR, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. The Final EIR prepared for Victoria Community Plan Amendment 01-01,
Development Agreement 01-02, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTT15716, and
the Disposition and Development Agreement has been completed in
compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act,
California Public Resource Code Sections 21000 et seq. (CEQA) with the
State and the City Guidelines for implementing CEQA, and all other
applicable laws and regulations.
b. The Final EIR was presented to the Council and the Council reviewed and
considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to the
consideration of the proposed project.
3. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above,
this Council hereby takes the following actions:
a. Certifies the Final EIR to be in compliance with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resource Code
Sections 21000 et seq. (CEQA) with the State and the City Guidelines for
implementing CEQA, and all other applicable laws and regulations.
b. Adopts a Statement of Facts, Findings, and Statement of Overriding
Considerations for the EIR attached hereto as Exhibit"A" respectively,based
on the following findings:
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 3 of 42
1) The facts and findings set forth in the Statement of Facts and Findings
and the Statement of Overriding Considerations are supported by
substantial evidence in the administrative record and the Final EIR.
2) The Final EIR identified all significant environmental impacts of the
project and there are no known potentially significant environmental
impacts not addressed in the Final EIR.
3) All significant impacts identified in the Final EIR as a result of the project
have been identified, avoided, or reduced to an acceptable level by the
imposition of mitigation measures on the project. These mitigation
measures are attached hereto as part of the Mitigation Monitoring
Program and are incorporated herein by the reference.
4) The Final EIR considered a reasonable range of alternatives to the
project. Potential mitigation or project alternatives have been
incorporated into the project to reduce the impacts.
5) The cumulative impacts of the project in relation to other projects in the
area have been considered. Except for the identified unavoidable
impacts described in the Statement of Facts of Findings and the Final
EIR, mitigation measures are incorporated into the project to reduce such
impacts to less than significant levels.
6) The unavoidable significant impacts of the project as identified in the
Statement of Facts of Findings and the Final EIR is outweighed by the
economic, social, and other benefits of the project identified in the
Statement of Overriding Considerations.
4. The Secretary to the City Council shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 201" day of February 2002.
AYES: Alexander, Biane, Curatalo, Dutton, Williams
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
—z'
William . Alexander, Mayor
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 4 of 42
ATTEST:
Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk
I, DEBRA J.ADAMS,CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,California,do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved and adopted by the City
Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,California, at a Regular Meeting of said City Council held
on the 20th day of February 2002.
Executed this 21"day of February 2002, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
zv"� Qz,&Vj
✓
Debra J. AdamW Adam , CMC, City Clerk
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 5 of 42
Facts,Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Regarding the Environmental Effects from the
Victoria Gardens Project
(SCH #2001031028)
I. INTRODUCTION
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga ("this Council') hereby adopts this entire document, including
the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VII below, as its findings ("Findings") pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA") for the Victoria Gardens project("Project") described in the Final
Environmental Impact Report("FEIR")for the Project, State Clearinghouse Number 2001031028. The"project" as
described in the FEIR includes all discretionary actions that will be considered by the City of Rancho Cucamonga
("City"), the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, and other public agencies that may have approval
authority over aspects of the Project. City's discretionary actions in approving the Project will include: 1) the
General Plan Amendment, 2) the Victoria Community Plan Amendment, 3) the Development Agreement, 4) the
Master Plan,and 5)the Tentative Parcel Map, for the Victoria Gardens Project.
In considering the potential benefits of the proposed Project, the City identified the following objectives that will be
achieved upon development of the project site:
Implementation of the regionally oriented commercial development envisioned for the project site in the General
Plan and Victoria Community Plan;
Development of commercial uses that will attract established businesses, which will strengthen economic
viability of the City;
Augmentation of the City's economic base by providing sales and property tax-generating uses;
Creation of employment opportunities for citizens of the City and surrounding communities;
Creation of a place for people to spend time, for children and families; a place with colorful plants, shops, and
graphics;a place with a town square,pedestrian paseos,shaded courtyards,outdoor dining,and fountains;
Meeting the demands of the community for shopping opportunities,by expanding retail options to an area on the
east side of the City;
• Creation of a successful, regional retail environment, set in shady, landscaped streets with a feel of walkable
Main Streets,and with striking mountain vistas;
• Creation of a vibrant and active downtown, which can accommodates the civic activities, commerce and public
events resulting from the interaction of businesses,residents,and visitors; and
Capture of retail sales that may be lost to adjacent cities.
These Findings are based upon the entre record before this Council, including the Final EIR prepared for the Project.
The EIR was prepared by the City of Rancho Cucamonga,acting as the lead agency under the California Environmental
Quality Act(CEQA).
1
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 6 of 42
II. PROJECT SUMMARY
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The 174-acre project site has been assembled in the eastern portion of the City,through the combination of 147 acres
of(City of Rancho Cucamonga) Redevelopment Agency controlled property, 18 acres of undeveloped property, and
9 acres of land previously dedicated for street right-of-ways. At ultimate build out, the project site will include
approximately 2.45 million square feet of retail,office,and civic uses as well as up to 600 multiple-family residential
units.
The development scenario for the proposed Victoria Gardens envisions development of a "new downtown'
consisting of an open air mixed use complex which includes an attractive and compatible blend of major retail
tenants, specialty commercial uses, restaurant and entertainment outlets, office uses, residential dwellings, and
community facilities. These uses will be built along a setting that is reminiscent of a traditional "main street" with
interesting streetscapes exhibiting individually designed storefronts, wider sidewalks, street furniture, and
landscaping including pocket parks. Second story office space will be built above portions of some retail uses to
accommodate professional uses (medical/dental offices, accountants, lawyers, etc.). The project will include a
variety of sit-down restaurants, cafes, and coffeehouses. The proposed project will include civic and cultural uses
that may include a branch library, community play house, performing arts theater, or community center. The use of
landscaping, awnings, canopies, sun shelters, misting systems and other architectural elements will serve to help
shield patrons of the shopping district from extreme weather conditions.
The area located between Foothill Boulevard and the future Victoria Gardens Lane will be developed with fast food
uses, automobile service station(s),restaurants,and retail uses. This area will be oriented to vehicle traffic. The area
of the Victoria Gardens project, which directly abuts I-15 may be developed with either retail or office/hotel uses.
The proposed Victoria Gardens project includes the development of up to 600 multiple-family residential units.
These dwelling units will be located north of the "new downtown," within walking distance of commercial, public,
and civic uses. The residential component of the proposed project may include clubhouse facilities, recreational
features,or open space reserved for the exclusive use of project residents.
The Final EIR evaluated the potential environmental effects that would result from the development of proposed
project.
The "project" under CEQA, for purposes of the City's discretionary action(s) is the approval of the amendments to
the General Plan and Victoria Community Plan, approval of the Development Agreement, and approval of the
Master Plan, which together will govern the development of the Victoria Gardens Project site. Specifically, the
proposed discretionary actions by the City will include:
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Amendment(GPA): Changes the designation of the project site from
Regional Center(RC)to Mixed Use(MU);modifies established criteria for the spacing of roadway medians.
Victoria Community Plan Amendment (VCPA): Changes the designation of the project site from Regional
Center to Mixed Use;modifies text and graphics.
Development Agreement: vests land use entitlements.
• Master Plan: sets forth the permitted land uses and development standards for the project site.
• Approval of Tentative Parcel Maps: subdivides the project site for commercial uses.
In addition, the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency will consider a Disposition and Development
Agreement governing terms for disposition and use of the portion of the Project site currently owned by the
Redevelopment Agency.
2
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 7 of 42
B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The primary goal of the Victoria Gardens project is to provide residents of the City with a convenient, accessible,
and affordable retail uses which compliments existing retail uses within the City, and along Foothill Boulevard.
Other objectives of the Project include the following:
Ensure that development of the site is in accordance with established functional standards and design and
aesthetic standards contained in the Victoria Community Plan, including the incorporation of certain elements
representative of community heritage styles found within the City. Thus providing the City with a development,
which creates a distinctive"downtown"environment.
Implement the regionally oriented commercial development envisioned for the project site in the General Plan
and Victoria Community Plan.
Ensure the commercial development will attract established businesses, which will strengthen economic
viability.
Meet the demands of the community for shopping opportunities, by expanding retail options to an area on the
east side of the City.
Create a mixed use neighborhood with public spaces, shopping, entertainment, residences, offices and civic
uses,within walking distance.
Create a place for people to spend time, for children and families; a place with colorful plants, shops, and
graphics; a place with a town square,pedestrian paseos,shaded courtyards,outdoor dining,and fountains.
Create a successful, regional retail environment, set in shady, landscaped streets with a feel of walkable Main
Streets,and with striking mountain vistas.
Augment the City's economic base by providing sales and property tax-generating uses.
Create employment opportunities for citizens of the City and surrounding communities.
Provide commercial development in conformance with applicable policies and programs included in the City's
General Plan, inclusive of the rezoning of a portion of the site.
Create a vibrant and active downtown, which can accommodates the civic activities, commerce and public
events resulting from the interaction of businesses,residents,and visitors.
Capture retail sales that may be lost to adjacent cities.
I1I. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The City of Rancho Cucamonga previously conducted environmental review for development of the Project site.
On March 19, 1984, HFA Associates and the City's Redevelopment Agency signed a participation agreement
for a redevelopment project known as the Rancho Redevelopment Project. This agreement was intended to result
in the development of a regional shopping center within the area bounded by Day Creek Boulevard, Miller
Avenue (Church Street), and Victoria Loop (now Victoria Gardens Lane). Under the terms of the agreement,
Redevelopment Agency funds were to be used for the acquisition of the project site for sale to HFA Associates
(the redeveloper). The redeveloper would then have the responsibility to prepare and obtain City approval for
site plans and related documents. The redeveloper sought approval of the regional mall project via a Conditional
Use Permit (CPU) 84-06.
The regional shopping center proposed under CPU 84-06 envisioned a two-story mall with approximately 170
shops and six major department stores connected by an air-conditioned pedestrian mall. The proposed project
included approximately 1,242,000 square feet of retail uses divided amongst six major retail tenants (838,000
square feet), mall shops (325,000 square feet), ancillary buildings (69,000 square feet), 5,950 parking spaces,
and required community service amenities/facilities. The project was oriented for maximum visibility for
Interstate 15 (1-15) and to allow for easy access via the freeway and Foothill Boulevard. Four major access
points into the project site were planned, one each at Day Creek Boulevard and Miller Avenue, and two on
3
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 8 of 42
Victoria Loop (Victoria Gardens Lane). Ancillary structures located away from the mall were to include
restaurants, financial institutions, and automotive service providers.
A Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report(SCH No. 80050706), addressing three specific issues (drainage,
traffic, and aesthetics) associated with activities permitted under Condition Use Permit 84-06,was certified by the City
Council in October 1984.
Portions of land included in the project site are adjacent to the Victoria Arbors Village project site and have been
previously analyzed in the Victoria Arbors Village EIR (SCH #98041137). Although portions of the project site
have received previous environmental clearance, the entire 174-acre project site is included in the environmental
documentation prepared for the Victoria Gardens project. To date, no development has taken place that was
analyzed in the Victoria Arbors Village EIR.
The following is a summary of the City's CEQA review for this Project:
A Notice of Preparation(NOP)and Initial Study identifying the scope of environmental issues, were
distributed to 41 federal,state and local agencies,organizations and/or individuals on March 6,2001,
and notice was provided through publication on March 7,2001, in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin
A total of nine comment letters were received. Copies of those comment letters are included in
Appendix A of the Draft EIR(under separate cover). Relevant comments received in response to the
NOP/Initial Study were incorporated into the Draft EIR.
The Draft EIR was distributed for public review on September 17, 2001, for a 45-day review period
with the comment period expiring on November 5,2001. Seven comment letters were received at the
close of the public comment period. The responses to comments are included in the Final EIR.
A Notice of Completion(NOC)was sent with the Draft EIR to the State Clearinghouse on September
21,2001,and notice was provided on September 21,2001 in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin.
The Final EIR was distributed for a 10-day period beginning on December 24,2001.
The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider various Project
approvals and staff recommendations on January 23, 2002. Following public testimony, and staff
recommendations, the Commission recommended to the City Council that the FEIR is adequate and
should be certified and that the City Council adopt these Findings and Statement of Overriding
Considerations and approve the Project.
On February 20, 2002, the City Council held a public hearing to consider the Project and staff
recommendations. Following public testimony and staff recommendations, the City Council certified
the FEIR and hereby adopts these Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations.
A- INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT FINDING
The City of Rancho Cucamonga retained LSA Associates,Inc.,to prepare the Draft and Final EIR. The Draft and Final
EIRs were prepared under the direction and supervision of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development
Department,Planning Division.
Finding: The Draft and Final EIRs reflect the Citys independent judgment. The City has exercised its independent
judgment in accordance with Public Resources Code, Section 21082.1(c)(3) in retaining its own
4
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 9 of 42
environmental consultant, directing the consultant in preparation of the Draft and Final EMs, as well as
reviewing,analyzing,and revising material prepared by the consultant.
B. GENERAL FINDING ON MITIGATION MEASURES
The City has reviewed the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR. The City has determined that in preparing the
conditions of approval for Victoria Gardens project,the City incorporated the mitigation measures recommended in the
Final EIR, except where determined infeasible as discussed below in these Findings. In the event that the conditions of
approval do not use the exact wording of the mitigation measures recommended in the Final EIR,in each such instance,
the adopted conditions of approval are intended to be identical or substantially similar to the recommended mitigation
measure. Any minor revisions were made for the purpose of improving clarity or to better define the intended purpose.
Findings: Unless specifically stated to the contrary in these findings, it is the Cit/, s intent to adopt all mitigation
measures recommended by the Final EIR. If a measure has, through error, been omitted from the
Conditions of Approval or from these Findings, and that measure is not specifically reflected in these
Findings,that measure shall be deemed to be adopted pursuant to this paragraph.
Additionally, unless specifically stated to the contrary in these Findings, all Conditions of Approval
repeating or rewording mitigation measures recommended in the Final EIR are intended to be
substantially similar to the mitigation measures as worded in the Final and are found to be equally
effective in avoiding or lessening the identified environmental impact.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND FINDINGS
City staff reports, the FEIR, written and oral testimony at all relevant public meetings or hearings, and these Facts,
Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations and other information in the administrative record serve as the
basis for the City's environmental determination.
The detailed analysis of potential environmental impacts and proposed mitigation measures for the Victoria Gardens
Project are presented in Chapter 4 of the DEIR. Responses to comments and any revisions/omissions to the DEIR are
provided in Appendix G, or indicated by strikethough (deletions) or double-underline (additions) in the FEIR,
respectively
The DEIR evaluated six major environmental categories(traffic and circulation,noise,air quality,biological resources,
cultural services, and public services) for potential significant adverse impacts, including cumulative impacts. Both
project-specific, short- and long-term, and cumulative impacts were evaluated. In addition to the six major
environmental categories addressed in the DEIR,ten other major categories were found to be nonsignificant in the Initial
Study prepared for the Victoria Gardens Project. Except as may be otherwise expressly provided herein,these Findings
incorporate the conclusions on these categories as outlined in the Initial Study(Appendix A of the DEIR) and the City
fords that no significant impacts have been identified as to those categories identified in the Initial Study and no further
analysis is required.
A. IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE DEIR AS LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT REQUIRING NO
MITIGATION
The following issues were identified in the Initial Study (Appendix A of the DEIR) as having the potential to cause
significant impact and were carried forward to the DEIR for detailed evaluation.These issues were found in the DEIR as
5
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 10 of 42
having no potential to cause significant impact and therefore require no project-specific mitigation. In the following
presentation,each resource issue is identified and the potential for significant adverse environmental effects is discussed.
1. TRAFFIC AND CIRCUALTION
a. Project Access
Less than Significant Impact: The addition of project traffic to year 2007 and year 2020 conditions will not
have a significant impact on the project access driveways on Day Creek
Boulevard,Church Street,Victoria Gardens Lane, and Foothill Boulevard.
Finding: An analysis of project access is included in Section 4.1 of the FEIR. This analysis concluded that
impacts at the proposed project driveways are considered to be less than significant. No mitigation
is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: Analyses of the project driveways under year 2007 with
project and year 2020 with project conditions indicate that all project access driveways will operate with satisfactory
levels of service based on the tarn restrictions and stop control proposed as part of the project.
2. NOISE
a. Parking Lot Activity
Less than Significant Impact: Noise levels resulting from typical parking lot activities will not be significantly
increased in a manner that would create a potential impact to adjacent land uses.
Finding: Potential noise impacts resulting from development of the proposed project are addressed in Section
4.2 of the MR. The analysis concluded that, noise associated with the parking lot activities in the
proposed commercial and office use areas will not have any significant impact on off-site or on-
site residences such as residences,schools,hospitals and similar uses. No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: Representative parking activities, such as customer conversing
or door closing, would generate intermittent, maximum noise levels of approximately 60 dBA at 50 feet. This level
of noise is much lower than that of the traffic on the area roads or the loading/unloading of trucks. Therefore, it is
not anticipated that noise associated with the parking lot activities in the proposed commercial and office use areas
will have any significant impact on off-site or on-site residences.
b. Transportation to Construction Site Impacts
Less than Significant Impact: Noise resulting from the transport of construction equipment to the project site will
not significantly increase noise levels in the vicinity of the proposed project.
Finding: Potential noise impacts resulting from development of the proposed project are addressed in Section
4.2 of the FEIR. The analysis concluded that, noise associated with the movement of construction
equipment to the project site will not have any significant impact on off-site or on-site residences.
No mitigation is required.
6
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 11 of 42
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding:Transport of construction equipment/materials to the project site and
worker commute would incrementally increase noise levels on access roads leading to the site. Although there
would be relatively high single event noise exposures (up to 87 dBA I.,,,,x at 50 feet from passing trucks), when
averaged over a longer period of time such as one hour or eight hours the effect in long-term ambient noise levels
would be small and negligible. Therefore, short-term construction noise impacts associated with worker commute
and equipment transport would not result in significant adverse impacts on noise sensitive receptors along the access
routes leading to the proposed project site.
C. Cumulative Noise Impacts
Less than Significant Impact: Cumulative noise impacts resulting from the transport of construction equipment to
the project site will not significantly increase noise levels in the vicinity of the
proposed project.
Finding: Potential noise impacts resulting from development of the proposed project are addressed in Section
4.2 of the FEIR. The analysis concluded that, cumulative noise impacts in the vicinity of the project
site and the City will not be significant.No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: The short-term construction noise and long-term operational noise
impacts (parking lot activity, loading/unloading activity, and traffic noise) associated with the proposed project were
determined to be less than significant. The proposed project's short-term construction activity and on-site stationary
sources are localized noise sources and would only affect land uses immediately adjacent to the project site with direct
line of sight of the project boundary. These noise sources are not considered cumulative. Construction and operations
(excluding vehicular traffic)at other off-site locations would not cumulatively add to project related noise impacts.
3. AIR QUALITY
a. Long Term Microscale Projections
Less than Significant Impact: Although development of the proposed project will add new vehicular trips to
future traffic volumes in the project vicinity, deteriorating the level of service at
some adjacent intersections, a corresponding increase in carbon monoxide (CO)
hot spots will not occur.
Finding: Potential impacts related to this issue are discussed in Section 4.3 of the FEIR. Based on the
analysis provided in the FEIR, composite CO levels would be below both the State and federal
one hour and eight hour CO standards. Therefore, project related CO concentration increases are
not considered significant. No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: An assessment of project related impacts on localized ambient
air quality requires that future ambient air quality levels be projected. Because the proposed project would add new
vehicular trips to future traffic volumes in the project vicinity, deterioration in the level of service at adjacent
intersections would occur as a result of the proposed project. Localized CO hot spot analysis was required and
conducted. At many receptor locations, there would be a reduction in the CO concentrations with implementation of
the project. Because the composite CO levels would be below both the State and federal one hour and eight hour CO
standards,these project related CO concentration increases are not considered significant.
7
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 12 of 42
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
a. Impacts to On-site Drainage
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the proposed project will not alter and/or eliminate on-site
drainage in a manner that is significant.
Finding: Potential impacts related to this issue are discussed in Section 4.4 of the FEIR. Based on the
analysis provided in the FEIR, impacts to this drainage will not be considered significant due to the
fact that the drainage is non-wetland waters and that the drainage is isolated from other wetland
waters.No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: Impacts to the drainage will not be considered significant due to the
fact that the drainage is non-wetland waters and that the drainage is isolated from other wetland waters. Adherence
to measures set forth by all applicable permits will eliminate any associated impacts.
b. Impacts to Special Interest Species
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the proposed project will not significantly impact"special interest"
plant and/or animal species.
Finding: Potential impacts related to this issue are discussed in Section 4.4 of the FEIR. However, none of
these species are listed as a threatened or endangered species. Due to the degradation of the
project site, and the fact that these species are not listed as a threatened or endangered, potential
impacts associated with this issue are not significant. No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding.The results of the literature review indicated the potential occurrence
of 29 special interest plant and animal species in the project vicinity. Of these 29 species, 21 are considered absent
based on the lack of suitable habitat or based on focused survey results. Of the remaining 8 species, 2 are present, 2
are considered to have a moderate to high probability of occurrence, and 4 are considered to have a low probability
of occurrence. The special interest species occurring or potentially occurring on the project site include:
• Plummers mariposa lily(Calochortus plummerae)
Parry's spineflower(Choriznthe parryi var.parryi)
Parish's desert them(Lycium parishii)
• San Diego homed lizard(Phrynosoma coronatum blainvillei)
Orange-throated whiptail(Cnemidophorus hyperthrus)
Western mastif bat(Eumops perotis calijornicus)
• Western burrowing owl(Achene cunicularia hypugea)
Bell's sage sparow(Amphispiza belli Belli)
The western burrowing owl was observed on site during the San Bernardino kangaroo rat survey. Based on this
sighting,the owl is considered to currently occupy the site. However,the owl was only observed during two surveys,
and not during the focused surveys for the California gnatcatcher. The infrequency of the sightings during the
surveys indicates that there are low numbers of burrowing owls that may use the site for foraging habitat. The
burrowing owl is not listed as a threatened or endangered species. Potential impacts to the few individuals or the
foraging habitat used by low numbers of individuals are not considered significant.
8
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 13 of 42
The Department of Fish and Game Codes (DFG) 3503 and 3503.5 prohibit the destruction of individual owls and
owl nests. Certain measures will be required to ensure that the project is in accordance with the DFG Code.
Additional surveys will be required prior to construction to ensure that no burrowing owls will be on site during
construction activities. If burrowing owls are present on site, the owls may be passively relocated, during the non-
breeding season (September 1 to January 31), by placing one-way doors on the burrow entrances. Owls cannot be
passively relocated during the breeding season and a 250-foot buffer zone would be required to avoid disturbance to
the owl nest(burrow)per DFG Codes 3503 and 3503.3.
The bell's sage sparrow was observed on site during the year 2001 SBKR and California gnatcatcher focused
surveys. However, this species is not listed as a threatened or endangered species. Due to the degradation of the
site, and the fact that the bird is not listed as a threatened or endangered species, potential impacts to the species are
not significant.
DFG Code 3503.5 prohibits the destruction of bird nests. Certain measures will be required to ensure that the
project is in accordance with the DFG Code. The project will need to be cleared during the non-breeding season of
(September 1-January 31)for this species.
The San Diego homed lizard was observed approximately 1.0 mile north(north of Baseline Road)of the project site
in 1998. Suitable habitat for this species is present on site, although it was not observed on site. However, this
species is not listed as federally or state endangered or threatened and impacts to this species are not significant.
Based on surveys, no federally or state listed threatened or endangered species are present on site. Thus, there will
be no impacts to federally or state listed threatened or endangered species. No mitigation is required.
C. Impacts to the San Bernardino kangaroo rat
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the proposed project will not significantly impact the San
Bernardino kangaroo rut (Dipodomys merriami parvus), a federally listed
endangered species.
Finding: Potential impacts related to this issue are discussed in Section 4.4 of the FEIR. The focused
trapping survey for the SBKR revealed that the species does not occur on the project site;
therefore,no significant impact to this species will occur. No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding.The San Bernardino kangaroo rat(SBKR) was emergency listed as
endangered on January 27, 1998 (USFWS, 1998)and final listed on September 24, 1998. The site is located within
the area proposed for designation as critical habitat for the SBKR and may meet some limited criteria for the
designated critical habitat, i.e., it has some limited, severely degraded habitat, and a limited portion of it is currently
subject to natural processes that potentially could rejuvenate and maintain habitat (flooding). The focused trapping
survey for the SBKR revealed that the species does not occur on the project site. This fact and the lack of a viable
corridor from either the north or south leaves the subject property completely isolated from areas occupied by the
species. Due to the absence of SBKR from the site and the low value of the site as critical habitat,potential impacts
to the species(i.e.,loss of proposed critical habitat)are not considered significant.
d. Impacts to the California gnatcatcher
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the proposed project will not significantly impact the California
gnatcatcher (Polioplila californica californica), a federally listed threatened
species.
9
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 14 of 42
Finding: Potential impacts related to this issue are discussed in Section 4.4 of the FEIR. The entire
project site was surveyed for the presence of the California gnatcatcher. The focused surveys
revealed that this species is not present on-site; therefore, no significant impact to the California
gnatcatcher will occur. No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding.The California gnatcatcher is a small insectivorous bird found almost
exclusively within coastal sage scrub habitat from Los Angeles County south to upper Baja California. The
California gnatcatcher was listed under the federal ESA as a threatened species on March 25, 1993. The site is not
within critical habitat for the California gnatcatcher. The California gnatcatcher critical habitat is approximately one
and a half miles to the northwest. The entire site was surveyed for the presence of the California gnatcatcher. The
focused survey conducted for the California gnatcatcher revealed that the species is not present on the project site
e. Impacts Related to Habitat P ragmentation/Wildlife Movement
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the proposed project will not significantly impact the movement of
wildlife in the vicinity of the project site and/or result in the fragmentation of
wildlife habitat.
Finding: Potential impacts related to this issue are discussed in Section 4.4 of the FEIR. No wildlife
corridor extends,or is in proximity, to the habitat of the proposed project site. The habitat on site
is disjunct and in a highly urbanized area; therefore, impacts related to this issue are less than
significant. No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding. Habitat fragmentation occurs when a single, unified habitat area is
divided into two or more areas, such that the division isolates the two areas from each other. Isolation of habitat
limits the free movement of wildlife from one portion of habitat to another,or from one habitat type to another.
The wildlife movement on the Victoria Gardens site is mainly restricted to localized movements because linkages to
surrounding habitats are limited by existing barriers,primarily major roadways(Foothill Boulevard on the south and
the I-15 on the southeast) and approved residential housing developments (to the north and west). No wildlife
corridor extends,or is in proximity,to the habitat of the proposed project site. The habitat on site is disjunct and in a
highly urbanized area. Therefore, the proposed project will not result in significant impacts on wildlife movement
routes or contribute to habitat fragmentation.
I. Impacts to Local and Regional Policies/MSHCP
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the proposed project will not conflict with local and/or regional
policies established for the preservation/protection of biological resources.
Finding: Potential impacts related to this issue are discussed in Section 4.4 of the FOR The proposed
project would not conflict with any local or regional policies/ordinances protecting/preserving biological resources;
therefore, impacts related to this issue are less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding. The North Etiwanda Open Space Habitat Preservation Program
(NEOSHPP) was adopted by the San Bernardino Board of Supervisors on April 26, 1994. The NEOSHPP area is
located northeasterly of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and is roughly bounded by Deer Creek on the west, the City
of Fontana on the east, the City of Rancho Cucamonga on the south, and the San Bernardino National Forest on the
north. The majority of the program area is within the City of Rancho Cucamonga sphere-of-influence, with a small
10
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 15 of 42
portion being within the City of Fontana sphere-of-influence and the remaining area being within the National Forest
boundary. The 7,243-acre program area was established in 1994. The project site is not within the NEOSHPP area.
The County of San Bernardino, the USFWS, the CDFG, and 14 affected cities are currently involved with the
preparation of a regional a Valley-Wide Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan(VMSHCP) for target species and
associated habitats. This conservation plan is not yet approved and, therefore, cannot be reviewed as to its potential
relevance to the proposed project.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga has a tree preservation ordinance to protect heritage trees, including all eucalyptus
windrows and trees in excess of 15 feet in height. The windrows of eucalyptus trees and the individual eucalyptus
tree in the center of the site fall under the definition of heritage trees. The tree ordinance allows for the removal of
heritage trees by filing a Tree Removal Permit with the City Planner. Removal of the eucalyptus trees is not
considered significant and no mitigation is required. However,the City may impose measures(such as replanting)as
a part of the permit process that must be implemented.
g. Impacts to Plant Communities
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the proposed project will eliminate approximately 54.0 acres of
disturbed Riversidian alluvial fan sage scrub(RAFSS),approximately 20.0 acres of
non-native grasslands,and approximately 100.0 acres of abandoned vineyards.
Finding: Potential impacts related to this issue are discussed in Section 4.4 of the FEIR. Because the
project site does not host endangered/threatened species and because of the significant degradation and isolation of
the project site,impacts to on-site plant communities are not significant. No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding. Impacts resulting from the project will include approximately 54
acres to disturbed Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub (RAFSS), approximately 20 acres to non-native grasslands,
and approximately 100 acres of abandoned vineyards. The disturbed RAFSS on site is not a contiguous block of
habitat. The 54 acres of disturbed RAFSS are distributed in two locations on site, ranging from 7 to 47 acres. The
patch of RAFSS in the northern portion of the project site is adjacent to Victoria Arbors Village, an approved
development site that will no longer sustain a RAFSS community. The lack of any threatened or endangered species
further indicates the low habitat value of the site. Impacts to RAFSS are not significant because of the degradation
and isolation of the site.
h. Impacts to Wetlands
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the proposed project will not impact on-site wetlands.
Finding: Because no wetlands are present on-site, impacts associated with this issue are less than significant.
No mitigation is required
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding. Per focused surveys,and the absence of hydrophytic vegetation,it was
determined that no wetlands are present within the project boundaries.
L Impacts to Raptor Habitat
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the proposed project will not significantly impact foraging sites for
raptor species.
11
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 16 of 42
Finding: Potential impacts related to this issue are discussed in Section 4.4 of the FEIR. Due to the
extensive home range of these raptors, the loss of foraging habitat for raptors is not considered to be a significant
impact. No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding. The golden eagle, red-shouldered hawk and burrowing owl were
observed on site. While these species were observed foraging on site,due to lack of suitable nesting habitat(the red-
shouldered hawk nests in dense riparian areas and the golden eagle nests typically on cliffs,although may also nest in
large trees in open areas), it is not likely that the golden eagle or the red-shouldered hawk nest on site. The
eucalyptus trees are potentially nesting habitat, however,no nests(nor nesting behavior)were observed on site. The
foraging area of these raptors is extensive; the golden eagle in southern California has a territorial and foraging area
of approximately 36 square miles. The limited knowledge available on the red-shouldered hawk home ranges points
to a territorial and foraging area between 156 and 480 acres(in Michigan). Due to the extensive home range of these
raptors,the loss of foraging habitat for raptors is not considered to be a significant impact.
DFG Code and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act prohibits the take of raptor nests and certain measures must be
implemented by the project to be in compliance. Proposed project construction activities (that may result in the
destruction of active raptor nests)should be scheduled outside the peak raptor nesting season(March through July).
j. Cumulative Impacts to Biological Resources
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the proposed project will not have a significant cumulative impact
on biological resources on/adjacent to the project site and within the region.
Finding: Potential impacts related to this issue are discussed in Section 4.4 of the FEIR. Due to the degradation
of the area and the fragmentation of habitat by interstate freeways, state routes, and residential and industrial
development, the loss of habitat resulting from implementation of the proposed project is not considered significant.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding. The study area between the proposed SR-30 and SR-60 Day Creek
watershed has approximately 2,300 acres of undeveloped land with similar habitat to the proposed project (active
and abandoned vineyards). The 174 acres of the Victoria Gardens proposed project will contribute to the loss of
approximately 8 percent of the undeveloped land in the area. Other approved and proposed projects (including the
Victoria Gardens project)within the study area will contribute to the loss of 612 of the 2,300 acres,or approximately
27 percent.
Given the current rate of development within the study area, the accessibility to bi- or tri-modal transit (railway,
interstate, and airport), and the fact that the area is slated for development, it is reasonable to predict that all 2,300
acres will be developed in the future. The 2,300-acre area has been historically used for agricultural purposes and is
degraded habitat. Due to the degradation of the area and the fragmentation of habitats by interstate freeways, state
routes, and residential and industrial development, the loss of habitat (8 percent of the total undeveloped habitat)
from the site is not considered significant.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES
a. Impacts to On-site Cultural Resources
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the proposed project will not significantly alter and/or eliminate
archeological resources.
12
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 17 of 42
Finding: Potential impacts related to this issue are discussed in Section 4.5 of the FEIR. The proposed
project will have a less than significant impact on the Foothill Fieldstone Stockpiles since it does
not meet the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historic Resources. No mitigation is
required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: The western two-thirds of the parcel is planted in grapevines
interspersed with dumping sites containing non-indigenous cobbles and gravels, chunks of concrete, asphalt,
automobile parts, appliances, coin-operated video game cabinets, tires, lumber, pieces of wood and metal, and
miscellaneous household refuse. A homeless person shelterihabitation site was encountered under the only tree in
the southeast quarter of the site. The eastern portion of the parcel is crossed from north to south by a wash that
provides exposures of the upper three feet of sediment on the parcel. The original ground surface was severely
impacted by rock removal methods that allowed vines to be planted, and subsequently impacted by cultivation and
discing associated with agriculture. The remainder of the parcel is covered by grapevines, native plants,weeds, and
grasses with a surface visibility of approximately 50 to 80 percent.
The survey crew encountered the remnant of an abandoned irrigation system, CA-SBR-7095H, consisting two rows
of precast concrete standpipe; it is not known whether it was associated with the Ellena Winery, but it was clearly
used to irrigate the vineyards on the parcel. The irrigation system has been partially destroyed by flooding along the
north/south wash. This resource is not known to be associated with historically significant events or important
persons, and it does not embody distinctive characteristics,represent the work of an important creative individual, or
possess high artistic values. It is not likely to yield important historical information;therefore, it is not a significant
resource.
Three very large piles of cobbles and boulders, which had probably been cleared from the vineyard, and trace
historic refuse were also observed in the project area. Historically, on the lower slopes of the fanglomerates from the
San Gabriel Mountains, boulders had to be removed to make land available for agriculture. These boulders were
either stockpiled or placed as hedgerows along property boundaries. It is possible that laborers from the Chinese
labor camp, reported to be located one mile north of the parcel (Laska, this records search), could have been
involved in clearing the parcel. The date range of the clearance is unknown. Due to the unknown affiliation and
lacking a precise date of these stockpiles, thew alteration or removal would not constitute a significant impact to
cultural resources. Designated, LSA-RCG131-1, LSA-RCG131-2, and LSA-RCG131-3 (Foothill Fieldstone
Stockpiles), this historic site was recorded during the archaeological survey. The Foothill Fieldstone Stockpiles do
not appear to meet any of the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historic Resources (PRC SS5024.1,
Title 14 CCR, Section 4852). Due to the unknown affiliation and lacking a precise date of these stockpiles, their
alteration or removal would not constitute a significant impact to cultural resources. Recordation of the resource
fulfills the requirements of mitigation. No further work is recommended for this resource.
6. PUBLIC SERVICES
a. Impacts to Fire Protection Service Response Times
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the proposed project will not significantly alter Rancho
Cucamonga Fire District response times.
Finding: Potential impacts related to this issue are discussed in Section 4.5 of the FEIR.Because the project
site is located within the 5-minute response area of Rancho Cucamonga Fire District facilities, no
significant impact related to this issue will occur. No mitigation is required.
13
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 18 of 42
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: The Rancho Cucamonga Fire District has a standard response time
threshold of five minutes, including call-in-time. Based on this standard, the maximum travel time would be three
minutes. Due to the project's location relative to Stations 3, 4, and 5, the site is anticipated to fall within the 5
minute response time criteria.
b. Impacts to Water Supply
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the proposed project will not significantly impact the supply
and/or distribution of water.
Finding: Potential impacts related to this issue are discussed in Section 4.6 of the FEIR.The potential water
demands associated with the development of the proposed on-site uses have been anticipated in recent Cucamonga
County Water District (CCWD) Water Master Plans. CCWD supplies the majority water using both imported
surface water and local groundwater and these water sources are expected to be available to meet service area water
demand in the future. Therefore, the proposed project's water service impacts are considered to be less than
significant. No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: Future increases in the demand for water will be met with by
aggressive capital improvement program, which includes construction of transmission mains, well sites, increasing
the reservoir storage capacities in all pressure zones, and increasing the size of the L. W. Michael Treatment Plant.
Most of all of these facilities are slated for completion within the next 10-15 years. The District is developing a
reclaimed water program, which will utilize processed water from the Regional Plant No. 4 located at the southwest
comer of Etiwanda Avenue and Sixth Street. The reclaimed water will provide service to major landscaping and
recreational areas and many parkway and median island improvements.
Based on CCWD water demand factors, development of the proposed Victoria Gardens project will increase water
service demand to the City of Rancho Cucamonga by approximately 732.20 acre feel per year(654,000 gallons per
day). The Cucamonga County Water District supplies an approximate average total of 40,000 acre feet per year
(41.7 million gallons per day). Therefore, the increased water demand associated with this proposed project is an
increase of less than 2% of the current average total of water supplied by the District. As previously stated, the
project site has been planned for a "Regional Center' since at least 1981, therefore, potential water demands
associated with the development of the proposed on-site uses have been anticipated in recent CCWD Water Master
Plans. CCWD supplies the majority water using both imported surface water and local groundwater and these water
sources are expected to be available to meet service area water demand in the future. Therefore, the proposed
project's water service impacts are considered to be less than significant.
P J mP g
C. Impacts to Wastewater Facilities
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the proposed project will not significantly impact wastewater
treatment facilities.
Finding: Potential impacts related to this issue are discussed in Section 4.6 of the FEIR. Capacity at Inland
Empire Utilities Agency wastewater treatment facilities are adequate to process the volume of wastewater anticipated
to originate from the proposed on-site land uses; therefore, the proposed project's water service impacts are
considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: The proposed project will increase wastewater effluent flows to the
Inland Empire Utilities Agency's treatment system. However, the Inland Empire Utilities Agency indicates that there
is sufficient wastewater capacity to treat the wastewater generation estimated for Victoria Gardens. While, the
ultimate capacity of RP-4 totals 7.0 mgd, on an average day, this facility treats approximately 4.4 mgd. Average
daily surplus capacity at RP4 totals 2.6 mgd. Development of the Victoria Gardens project will result in the
generation of approximately 277,200 gallons of wastewater per day. The volume of wastewater generated by the
14
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 19 of 42
proposed project will amount to approximately 6%of the wastewater currently treated by RP4 every day, less than
4%of RP-4's ultimate daily capacity,and less than I I%of the plant's average daily surplus capacity. If bypassed to
RP-I, wastewater flows would amount to less than 1% of this facility's current treatment load and ultimate daily
capacity, and approximately 6.0% of the average daily surplus capacity at RP-1. Consequently, potential impacts
associated with increases of wastewater flows to local treatment which will occur with development of the Victoria
Gardens project are considered less than significant
d. Cumulative Impacts to School Facilities
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the Victoria Gardens project will not have a significant
cumulative impact on the provision of school services and/or facilities.
Finding: Cumulative impacts to school facilities are considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is
required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: Development of the Victoria Gardens project would increase the
demand on schools and the school districts' education services in the project vicinity. The proposed project would
require additional staffing and facilities to accommodate the increase in the student population resulting from the
development of the proposed 600 multi-family residential units. However, implementation of mitigation measures
identified in Section 4.6 of the FEIR would lessen the project's cumulative contributions to educational service
impacts. Additionally, other development projects within the City will be required to adhere to the uniform State
environmental standards and evaluations set forth by the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). Therefore,
the proposed project impacts is considered to be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures.
e. Cumulative Impacts to Police Protection Services/Facilities
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the Victoria Gardens project will not have a significant
cumulative impact on the provision of police protection services and/or facilities.
Finding: Cumulative impacts to police protection services/facilities are considered to be less than significant.
No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding:The Victoria Gardens project would increase the demand of police
protection in the area. However, the proposed project's impacts on police services were determined to be less
than significant contingent upon the implementation of all mitigation measures. As other development projects
are constructed citywide and in the vicinity of the proposed project, the City will be responsible for ensuring that
adequate police service is provided. Therefore, cumulative impacts associated with development of the proposed
project are considered to be less than significant.
f. Cumulative Impacts to Fire Protection Services/Facilities
Less than Significant Impact: Development of the Victoria Gardens project will not have a significant cumulative
impact on the provision of fire protection services and/or facilities.
Finding: Cumulative impacts to fire protection services/facilities are considered to be less than
significant. No mitigation is required.
15
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 20 of 42
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: Development of the proposed project would increase the demand for
fire protection in the area and would require additional staffing and facilities to accommodate growth. The FEIR
identifies mitigation measures, the implementation of which will reduce potential impacts to fire protection
services/facilities to a less than significant level. Therefore, the cumulative effect development of the proposed
project will have on fire protection services/facilities will be less than significant.
g. Cumulative Impacts to Water Supply Facilities
Less than Significant Impact: When considered with other proposed or planned development within the service
area of the Cucamonga County Water District, development of the Victoria
Gardens project will not contribute to a significant water service impact.
Finding: The proposed project's contributions to potential cumulative water service impacts are considered
to be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: The proposed development will increase water service demand to
the City of Rancho Cucamonga by approximately 732.20 acre feet per year (654,000 gallons per day). The
increased water demand associated with this proposed project is an increase of less than 2%of the current average
total of water supplied by the District. CCWD supplies the majority water using both imported surface water and
local groundwater and these water sources are expected to be available to meet service area water demand in the
future. Development projects within the City will be subjected to all applicable environmental standards and
evaluation set forth by the CEQA addressing project specific water service impacts. In addition, CCWD has
anticipated increases in water demand and associated infrastructure in its water facilities and supply planning efforts.
h. Cumulative Impacts to Wastewater Treatment Facilities
Less than Significant Impact: When considered with other developments within the service area of the Inland
Empire Utilities Agency, development of the Victoria Gardens project will not
have a significant cumulative impact on wastewater treatment facilities.
Finding: The proposed project's contributions to potential cumulative wastewater service impacts are
considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: The increase in wastewater generation associated with the
construction of Victoria Gardens will elevate the demand for wastewater services from the Inland Empire Utilities
Agency. Existing wastewater treatment facilities can accommodate the projected wastewater generated by the
proposed project in combination with all other projects within the City. Existing and planned wastewater facilities
are expected to be available to meet citywide wastewater generation in the future. Both RPI and RP-4 have
adequate daily surplus capacity to accept wastewater flows generated from the proposed on-site uses; therefore,
potential cumulative wastewater service impacts are considered to be less than significant.
B. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS WHICH CAN BE MITIGATED BELOW A LEVEL
OF SIGNIFICANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES.
The following impacts related to Transportation and Circulation,Noise,and Public Services were found to be potentially
significant, but, unless otherwise noted below, can be feasibly mitigated to a less than significant level with the
imposition of mitigation measures.The City finds that,except as stated to the contrary,all potentially significant Project
impacts listed below can and will be mitigated, reduced or avoided by imposition of the mitigation measures,and these
mitigation measures are set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Plan adopted by the City.
16
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 21 of 42
Specific findings of the City for each category of such impacts are set forth in detail below. Public Resources Code
Section 21081 states that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an Environmental Impact
Report has been completed which identifies one or more significant effects unless the public agency makes one or more
of the following findings:
1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the
significant effects on the environment.
2. Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have
been,or can and should be,adopted by that other agency.
3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation
measures or alternatives identified in the FEIR.
The City hereby finds, pursuant to Section 21081 that, except as otherwise stated in these Findings, the following
potential environmental impacts can and will be mitigated to below a level of significance. Each mitigation measure
discussed in this section of the findings is assigned an alpha-numeric designation correlating it with the environmental
category used in the Mitigation Monitoring Program included in the PER and adopted by the City to provide for the
enforcement of such mitigation measures.
1. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION
a. Year 2007 with Project Intersection Conditions
Potential Significant Impact: Impact 4.1.1. Ten intersections are forecast to operate below the LOS threshold (C
for intersections entirely within Fontana, D for others) under year 2007 with project conditions in the a.m. and/or
p.m.peak hour. These intersections are as follows:
Day Creek Boulevard/SR-210 Westbound Ramps
Day Creek Boulevard/Victoria Gardens Lane
Day Creek Boulevard/Foothill Boulevard
Victoria Gardens Lane/Base Line Road
Victoria Gardens Lane/Church Street
Etiwanda Avenue/Arrow Route
Etiwanda Avenue/Stover Avenue
• 1-15 Southbound Ramps/Base Line Road
• I-15 Northbound Ramps/Base Line Road
Cherry Avenue/Foothill Boulevard.
The project creates or contributes to these unsatisfactory conditions, which is considered to be a significant impact
except to the extent mitigated below.
Finding: The impact is analyzed in Section 4.1 of the FEIR. The FEIR analysis identified several mitigation
measures to reduce potential impacts associated with this issue to a less than significant level. The
City is adopting all of the traffic and circulation mitigation measures recommended in the FEIR,
with the exception of those rejected measured discussed in Section N.C. below in these Findings.
17
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 22 of 42
Except as discussed in Section IV.C. below, imposition of the following mitigation measure will
reduce these impacts to a level of insignificance:
4.1.1A Except where noted below that full funding for the improvement has been assured by the City or by the
existing Community Facilities District(CFD) 2001-1,the project shall make a fair share contribution to the following
improvements:
Day Creek Boulevard/Victoria Gardens Lane - Addition of a free northbound right turn lane. Short
eastbound green phase will necessitate prohibition of pedestrian crossing of Day Creek Boulevard on the south
leg of this intersection.
Day Creek Boulevard/Foothill Boulevard -Addition of a free westbound right turn lane, which will continue
to become the free northbound right tum lane at Day Creek Boulevard/Victoria Gardens Lane. Conversion of
one northbound left tum lane to a northbound through lane. Addition of a free northbound right tum lane,which
will continue to become a dedicated right tum lane at I-15 Southbound Ramps/Foothill Boulevard. Addition of
a third southbound left tum lane. Conversion of southbound shared though/right turn lane to a dedicated
southbound right tum lane. Modification of signal phasing to provide right tum overlap phasing for southbound
right turn movement. As an alternative to the overlap phasing,a free(uncontrolled)right tum for this movement
would improve overall intersection operations slightly and permit eastbound U-tums, although a LOS
calculation will show greater average delay for controlled movements. This signal will need to be operated
"split phase" northbound and southbound to allow three southbound lanes to tum left. Coordination of signal
timing with Day Creek Boulevard/Victoria Gardens Lane shall be implemented to provide maximum use of
southbound green time. Signal timing must consider pedestrian crossing of the east leg of the intersection in
order to connect a pedestrian trail from north to south. Short northbound through green phase will require
pedestrians crossing Foothill Boulevard on the east leg of this intersection to cross to the median on one phase
and then continue on a subsequent phase. A countdown pedestrian signal and an eight-foot wide raised median
to serve as a pedestrian refuge must be provided in the east leg of the intersection.
Victoria Gardens Lane/Base Line Road-Conversion of planned northbound shared through/right tum lane to
a free right turn lane. Addition of a dedication eastbound right turn lane. Funding and completion of this
improvement has been assured by the existing CFD 2001-1 at no cost to the project.
• Victoria Gardens Lane/Church Street - Modification of signal phasing to provide right tum overlap phasing
for northbound right tum movement. Funding and completion of this improvement has been assured by the
existing CFD 1001-1 at no cost to the project.
• I-15 Southbound and Northbound Ramps/Base Line Road - Freeway interchange must be reconstructed to
include southbound and northbound loop on-ramps.Plans for the reconstruction of this interchange are currently
being prepared by Caltrans, SANBAG, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The reconstruction of this
interchange will include the reconstruction of the intersection of East Avenue and Base Line Road. The City has
committed to perform these improvements at no cost to the project.
Cherry Avenue/Foothill Boulevard - Addition of a second southbound left tum lane. This mitigation will
maintain the level of service at this intersection at its 2001 level, which did not meet the City of Fontana's LOS
C standard.
Etiwanda Avenue/Stover Avenue—Addition of a second southbound left tum lane and a free westbound right
tum lane.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: The Congestion Management Program (CMP) standard level of
service (LOS) is LOS E. However, the CMP also allows local discretion and requirements to be used to determine
project impacts and appropriate mitigation. In the City of Rancho Cucamonga, LOS D is the standard level of
service. Therefore, any level of service condition in excess of LOS D is considered an impact requiring mitigation.
Since this analysis is also being used for CEQA clearance in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, local discretion and
requirements are used to determine project impacts on local roadways and,hence,appropriate mitigation.
18
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 23 of 42
The project will add traffic to roadways in the cities of Fontana and Ontario and in unincorporated San Bernardino
County. In the City of Fontana and the County,LOS C is the standard for intersection level of service; in the City of
Ontario,LOS D is the standard.
As stated in Table 4.1.J of the FEIR, levels of service at the above referenced intersections exceed the level of service
standard established by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and/or neighboring jurisdictions. With the implementation of
the recommended intersection improvements outlined in the above stated mitigation measures, minimum level of
service standards are maintained at these intersections(refer to Table 4.LK of the FEIR); therefore, impacts related
to the intersections listed above will be reduced to a less than significant level except as otherwise noted in Section
IV.C.below.
b. Year 2020 with Project Intersection Conditions
Potential Significant Impact: Impact 4.1.3. Twenty-eight intersections are forecast to operate below the LOS
threshold (C for intersections entirely within Fontana, D for others) under year 2020 with project conditions in the
a.m.and./or p.m.peak hour. These intersections are as follows:
Archibald Avenue/Foothill Boulevard
Haven Avenue/Base Line Road
Milliken Avenue/SR-210 Eastbound Ramps
Milliken Avenue/Base Line Road
Milliken Avenue/Foothill Boulevard
Milliken Avenue/Arrow Route
Milliken Avenue/4th Street
Rochester Avenue/Arrow Route
I-15 Southbound Ramps/4th Street
Day Creek Boulevard/Summit Avenue
• Day Creek Boulevard/SR-210 Westbound Ramps
• Day Creek Boulevard/SR-210 Eastbound Ramps
Day Creek Boulevard/Highland Avenue
Day Creek Boulevard/Base Line Road
Day Creek Boulevard/Victoria Gardens Lane
Day Creek Boulevard/Foothill Boulevard
I-15 Southbound Ramps/Foothill Boulevard
Victoria Gardens Lane/Base Line Road.
Victoria Gardens Lane/Church Street
Etiwanda Avenue/Church Street
• Etiwanda Avenue/Foothill Boulevard
• Etiwanda Avenue/Arrow Route
• Etiwanda Avenue/San Bernardino Avenue
Etiwanda Avenue/Stover Avenue
I-15 Southbound Ramps/Base Line Road
East Avenue/Base Line Road
19
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 24 of 42
I-15 Northbound Ramps/Base Line Road
Cherry Avenue/Foothill Boulevard.
The project creates or contributes to these unsatisfactory conditions, which is considered to be a significant impact
except to the extent mitigated below.
Finding: This impact is analyzed in Section 4.1 of the FEIR. The FEIR analysis identified several mitigation
measures to reduce potential impacts associated with this issue to a less than significant level. The
City is adopting all of the traffic and circulation mitigation measures recommended in the FEIR,
with the exception of those rejected measured discussed in Section IV.C.below in these Findings.
Except as discussed in Section IV.C. below, imposition of the following mitigation measure will
reduce these impacts to a level of insignificance:
4.1.3A Except where noted below that full funding for the improvement has been assured by the City or by the
existing Community Facilities District (CFD) 2001-1, the project shall make a fair share contribution
to the following improvements:
• Day Creek Boulevard/Base Line Road - Addition of a second eastbound left turn lane and a second
westbound left tum lane. Funding and completion of this improvement has been assured by the existing CFD
2001-1 at no cost to the project.
• Day Creek Boulevard/Victoria Gardens Lane-Addition of a free northbound right tum lane. Short eastbound
green phase will necessitate prohibition of pedestrian crossing of Day Creek Boulevard on the south leg of this
intersection.
Day Creek Boulevard/Foothill Boulevard -Addition of a free westbound right turn lane, which will continue
to become the free northbound right tum lane at Day Creek Boulevard/Victoria Gardens Lane. Conversion of
one northbound left tum lane to a northbound through lane. Addition of a free northbound right tum lane,which
will continue to become a dedicated right turn lane at I-15 Southbound Ramps/Foothill Boulevard. Addition of
a third southbound left turn lane. Conversion of southbound shared though/right tum lane to a dedicated
southbound right tum lane. Modification of signal phasing to provide right tum overlap phasing for southbound
right turn movement. As an alternative to the overlap phasing,a free(uncontrolled)right tum for this movement
would improve overall intersection operations slightly and permit eastbound U-turns, although a LOS
calculation will show greater average delay for controlled movements. This signal will need to be operated
"split phase"northbound and southbound to allow three southbound lanes to tum left. Short westbound through
green phase will require pedestrians crossing Day Creek Boulevard on the north leg of this intersection to cross
to the median on one phase and then continue on a subsequent phase. A countdown pedestrian signal and an
eight-foot wide raised median to serve as a pedestrian refuge must be provided in the north leg of the
intersection. Southbound left tum lanes must be side-by-side with the northbound left tum lane at Victoria
Gardens Lane to provide sufficient queuing capacity for southbound left tum movements (See Figure 4.1.15. in
the EIR). Coordination of signal timing with Day Creek BoulevardNictoria Gardens Lane shall be implemented
to provide maximum use of southbound green time. Signal timing must consider pedestrian crossing of the east
leg of the intersection in order to connect a pedestrian trail from north to south. Short northbound through green
phase will require pedestrians crossing Foothill Boulevard on the east leg of this intersection to cross to the
median on one phase and then continue on a subsequent phase. A countdown pedestrian signal and an eight-foot
wide raised median to serve as a pedestrian refuge must be provided in the east leg of the intersection.
I-15 Southbound Ramps/Foothill Boulevard-Addition of a free eastbound right tum lane.
Victoria Gardens Lane/Base Line Road-Conversion of planned northbound shared throughtright tum lane to
a free right tum lane.Funding and completion of this improvement has been assured by the existing CFD 2001-1
at no cost to the project.
Victoria Gardens Lane/Church Street-Addition of a second westbound left tum lane. Modification of signal
phasing to provide right tum overlap phasing for northbound right turn movement. Funding and completion of
these improvements has been assured by the existing CFD 2001-1 at no cost to the project.
20
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 25 of 42
• Etiwanda Avenue/Church Street—Addition of a dedicated northbound left tum lane, resulting in a single left
tum lane and a single shared through/right tum lane. Addition of a dedicated eastbound left turn lane,resulting
in a single left turn lane and a single shared through/right tum lane. Addition of a dedicated westbound left tum
lane, resulting in a single left tum lane and a single shared through/right turn lane. Funding and completion of
these improvements has been assured by the existing CFD 2001-1 at no cost to the project.
• Etiwanda Avenue/San Bernardino Avenue—Addition of a second eastbound left tum lane.
Etiwanda Avenue/Slover Avenue - Addition of a third and a fourth northbound through lane, a second
eastbound left tum lane, a second southbound left tum lane, a second westbound left tum lane, and a free
westbound right nun lane. These mitigations will maintain the level of service at this intersection at its 2001
level,which did not meet the City of Ontario's LOS D standard.
• I-15 Southbound and Northbound Ramps/Base Line Road - Freeway interchange must be reconstructed to
include southbound and northbound loop on-ramps. Plans for the reconstruction of this interchange are
currently being prepared by Caltrans, SANBAG,and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The reconstruction of this
interchange will include the reconstruction of the intersection of East Avenue and Base Line Road.The City has
committed to perform these improvements at no cost to the project.
• Cherry Avenue/Foothill Boulevard - Addition of a second eastbound left turn lane, a dedicated eastbound
right tum lane, a second southbound left tum lane, a dedicated northbound right tum lane, and a dedicated
westbound right tum lane. These mitigations will maintain the level of service at this intersection at its 2001
level,which did not meet the City of Fontana's LOS C standard.
• East Avenue/Base Line Road - Mitigation at this intersection is included as part of 1-15/Base Line Road
interchange reconstruction.
Etiwanda Avenue/Foothill Boulevard -Addition of a second southbound through lane, a second northbound
through lane, and a second northbound left turn lane. Modification of signal phasing to provide right tum
overlap phasing for the northbound right turn movement.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Finding: The level of service for the impacted intersections (Year 2020 with
project conditions) is detailed in Table 4.LN of the FEIR. With the implementation of the recommended intersection
improvements outlined in the above stated mitigation measure,minimum level of service standards are maintained at
these intersections(refer to Table 4.1.0 of the FEIR);therefore,impacts related to this issue will be reduced to a less
than significant level,except as otherwise noted in Section N.C.below.
2. NOISE
a. Construction Activities
Potential Significant Impact: Impact 4.2.1. Noise levels from grading and other construction activities for the
proposed project may range up to 85 dBA I.,,,,x at the closest planned residential uses to the north of the project site
for very limited times when construction occurs near them. Construction noise impacts of the proposed project
would be potentially adverse. Therefore,mitigation measures would be required.
Finding: This impact is analyzed in Section 4.2 of the FEIR. 'Be City is imposing the following mitigation
measure that will reduce potential impacts associated with this issue to a less than significant level.
4.2.1A Construction shall be limited to the hours of 6:30 a.m. through 8:00 p.m. on Monday through Saturday,
excluding national holidays. No construction shall be allowed on Sundays.
4.2.1B There shall be proper muffling of and maintenance of all internal combustion engines for construction
equipment and vehicles used on the site.
21
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 26 of 42
4.2.1C All stationary noise generating sources,such as air compressors and portable power generators,shall be located
as far away as possible from existing sensitive receptors.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: Construction of the proposed project is expected to require the
use of earthmovers,bulldozers, scrapers, graders,backfillers, front loaders,and water and pickup. Typical operating
cycles for these types of construction equipment may involve one or two minutes of full power operation followed by
three to four minutes at lower power settings.
Each bulldozer would also generate 88 dBA L,,,,, at 50 feet. The maximum noise level generated by water and
pickup trucks is approximately 86 dBA I.at 50 feet from these vehicles. Each doubling of the sound sources with
equal strength increases the noise level by 3 dBA. Assuming that each piece of construction equipment operates as
an individual noise source, the worst case composite noise level during this phase of construction would be 91 dBA
Lmax at a distance of 50 feet from an active construction area. As these noise sources are point sources, the noise
decreases at a rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance.
The nearest residences are located to the north of the project site on the opposite side of Church Street. These
residences are approximately 100 feet from the project boundary and may be subjected to short-term noise reaching
85 dBA Lmax intermittently generated by construction activities on the project site. This level of noise is
comparable with vehicular traffic noise on Church Street. To minimize the impact of the construction noise on
residences adjacent to the project area, compliance with the City's Noise Control Ordinance would be required.
Construction related noise impacts of the proposed project would be potentially adverse; however, with the
implementation of applicable mitigation measures, the impact would be reduced to a less than significant level.
b. Long Term Noise Impact
Potential Significant Impact: Impact 4.2.2. There will be a significant increase in project related traffic noise on
Victoria Gardens Lane from Base Line Road to south of Church Street. In addition,proposed residential properties
on the project site may be exposed to potentially significant traffic noise impacts. Therefore, mitigation measures
are required to ensure that the sensitive receptor locations are not exposed to traffic noise levels exceeding the City's
standards.
Finding: This impact is analyzed in Section 4.2 of the FEIR. The City is imposing the following mitigation
measure that will reduce potential impacts associated with this issue to a less than significant level.
4.2.2A Residential units located within 86 to 172 feet of the centerline of Day Creek Boulevard shall be equipped
with building facade upgrades,such as double paned(or dual glazing)windows,and mechanical ventilation,
such as an air conditioning system.
4.2.2B Residential units located within 364 feet of the centerline of Day Creek Boulevard or within 99 feet of the
centerline of Church Street shall be equipped with mechanical ventilation, such as an air conditioning
system.
The following mitigation measure is required for off-site sensitive uses that would experience potentially significant
project related traffic noise impacts:
4.2.2C Sensitive receptors located along Victoria Gardens Lane within the proposed Victoria Arbors Village may
require a six foot sound wall if outdoor land uses fall within 77 feet of the roadway. A form of mechanical
ventilation, such as air conditioning, will be required if the residences are within 165 feet of Victoria
Gardens Lane.
22
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 27 of 42
The following mitigation measure is required for outdoor on-site uses which may be exposed to project related traffic
noise:
4.2.213 Outdoor plazas and dining areas shall incorporate features to mask or reduce noise generated from project
related traffic. Specifically,the project design shall utilize water features(e.g. fountains),either alone, or in
tandem with other noise-reducing features (e.g., vegetative screening, structural design), to reduce noise
levels within outdoor gathering and dining areas.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: The FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Model (FHWA-77-108)was
used to evaluate the traffic related noise conditions in the vicinity of the project site. This model requires various
parameters, including traffic volumes, vehicle mix, vehicle speed, and roadway geometry to compute typical
equivalent noise levels during daytime,evening, and nighttime hours.
The future no project and future with project average daily traffic (ADT) volumes in the area were taken from the
traffic report prepared for this project. The resultant noise levels are weighted and summed over 24 hour periods to
determine the Lan value. I& contours are derived through a series of computerized iterations to isolate the 60, 65,
and 70 dBA "contours for future traffic noise levels in the area. Future traffic noise levels are detailed in Tables
4.2.0 and 4.2.1)of the FEIR.
Traffic noise under future (2020) baseline conditions would range from moderate to high in the project vicinity.
Projected traffic noise along future Day Creek Boulevard,Base Line Road, and Foothill Boulevard is high, whereas
projected traffic noise along Rochester Avenue, Victoria Gardens Lane, Etiwanda Avenue, and Church Street is
moderate. A significant increase in project related traffic noise would occur on Victoria Gardens Lane from Base
Line Road to south of Church Street. As stated in the FEIR,implementation of the above stated mitigation measures
will reduce traffic related noise to a below City standards;thereby reducing potential impacts related to this issue to a
less than significant level.
c. Truck Delivery and Loading/Unloading
Potential Significant Impact: Impact 4.23. Noise levels from the truck delivery and loading/unloading activities
for the proposed project may range up to 61 dBA Lmax at the closest residential uses proposed on the project site.
Noise impacts from the truck delivery and loading/unloading activities would be potentially adverse. Therefore,
mitigation measures would be required.
Finding: This impact is analyzed in Section 4.2 of the FEIR. The City is imposing the following mitigation
measure that will reduce potential impacts associated with this issue to a less than significant level.
4.23A On-site residences located within 250 feet of any loading dock shall be equipped with mechanical ventilation,
such as an air conditioning system.
4.2.3B In accordance with City Code Section 17.10.050 of the Performance Standards, no loading or unloading
activities, including truck idling shall occur between the hours of 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. within 250 feet of
any residential development.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: The closest off-site sensitive receptors are at a distance of
approximately 300 feet from the nearest area that an on-site loading/unloading area could be located. The noise
attenuation of loading/unloading activities provided by distance divergence at 300 feet is approximately 16 dBA
compared to the level at 50 feet. Therefore, residences to the north of the commercial portion of the project site
would be exposed to loading/unloading noise levels of 59 dBA I... This noise level is expected to be further
attenuated by the on-site buildings. This noise level is below the nighttime Lm, of 60 dBA(10 p.m to 7 a.m.) from
commercial activities specified in Section 17.10.050 of the Performance Standards;therefore,no mitigation for noise
impacts to off-site sensitive receptors is required.
23
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 28 of 42
The on-site noise generating activities closest to sensitive uses would be from the loading/unloading activities
associated with the proposed retail stores. Unloading and loading activities of trucks include the idling of
refrigerator trucks. The closest loading dock to the proposed on-site residences are at a distance of approximately
250 feet. Based on noise readings from loading and unloading activities for other similar projects, a noise level of
75 dBA I.at 50 feet was used in this analysis. The noise attenuation of loading/unloading activities, provided by
distance divergence at 250 feet, is approximately 14 dBA compared to the level at 50 feet. Therefore,residences of
the project site would be exposed to loading/unloading noise levels of 61 dBA "m . This noise level exceeds the
nighttime I. of 60 dBA (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) from commercial activities specified in Section 17.10.050 of the
Performance Standards. Implementation of the above stated mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to
proposed on-site sensitive receptors to a less than significant level.
3. PUBLIC SERVICES
a. Impacts to School Facilities
Potential Significant Impact:Impact 4.6.1. As a result of the overcrowding in the classrooms of the Etiwanda and
Chaffey School Districts,both have urged and continue to urge the City not to approve development unless adequate
school facilities are available to serve the development project. Future development will generate more students for
the already impacted school districts and is considered significant before mitigation.
Finding: This impact is analyzed in Section 4.6 of the FEIR. The City is imposing the following mitigation
measure that will reduce potential impacts associated with this issue to a less than significant level.
4.6.1A The developer shall pay statutory school fees to the Etiwanda School District and Chaffey Joint Unified High
School District subject to the limitations of Government Code Section 65995 et seq.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: Students generated from the project site,for grades K-8 would be
served by schools within the Etiwanda School District where additional capacity can be created by temporary
classrooms. Terra Vista Elementary School is within close proximity of the project site and will provide education
for grades K-5. For intermediate education, Summit Intermediate School is closest to the project site..
Starting with the 1996/1997 school year, the State instituted a mandate to place an enrollment cap on all elementary
schools that results in a student to teacher ratio of 20:1 for grades K-3 and a ratio of 30:1 for all other grades. Due to
the lack of available classroom facilities within the Etiwanda School District, some schools cannot comply with this
State mandate. One method used to provide additional facilities is accomplished through requiring school fees and
or deductions. The Etiwanda School District's (3/30/01) assessment fee for residential development is $2.61 per
square foot and$0.23 per square foot for commercial. The cost per dwelling of providing grades K-8 facilities may
vary. In general, using current construction cost information for the district, the total cost of new school facilities
and related expenses for enrollment growth is$11,619 per home. As of March 30, 2001, Etiwanda School District
has a total of 8 elementary schools and 2 intermediate schools. Projections indicate nine elementary and three
intermediate schools are required to accommodate the projected 2002 student population.
The Chaffey Joint Unified High School District (CJUHSD) serves the communities of Montclair, Ontario and
Rancho Cucamonga. Approximately 20,805 students are currently enrolled at the District's six high schools and two
continuation high schools. The Victoria Gardens project site is located within the attendance area of Etiwanda High
School. The student population at this school current exceeds capacity. Within the District, two new high schools,
Los Osos and Colony, are scheduled toopen in September 2002. The District's adopted Boundary Plan, indicates,
pen p
that upon opening of these two new high schools, the project site will be located within the attendance area of
24
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 29 of 42
Rancho Cucamonga High School. The CJUHSD collects developer fees of $0.10 per square foot for
commercial/industrial development and$0.64 per square foot for residential development.
The proposed project would require additional staffing and facilities to accommodate the proposed 600 multi-family
residential units. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure will reduce potential school related
impacts to a less than significant level.
b. Impacts to Police Protection Services/Facilities
Potential Significant Impact: Impact 4.6.2. Development of the proposed commercial, residential, or office uses
may increase the demand for police services. Additional police personal,facilities and/or equipment will be required
to service any increased demand for police services associated with development of the Victoria Gardens project.
This impact is potentially significant.
Finding: This impact is analyzed in Section 4.6 of the FEIR. The City is imposing the following mitigation
measures that will reduce potential impacts associated with this issue to a less than significant level.
4.6.2A The developer shall submit to the City a Public Safety and Security Plan, which identifies the developer's
intent to provide safety services to the project to supplement normal City Police Services.
4.6.211 To address the increased demand on City police services resulting from the proposed project,an area within the
retail center will be set aside for an on-site City police office.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: The construction and occupation of new residential and
commercial uses may provide targets for criminal activity; therefore, the proposed project will contribute to an
incremental increase in demand on police services and facilities. Development of the proposed commercial, office
and residential uses may increase the potential for crimes against persons and property; therefore, additional police
protection will be required. During construction of the proposed land uses, crimes of grand theft and malicious
mischief will be the major crime problem. After construction and occupancy of the proposed Victoria gardens
project, an increased potential for crimes against property (theft, robbery, and burglary) will become the primary
concern of local police.
The expansion of police protection services and facilities is routinely associated with commercial growth.
Additionally,development of the proposed Victoria Gardens project will require adequate emergency access into the
project site. Potential impacts to existing police protection services and facilities resulting from development of the
Victoria Gardens project will be adequately mitigated through adherence to the above stated mitigation measures.
c. Impacts to Fire Protection Services/Facilities
Potential Significant Impact: Impact 4.6.3. Construction of the proposed project will increase the demand on
current Fire District forces and available resources. Therefore, additional fire protection services will be required.
Impacts resulting from Victoria Gardens, on the City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire District's fire services are
therefore,potentially significant.
Finding: This impact is analyzed in Section 4.6 of the FEIR. The City is imposing the following mitigation
measures to reduce potential impacts associated with this issue to a less than significant level.
4.6.3A The developer shall join Community Facilities District(CFD) 85-1 to provide fire protection services to the
site.
25
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 30 of 42
4.6.3B The developer shall install full, automatic fire sprinklers systems in all commercial/retail, office, civic and
multi-family residential units in accordance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Ordinance No. 15 and
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Ordinance No.22.
4.6.3C The Fire District shall be consulted on street name assignments to assure compliance with response plans.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: The proposed project includes approximately 2.45 million square
feet of commercial/retail, office, and civic uses and up to 600 multi-family residential units. Development of the
proposed land uses would potentially increase the demand for fire protection services.
The project site is located within the area served by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District. Fire Station 3, located on
Base Line Road,approximately 1,000 feet east of Day Creek Boulevard,would serve the project site. Additionally,
Fire Station 4 (located on Jersey Boulevard, approximately 3 miles west of the "future" Day Creek Boulevard), and
Fire Station 5, located on Banyan Street, approximately 2.5 miles west of the"future" Day Creek Boulevard would
also assist in provision of fire/emergency services. An impact to fire protection is considered significant if it creates
a demand for fire protection services that results in response times in excess of five (5) minutes for fire and
emergency medical calls to the project site area.
With implementation of the proposed mitigation measures,all potential significant effects on fire services associated
with the Victoria Gardens project would be reduced to below the level of significance.
C. IMPACTS ANALYZED IN THE FEIR AND DETERMINED TO BE SIGNIFICANT
AND UNAVOIDABLE.
Based upon information in the FEIR, in the record, and based upon testimony provided during the public hearings on
this project, the following adverse impacts of the Victoria Gardens project as more particularly discussed below are
considered to be significant and unavoidable, both individually and cumulatively: Traffic and Circulation, and Air
Quality. Despite implementation of the adopted mitigation measures that will reduce impacts to the extent feasible,
these impacts are considered significant and unavoidable despite the adopted mitigation.
1. Traffic and Circulation
a. Year 2007 Freeway Segment Conditions
Significant Unavoidable Impact: Impact 4.1.2. Three freeway segments are forecast to operate below the LOS E
threshold under year 2007 with project conditions in the a.rrL and./or p.m.peak hour. These segments are as follows:
• Interstate 15 Northbound from Jumpa Street to I-10
• Interstate 10 Eastbound from Archibald Avenue to I-15
• Interstate 10 Eastbound from Etiwanda Avenue to Cherry Avenue.
The project creates or contributes to these unsatisfactory conditions,which is considered to be a significant impact.
Finding: This impact is analyzed in Section 4.1 of the FEIR. The FEIR analysis identified the following
mitigation measures that would maintain freeway operations under year 2007 with project at
acceptable levels of service. These measures are infeasible,and will not be imposed by the City.
4.1.2A As shown in Table 4.1.M in the FEIR, the addition of the following freeway lanes would maintain freeway
operations under year 2007 with project conditions at acceptable levels of service:
Interstate 15 from Jurupa Street to I-10-Addition of one northbound HOV lane.
26
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 31 of 42
Interstate 10 from Archibald Avenue to I-15-Addition of one eastbound mixed-flow lane.
Interstate 10 from Etiwanda Avenue to Valley Boulevard -Addition of one eastbound HOV lane.
Interstate 10 from Valley Boulevard to Cherry Avenue - Addition of one eastbound mixed flow lane and
one eastbound HOV lane.
There are no feasible mitigation measures for these impacts. Since there are no feasible mitigation measures for
these conditions, impacts remain significant and unavoidable.
Facts and Analysis in Support of the Findings: As detailed in Table 4.11 of the FEIR, all the freeway segments
examined, with the exception of those identified above, are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service
(LOS E or better) under 2007 with project conditions. Improvements to I-10 and I-15 are under the authority of
Caltrans. As shown on Table S-3 of the SEIR, the cost of making the recommended 1-15 and I-10 improvements
would be approximately$7,800,000.
Requiring the developer to pay any portion of this cost, however, would render the project financially infeasible for
development. A pro-forma economic projection of development costs and estimated economic returns for the
project has been submitted by the developer and independently reviewed by the City's economic consultant. The
pro-forma shows that the developer's anticipated"cash on cost"return is slightly less that the 12%return or"hurdle
rate" ordinarily needed to induce a developer to move forward with a project of this type and scope. Accordingly,
any additional cost, contribution or exaction beyond the amounts budgeted in the proforma would make the project
an undesirable investment, and it would not be developed. The freeway segment mitigation described above is not
within the pro-forma budget. Consequently, the above stated mitigation measures are not feasible, and will not be
imposed.
b. Year 2020 with Project Freeway Segment Conditions j
Significant Unavoidable Impact: Impact 4.1.4 Six freeway segments are forecast to operate below the LOS E
threshold under year 2020 with project conditions in the a.m.and./or p.m. peak hour. These segments are as follows:
Interstate 15 Northbound from SR-60 to Duncan Canyon Road
Interstate 10 Eastbound from Vineyard Avenue to I-15
Interstate 10 Eastbound from Etiwanda Avenue to Cherry Avenue
Interstate 10 Westbound from I-IS to Milliken Avenue
State Route 210 Eastbound from Carnelian Street Day Creek Boulevard
State Route 210 Eastbound from Cherry Avenue to East Avenue.
The project creates or contributes to these unsatisfactory conditions,which is considered to be a significant impact.
Finding: This impact is analyzed in Section 4.1 of the FEIR. The FEIR analysis identified the following
mitigation measures that would maintain freeway operations under year 2020 with project at
acceptable levels of service. These measures are infeasible,and will not be imposed by the City.
4.1.4A As shown in Table 4.1.Q in the FEIR, the addition of the following freeway lanes would maintain freeway
operations under year 2020 with project conditions at acceptable levels of service:
Interstate 15 from SR-60 to Duncan Canyon Road - Addition of one northbound mixed-flow lane and one
northbound HOV lane.
Interstate 10 from Vineyard Avenue to Archibald Avenue-Addition of one eastbound mixed-flow lane.
Interstate 10 from Archibald Avenue to Milliken Avenue-Addition of two eastbound mixed-flow lanes.
27
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 32 of 42
Interstate 10 from Milliken Avenue to I-15-Addition of two eastbound mixed-flow lanes and one westbound
mixed-flow lane.
Interstate 10 from Etiwanda Avenue to Cherry Avenue -Addition of two eastbound mixed-flow lanes and
one eastbound HOV lane.
State Route 210 from Carnelian Street to Day Creek Boulevard - Addition of one eastbound mixed-flow
lane.
State Route 210 from Cherry Avenue to East Avenue-Addition of one eastbound mixed-flow lane.
There are no feasible mitigation measures for these impacts. Since there are no feasible mitigation measures for
these conditions,impacts to these freeway segments remain significant and unavoidable.
Facts in Support of the Finding: As detailed in Table 4.1.1?of the FOR, all the freeway segments examined,with
the exception of those identified above, are forecasted to operate at satisfactory levels of service under 2020 with
project conditions. Improvements to I-10 and I-15 are under the authority of Caltrans. As shown on Table S-5 of
the SEIR, the cost of making the recommended SR 210, I-15 and I-10 improvements would be approximately
$51,480,000;of which$2,117,188 is the project's"fair share".
Requiring the developer to pay any portion of this cost, however, would render the project financially infeasible
for development. A pro-forma economic projection of development costs and estimated economic returns for the
project has been submitted by the developer and independently reviewed by the City's economic consultant.
The pro-forma shows that the developer's anticipated "cash on cost" return is slightly less that the 12% return
or "h urdle rate" ordinarily needed to induce a developer to move forward with a project of this type and scope.
Accordingly, any additional cost, contribution or exaction beyond the amounts budgeted in the proforma would
make the project an undesirable investment, and it would not be developed. The freeway segment mitigation
described above is not within the pro-forma budget. Consequently, the above stated mitigation measures are not
feasible, and will not be imposed.
C. Project Intersection Conditions
Significant Unavoidable Impact: Impact 4.1.4. Mitigation identified in the FEIR for the following
intersections will not be imposed on the project by the City, thereby creating a potential for unsatisfactory levels
of service in conflict with the CMP:
2007:
Day Creek Boulevard/SR-210 Westbound Ramps-Addition of a free southbound right tum lane.
Etiwanda Avenue/Arrow Route-Addition of a second northbound through lane.
2020:
Archibald Avenue/Foothill Boulevard - Addition of a dedicated eastbound right tum lane, a dedicated
northbound right turn lane,and a second southbound left tum lane.
Haven Avenue/Base Line Road -Addition of a third eastbound through lane and a second eastbound left turn
lane.
Milliken Avenue/SR-210 Eastbound Ramps-Addition of a free northbound right turn lane.
Milliken Avenue/Base Line Road -Addition of a third eastbound through lane and a third southbound through
lane.
Milliken Avenue/Foothill Boulevard - Addition of a third eastbound through lane, a third and a fourth
southbound through lanes,and a dedicated northbound right tum lane.
28
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 33 of 42
Milliken Avenue/Arrow Route-Addition of a second eastbound left tum lane,a third eastbound through lane,
and a fourth northbound through lane.
Milliken Avenue/4th Street -Addition of a third southbound left tum lane. Modification of signal phasing to
provide right turn overlap phasing for northbound right tum movement.
Rochester Avenue/Arrow Route - Conversion of second northbound left tum lane to a second northbound
through lane.
I-15 Southbound Ramps/4th Street - Addition of a free southbound right turn lane. Modification of signal
phasing to provide right turn overlap phasing for northbound right tum movement.
Day Creek Boulevard/Summit Avenue -Addition of dedicated northbound and southbound right turn lanes.
• Day Creek Boulevard/SR-110 Westbound Ramps - Construction of a loop off-ramp for westbound SR-210
traffic exiting south onto Day Creek Boulevard.
• Day Creek Boulevard/SR-210 Eastbound Ramps-Addition of a free northbound right tum lane. Conversion
of eastbound shared left tum/through/right tum lane to a shared through/right tum lane.
Day Creek Boulevard/Highland Avenue-Addition of dedicated northbound and southbound right turn lanes.
Conversion of westbound shared through/right tum lane to a dedicated right tum lane. Modification of signal
phasing to provide right tum overlap phasing for westbound right tum movement.
Etiwanda Avenue/Arrow Route-Addition of a second northbound through lane,a second southbound through
lane, a second eastbound through lane,a second eastbound left turn lane, a second westbound left tum lane, and
a dedicated northbound right tum lane.
Finding: Impacts at these locations are analyzed in Section 4.1 of the FEIR. The FEIR analysis identified the
preceding mitigation measures that would maintain intersections under year 2020 with project at
acceptable levels of service. These measures are infeasible, and, in accordance with the
Development Agreement for the project,will not be imposed by the City. Level of service impacts
at these locations will be significant and unavoidable.
Facts in Support of the Finding: As shown on Tables S-3 and S-5 of the FEIR, the cost of making these
improvements would exceed three million dollars, of which the project's "fair share" would be more than four
hundred thousand dollars.
Requiring the developer to pay any portion of this cost, however, would render the project financially infeasible
for development. A pro-forma economic projection of development costs and estimated economic returns for the
project has been submitted by the developer and independently reviewed by the City's economic consultant.
The pro-forma shows that the developer's anticipated "cash on cost" return is slightly less that the 12% return
or "h urdle rate" ordinarily needed to induce a developer to move forward with a project of this type and scope.
Accordingly, any additional cost, contribution or exaction beyond the amounts budgeted in the proforma would
make the project an undesirable investment, and it would not be developed. The intersection mitigation
described above is not within the pro-forma budget. Consequently, the above stated mitigation measures are not
feasible, and will not be imposed.
d. Potential Delays in Implementation of Traffic and Circulation Improvements
Significant Unavoidable Impact: Impact 4.1.5. Several of the mitigation measures for Traffic and Circulation
impacts require the payment of a "fair share" contribution by the project, rather than requiring the project to pay
the entire cost of the improvement or guaranty that it be installed and completed by the time the project opens.
Other measures identify the City or a CFD as a funding source. If the remainder of the funding from other
sources is not timely obtained, or if the improvements are delayed for other reasons, the project may operate
with additional unmitigated traffic impacts.
29
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 34 of 42
Finding: Impacts from the project before mitigation are analyzed in Section 4.1 of the FEIR and will be
significant. These impacts could be avoided if the City required the project to pay 100 percent of the
cost of each improvement and to assure or guaranty that the project would not open until all required
improvements were installed. Such a requirement is infeasible,and will not be imposed by the City.
Accordingly, level of service impacts at locations where the developer is contributing a "fair
share" may be significant and unavoidable if the remainder of the funding is not available when
needed or the improvements are otherwise delayed.
Facts in Support of the Finding: As shown on Tables S-3 and S-5 of the FEIR, the cost of all the offsite traffic
improvements needed to fully mitigate project impacts exceeds 85 million dollars.
Requiring the developer to pay any portion of this cost beyond its fair share for the mitigation being imposed,
however, would render the project financially infeasible for development. A pro-forma economic projection of
development costs and estimated economic returns for the project has been submitted by the developer and
independently reviewed by the City's economic consultant. The pro-forma shows that the developer's
anticipated "cash on cost" return is slightly less that the 12% return or "h urdle rate" ordinarily needed to induce
a developer to move forward with a project of this type and scope. Accordingly, any additional cost,
contribution or exaction beyond the amounts budgeted in the proforma would make the project an undesirable
investment, and it would not be developed. In addition, construction financing and leasing practices for a large
development like the project will require the project developer to commit to a an opening date for the project,
and will not allow the opening to be postponed because of delays in funding or completing offsite traffic
improvements. Consequently, the above stated mitigation measures are not feasible, and will not be imposed.
2. AIR QUALITY
a. Short-term Construction Related Impacts
Significant Unavoidable Impact: Impact 4.3.1. Peak grading and construction emissions would exceed the
SCAQMD thresholds for the criteria pollutants of NOx and PM10, which are 100 pounds per day and 150 pounds per
day,respectively. Emissions of other criteria pollutants would be below the standards. Implementation of mitigation
measures will minimize air quality impacts;however,the impacts will remain significant.
Finding: Issues associated with the proposed project's effects on air quality are discussed in Section 4.3 of
the FEIR. The City is imposing the following mitigation measures that would reduce the level of
construction related emissions,but not below a level of significance.
4.3.1A The Construction Contractor shall select the construction equipment used on site based on low emission
factors and high energy efficiency. The Construction Contractor shall ensure that construction grading
plans include a statement that all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with
the manufacturer's specifications.
4.3.1B The Construction Contractor shall utilize electric or diesel powered equipment in lieu of gasoline powered
engines where feasible.
4.3.IC The Construction Contractor shall ensure that construction 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.ID The Construction Contractor shall time the construction activities so as not to interfere with peak hour
traffic and minimize obstruction of through traffic lanes adjacent to the site; if necessary, a flagperson shall
be retained to maintain safety adjacent to existing roadways.
30
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 35 of 42
4.3.1E The Construction Contractor shall support and encourage ridesharing and transit incentives for the
construction crew.
4.3.1F Dust generated by the development activities shall be retained on site and kept to a minimum by following
the dust control measures listed below.
a. During clearing, grading, earth moving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials, water trucks or
sprinkler systems shall be used to prevent dust from leaving the site and to create a crust after each day's
activities cease.
b. During construction,water 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 minimum,this would include wetting down such areas in the
late morning and after work is completed for the day,and whenever wind exceeds 15 miles per hour.
c. After clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation is completed, the entire area of disturbed soil shall be
treated immediately by pickup of the soil until the area is paved or otherwise developed so that dust generation
will not occur.
d. Soil stockpiled for more than two days shall be covered,kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust
generation.
e. Trucks transporting soil, sand, cut or fill materials, and/or construction debris to or from the site shall be tarped
from the point of origin.
43.1G The Construction Contractor shall utilize as much as possible precoated/natural colored building materials,
water based or low VOC coating, and coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency,
such as a high volume low pressure (HVLP) spray method, or manual coatings application such as paint
brush,hand roller, trowel,spatula,dauber, rag,or sponge.
Despite implementation of the stated mitigation, short-term construction emissions would exceed the SCAQMD's
daily thresholds for the criteria pollutants of NOx and PMio.. Therefore, impacts associated with this issue would
remain significant and unavoidable.
Facts in Support of the Finding: Grading and construction activities would cause combustion emissions from
utility engines, heavy-duty construction vehicles, haul trucks, and vehicles transporting the construction crew.
Exhaust emissions during grading and construction activities envisioned on site would vary daily as construction
activity levels change. It is assumed that construction or building erection would not begin until after mass grading
on the project site is completed. Therefore, there would be no overlap in emissions from grading or building
erection/construction.
Construction emissions associated with grading of the proposed project have been estimated based on the
methodology outlined in the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook and on analysis of similar projects. Fugitive
dust emissions are generally associated with demolition, land clearing, exposure, vehicle, and equipment travel on
unpaved roads and with cut and fill operations. Dust generated during construction activities would vary
substantially depending on the level of activity, the specific operations, and weather conditions. Nearby sensitive
receptors and workers may be exposed to blowing dust, depending upon prevailing wind conditions. Assuming that
a limited amount of debris will be imported or exported from the project site,exhaust emissions from haul trucks and
dust from soil transfer are expected to be minimal.
The SCAQMD estimates that each acre of graded surface creates about 26.4 pounds of PMko per workday during the
construction phase of the project and 21.8 pounds of PMio per hour from dirt/debris pushing per dozer. Because the
project area covers 174 acres, it is not expected that the entire project site would be graded at the same time.
Therefore,it is assumed that a maximum of ten acres of land would be under mass grading on any one day. It is also
31
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 36 of 42
assumed that two dozers would be used up to eight hours a day each. A maximum of one acre of open stockpiles
would occur on the project site,which will generate 85.6 ppd of PMio. Therefore,a total of 698 pounds of PMio per
day would be generated from soil disturbance without mitigation during peak construction phase. This level of dust
emission would exceed the SCAQMD threshold of 150 pounds per day.
The project will be required to comply with regional rules, which would assist in reducing the short-term air
pollutant emissions. SCAQMD Rule 403 requires that fugitive dust be controlled with best available control
measures so that the presence of such dust does not remain visible in the atmosphere beyond the property line of the
emission source. In addition, SCAQMD Rule 402 requires implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent
fugitive dust from creating a nuisance off site. Implementation of these dust suppression techniques as required by
the SCAQMD can reduce the fugitive dust generation (and thus the PMio component) by 50 to 75 percent.
Assuming a mitigating efficiency of 50 percent by implementation of the standard mitigation, daily PM10 emissions
from soil disturbance would be reduced to approximately 349 pounds. Compliance with these rules would reduce
impacts on nearby sensitive receptors. However, fugitive dust impacts would remain adverse. Mitigation measures
would be required.
It is assumed further that, on a peak grading day, a total of 24 workers would be working on the project site.
Assuming an average 50 mile round trip commute length for every worker, emissions from the daily 1,200 miles of
travel by worker commute would generate 10.3 pounds per day(ppd)of CO, 1.9 ppd of ROC, 3.3 ppd of NOx ,0.6
ppd of SOx,and 1.2 ppd of PMio. As shown,peak grading day construction equipment emissions would exceed the
SCAQMD daily thresholds for the criteria pollutants NOx and PMio.
Because short-term construction emissions would exceed the SCAQMD daily threshold for,NO,and PMio,even after
implementation of the above stated mitigation,this impact remains significant.
b. Air Pollutants with Regional Impacts
Significant Unavoidable Impact: Impact 43.2. Long-term air pollutant emission impacts are those associated
with changes in permanent usage of the project site. Area sources include on-site emissions such as natural gas
consumption and emissions associated with consumer products. Mobile source emissions result from vehicle trips
associated with the proposed project. These impacts would be potentially significant
Finding: Issues associated with the proposed project's effects on au quality are discussed in Section 4.3 of
the FEIR. The City is imposing the following mitigation measures that will reduce regional air
quality impacts,but not below a level of significance.
43.2A The project shall comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations or City requirements regarding
energy conservation standards.
43.211 Use of transportation demand measures (TDM), such as preferential parking for vanpooling/carpooling,
subsidy for transit pass or vanpooling/carpooling, flextime work schedule, bike racks, lockers, showers, and on-site
cafeteria,shall be incorporated in the design of the commercial land uses.
4.3.2C Prewire houses for electrical charging EV cars, if feasible. Install conduits for fiber optics for residential and
non-residential uses.
43.2D Install EV chargers or alternative fuel stations (natural gas) for community wide use at key commercial and
public location(s),if feasible.
43.2E The developer shall contract with a mitigation monitor to assure compliance with and implementation of the
mitigation monitoring program.
32
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 37 of 42
Total emissions from long-term project operations would include stationary sources added to the mobile sources.
The emissions for CO,NOx, ROC,and PM10 would exceed the SCAQMD thresholds for daily operations emissions.
No feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce long-term air quality emissions from project related vehicles
to a less than significant level. Transportation demand management (TDM) measures and the other measures
imposed as described above are effective in reducing mobile source emissions, but cannot feasibly reduce impacts
below a level of significance, particularly with a retail-based development in a suburban setting. Therefore, the
project would have a significant impact on air quality after mitigation.
Facts in Support of the Finding: Proposed on-site uses include approximately 2.45 million square feet of retail,
office, and civic uses, as well as up to 600 multiple family residential units on 174 acres of land. These land uses
would consume natural gas and electricity. While the consumption of electricity and natural gas by the proposed on-
site land uses would not in itself exceed the emission thresholds established by the SCAQMD, when combined with
mobile emissions resulting from project related traffic would be significant(Table 4.3.G of the FEIR).
There would be 57,312 daily vehicular trips associated with the proposed on-site uses. Based on the latest
URBEMIS7G air quality model, the proposed land uses would generate criteria pollutant emissions that would
exceed the operational thresholds for CO,ROC,PM lo and NOx established by the SCAQMD.
No feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce long-term air quality emissions from project related vehicles
to a less than significant level. Therefore,the project would have a significant impact on air quality after mitigation.
C. Cumulative Air Quality Impacts
Significant Unavoidable Impact: Development of the proposed project will cumulatively impact air quality within
the South Coast Air Basin, and area which is designated nonattainment for
ozone,PMio, and CO.
Finding: Both long-term stationary (on-site energy consumption) and mobile (vehicular traffic) sources
would contribute to regional criteria pollutant emissions. Because the Basin is a nonattainment
zone for ozone and CO, these emissions would cumulatively contribute to significant regional air
quality impacts. This cumulative effect is significant and unavoidable.
Facts in Support of the Finding: The cumulative study area for air quality impacts encompasses the Basin, which
is designated nonattainment for ozone, PM10, and CO. Operational emissions associated with the proposed project
in conjunction with build out of the City's General Plan will result in significant, cumulative air quality impacts
within the Basin. Emission of NOX from construction of the proposed project would cumulatively contribute to
regional ozone formation. Because the Basin is a nonattainment zone for ozone, this is a significant air quality
impact. Emissions of criteria pollutants and fugitive dust from construction activity would result in mostly localized
air quality impacts in the project vicinity. It is not anticipated that construction at other off-site locations would add
to the project related localized air quality impacts.
V. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Chapter 6.0 of the FEIR includes four project alternatives. These alternative address potential impacts associated with:
I) a no-build alternative, 2) an enclosed mall alternative, 3) a retail/civic alternative, and 4) an increased residential
alternative. The City has considered these alternatives for the development of the Victoria Gardens project and makes
the following findings.
33
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 38 of 42
No Build Alternative. Under this alternative,no development would take place on site. The project site would be
retained in its current condition. No ground disturbing activities would occur, nor would any form of structure or
facility be erected.
Finding: Under this alternative, the significant traffic, air quality, and noise impacts associated with the
proposed Project would not occur. The project site has been planned for "Regionally Related"
commercial uses for over twenty years. While this alternative would significantly reduce the
traffic, air quality, noise, and public service impacts associated with development of the proposed
project, allowing the project site to remain vacant and undeveloped would not realize the goals and
objectives stated in City's General Plan and the stated objectives of the proposed Project.
Accordingly,this alternative is rejected as infeasible.
Enclosed Mall Alternative. Development of the "Enclosed Mall" would allow construction of an enclosed mall
containing the retail, entertainment, and restaurant uses envisioned in the proposed project's "downtown" area
(approximately 1.543 million square feet). While occupying the same acreage as the proposed project, the intensity
of residential, outlying retail, and office uses would be reduced by one-half, resulting in construction of up to 300
residential units,285,000 square feet of office uses,and 150,000 square feet of outlying retail uses. Additionally,the
Enclosed Mall Alternative will include 40,000 square feet of civic uses.
Finding: Under the Enclosed Mall Alternative, impacts related to biological resources, cultural resources,
and the provision of public services would be similar to the proposed project. Impacts related to
public facilities would be proportionally reduced. Traffic volumes would be reduced; thereby,
triggering reductions in the noise levels and operational emissions. While the total amount of
developed uses envisioned under the Enclosed Mall Alternative equals 81 percent of that included
in the proposed project, and will offer a varied mix of retail, office, and residential uses, it will not
allow for the development of the"downtown"environment which is the keystone component of the
proposed project. In addition, while some impacts of the Proposed project could be reduced by
scaling back the proposed Project so that it would match the development densities of the Enclosed
Mall Alternative and still provide an open air mixed-use center, the substantial reduction in
residential dwelling units, office space and ancillary retail uses would preclude the successful
integration of a"new downtown"live-work environment that the City seeks to achieve on this Site.
Accordingly,this alternative is rejected as infeasible.
Retail/Civic Alternative. Under this alternative, the 174-acre project site would be developed with retail and civic
uses only. Using a Floor Area Ratio of 0.25, a maximum of 1,851,300 square feet of retail uses would be permitted
within the limits of the proposed project site. Additionally,40,000 square feet of civic uses would be developed on 4
acres within the limits of the project site. Rather than being developed under a Master Plan, development would
occur in a more piecemeal fashion.
Finding: The Retail/Civic Alternative would result in the development of approximately 1,851,300 square
feet (or approximately 77 percent of that of the proposed project) of retail uses on the 170.0 acre
project site and 40,000 square feet of civic uses on 4.0 acres. Implementation of this alternative
would substantially modify the project site,resulting in the loss of on-site vegetation,and replacing
undeveloped land with urban uses. While impacts to biological and cultural resources would be
similar to those resulting from the proposed project, implementation of the Retail/Civic
Alternative, traffic volumes would be reduced; thereby, triggering reductions in the noise levels
and operational emissions. Accordingly,this alternative is rejected as infeasible.
While the development of the Retail/Civic Alternative will permit the development of 1,851,300
square feet of retail uses, it is not possible at this time to identify the location, configuration, type
or mix of uses that may occur on-site. Piecemeal development may occur. While development
within the project site will continue to be governed by applicable design guidelines established and
34
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 39 of 42
enforced by the City, the potential for inconsistent or incompatible development is a possibility
under this alternative. Because the blend of retail, office, residential, and civic uses envisioned
under the proposed Project will be Master Planned, it will be possible to establish design
guidelines and performance standards to ensure the compatibility and consistency of the proposed
Project's varied uses. Additionally, without the residential or office components missing from the
Retail/Civic Alternative, the opportunity to develop the "inviting" downtown environment,
envisioned as an integral part of the proposed Project,would be lost.
Increased Residential Alternative. Development of the project site under this alternative would permit the
construction of up to 1,500 multiple-family residential units on 100 acres (15 dwelling units/acre), 435,600 square
feet of retail uses on 40 acres (FAR 0.25), 522,720 square feet of office uses (FAR 0.40) on 30 acres, and 40,000
square feet of civic uses on 4 acres.
Finding: The Increased Residential Alternative would increase the number of residential uses developed on the
174-acre project site. Implementation of this alternative would substantially modify the project site,
resulting in the loss of on-site vegetation, and replacing vacant land with urban uses. While impacts
to biological and cultural resources would be similar to those resulting from the proposed project,
implementation of this alternative would result in a reduction in ADT volumes; thereby, triggering
corresponding decreases in vehicle emissions and noise sources. Implementation of this alternative
would result in significant increases in the water demand, wastewater generation, and the student
populations at local schools.
Development of the majority of the project site with residential uses would preclude construction of
the varied mix of uses and the establishment of the "downtown"venue which are key components of
the proposed Project. Accordingly,this alternative is rejected as infeasible.
VI. PROJECT BENEFITS
The project will provide the following benefits to the City, the Redevelopment Agency, and the community at
large:
1. Establishment of a master-planned "downtown" that incorporates complementary retail/commercial, office,
residential and civic uses.
2. The Victoria Gardens Project provides a mix of cultural and regional commercial uses that gives the City a
stable,not transitory,type of development.
3. The Victoria Gardens Project provides a mix of residential,office and commercial uses at an intimate scale
that offers lifestyle choices not generally available to residents elsewhere in the City.
4. The Victoria Gardens Project offers an unprecedented opportunity to add a performing arts and library
complex to the community.
5. The Victoria Gardens Project offers exceptional economic prominence,strengthened economic base for the
City, elimination of economic "leakage" to surrounding areas, direct and indirect stimulation of other
economic investments in the community,jobs opportunity for workers, and overall fiscal benefits for the
residents.
35
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 40 of 42
6. The Victoria Gardens Project provides some major backbone infrastructure that allow for adequate
circulation, delivery of utilities, control of drainage and disposal of waste water, which would not be made
available to the community without the Project's development.
7. The Victoria Gardens Project will meet each of the objectives set forth in Sections I and II.B above in these
Findings.
VII. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The City of Rancho Cucamonga adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations with respect to the significant
unavoidable impacts identified above and in the FEIR, specifically(1)Traffic and Circulation related to(a)Year 2007
with project conditions,(b)Year 2020 with project conditions,and(2)Air Quality related to(a)short-tern construction
emissions,(b)long-term operational emissions,and(c)cumulative regional air quality.
This section of findings specifically addresses the requirements of Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, which
requires the lead agency to balance the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable significant impacts and to
determine whether the impacts are acceptably overridden by the project benefits. California Public Resources Code
21002 provides: "In the event specific economic, social, and other conditions make infeasible such project
alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects can be approved in spite of one or more significant
effects thereof." Section 21002.1(c) provides: "If economic, social, or other conditions make it infeasible to
mitigate one or more significant effects of on the environment of a project, the project may nonetheless be
approved or carried out at the discretion of a public agency... " Finally, California Administrative Code, Title
14, 15093(a) states: "If the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental
effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered 'acceptable The City finds that the previously stated
major project benefits (see Section VI above) of the Victoria Gardens project outweigh the unavoidable significant
adverse environmental impacts noted above. Each of the separate benefits of the proposed development cited in Section
VI above is hereby detemrined to be, in itself and independent of the other project benefits, a basis for overriding all
unavoidable environmental impacts identified in the FEIR and these Findings.
The City's findings set forth in the preceding sections have identified all of the adverse environmental impacts and the
feasible mitigation measures which can reduce impacts to less than significant levels where feasible, or to the lowest
feasible levels where significant impacts remain. The findings have also analyzed alternatives to determine whether
there are reasonable or feasible alternatives to the proposed action or whether they might reduce or eliminate the
significant adverse impacts of the proposed Project. The FEIR presents evidence that implementing the development of
the Victoria Gardens project will cause significant adverse impacts, which cannot be substantially mitigated to
nonsignificant levels. These significant impacts have been outlined above and the City makes the following finding:
Finding: Having considered the unavoidable adverse impacts of the Victoria Gardens project,the City hereby
determines that all feasible mitigation has been adopted to reduce or avoid the potentially significant
impacts identified in the FEIR,and that no additional feasible mitigation is available to further reduce
significant impacts. Further, the City finds that economic, social, and other considerations of the
Victoria Gardens project outweigh the unavoidable adverse impacts described above. The project
benefits and other reasons for accepting these remaining unmitigated impacts are described in these
Findings. In making this finding,the City has balanced the benefits of the Victoria Gardens project as
developed in accordance with the proposed Master Plan against its unavoidable environmental
impacts and has indicated its willingness to accept those risks.
Furthermore,the City has considered the alternatives to the project,and makes the following finding:
36
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 41 of 42
• Finding: Alternatives to the Victoria Gardens project that might have been capable of reducing identified
impacts have been considered and rejected because the alternatives are not feasible and fail to provide
economic and community benefits that will result from the Victoria Gardens project.
The City further finds that the Victoria Gardens project benefits are substantial and override each unavoidable impact of
theP J ro'ect,as follows:
1) Findings Regarding Traffic and Circulation Impacts
The Victoria Gardens project's imp acts to intersections, streets and freeway segments remain significant
and unavoidable because paying for improvements other than those provided by the Mitigation
Monitoring Program would render the Project financially infeasible. Requiring the developer in pay any
portion of this cost, however, would render the project financially infeasible for development. A pro-
forma economic projection of development costs and estimated economic returns for the project has been
submitted by the developer and independently reviewed by the City's economic consultant. The pro-
forma shows that the developer's anticipated "cash on cost" return is slightly less that the 12% return
or "h urdle rate" ordinarily needed to induce a developer to move forward with a project of this type and
scope. Accordingly, any additional cost, contribution or exaction beyond the amounts budgeted in the
proforma would make the project an undesirable investment, and it would not be developed. The
freeway segment mitigation described above is not within the pro-forma budget. Consequently, the
above stated mitigation measures are not feasible, and will not be imposed.
This impact is overridden by the new commercial/retail, civic, office, and housing opportunities,
• infrastructure improvements, and other benefits provided by the Victoria Gardens project.
2) Findings Regarding Air Quality Impacts
Construction activities resulting from development of the proposed project,including mass grading,will result
in short-term increases in air emissions that exceed applicable thresholds of the SCAQMD, despite the
imposition of mitigation measures. Short-term increases in air emissions from construction can be mitigated
but are not entirely avoidable, as construction activities within this region will continue to provide necessary
and vital housing. Emission of air pollutants resulting from project-related traffic will contribute to a
significant long-tenor air quality. These impacts are overridden by the commercial/retail, civic, office, and
housing opportunities, infrastructure improvements, and other benefits provided by the Victoria Gardens
project.
3) Findings Regarding Cumulative Impacts
The Victoria Gardens project will contribute to ctnnulative air quality impacts including short-term impacts to
air quality during construction or other major projects in the area and on a long term basis as a source of
vehicle emission from the proposed project and other projects in the region contributing to an increase in
pollutants. Since the South Coast Air Basin is a nonattainment area for federal air quality standards,
cumulative increases are considered significant and unavoidable. This impact is overridden by the new
commercial/retail, civic, office, and housing opportunities, infrastructure improvements and other
benefits provided by the Victoria Gardens project.
As the Lead Agency for the FEIR,the City has reviewed the project and the FEIR and fully understands the
• Project proposed by Forest City Development. Further, the City finds that all potential adverse
environmental impacts and all feasible mitigation measures to reduce these impacts have been identified in
the FEIR and public testimony. These impacts and mitigation measures are discussed in Section IV above.
37
Resolution No. 02-056
Page 42 of 42
The City also finds that a reasonable range of alternatives was considered in the FEIR and this document,
Section V above, and that no feasible alternatives which substantially lessen project impacts are available
for adoption.
The City has identified economic and social benefits and important public policy objectives enumerated in
Section VI above, which will result from implementing the Victoria Gardens project. The City has balanced
these substantial social and economic benefits against the unavoidable significant adverse effects of the
proposed project. Given the substantial social and economic benefits that will accrue to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, and the region, from developing the proposed project, the City finds that the benefits identified
herein override the unavoidable environmental effects.
VIII. ADOPTION OF A MONITORING/REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE CEQA
MITIGATION MEASURES
Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code requires the City adopt a monitoring or reporting program regarding the
changes in the project and mitigation measures imposed to lessen or avoid significant effects on the environment. The
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program(MNW),included as Appendix H in the FEfR, is adopted as modified,
because it fulfills the CEQA mitigation monitoring requirements:
a) The MMRP is designed to ensure compliance with the changes in the project and mitigation measures imposed
on the project during project implementation;and
b) Measures to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment are fully enforceable through permit
conditions,agreements or other measures.
38