Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003/06/11 - Agenda Packet1 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA (~UiCAMONGA JUNE 11, 2003 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Council Chamber 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Chairman McNiel Vice Chairman Maaas Coin Fletcher _ Com McPhail _ Com Stewart _ II. ANNOUNCEMENTS III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 28, 2003 May 28, 2003 Adjourned Meeting May 31, 2003 Adjourned Meeting IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS The following rtems are public hearings m which concerned individuals may voce their opinion of the related pro/ect Please wait to be recognized by the Chapman and address the Commission by stating your name and address All such opm~ons shall be l~mded to 5 minutes per ~ndiwdual for each project Please sign m after speaMng A ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-00254 - JPI WESTCOAST DEVELOPMENT, L P - A proposed amendment to Section 2 5 5 6, of I PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA JUNE 11, 2003 2 RANCHO (^.UCAMONGA the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Speafic Plan, and Table III-9, of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan to increase the allowable number of multi-faintly residential units from 1,388 to 1,887 - APN 0210-082-47 Related File Subarea 18 Speafic Plan Amendment DRC2003-00255 An Environmental Impact Report was previously certified m June 1994 The addendum is being prepared m accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act B ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-00255 - JPI WESTCOAST DEVELOPMENT, L P - A request to modify the permitted land uses allowed within Subarea 18 Planning Area VII to allow High Density residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre), located at the northwest comer of Milliken Avenue and Fourth Street - APN 0210-082-47 Related File General Plan Amendment DRC2003-00254 An Environmental Impact Report was previously certified in June 1994 The addendum is being prepared m accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act C CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00953 -CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to expand an existing automotive technical school of 71,872 square feet into an adjacent tenant space of 31,680 square feet to completely occupy the building of 103,552 square feet, located in the General Industrial Distract (Subarea 11) at 11530 6th Street -APN 0229-262-37 V. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS D PRELIMINARY REVIEW DRC2003-00477 - ETIWANDA SCHOOL DISTRICT - A review of the proposed site acgwsition of approximately 9 39 acres of land for an elementary school located m the Mixed-Use District of the Victoria Arbors Village on the west side of Victoria Park Lane, south of Base Line Road -APN 0227-171-29 and 30 VI. PUBLIC COMMENTS This ~s the time and place for the general public to address the comm~ss~on Items to be discussed here are those that do not already appear on this agenda VII. COMMISSION BUSINESS _ PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA JUNE 11, 2003 3 RANCHO CIICAMONGA VIII. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11 00 p m ad(ournment time if hems go beyond that time, they shall be heard only wdh the consent o(the Commission THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL ADJOURN TO A WORKSHOP IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING IN THE RAINS ROOM TO DISCUSS PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2003-00503 - JOHN LAING HOMES AND PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2003-00028 -MARKET PLACE PROPERTIES. 1, Gad Sanchez, Planning Commission Secretary of the Cdy of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 5, 2003 at least 72 hours poor to the meeting per Government amonga e, Rancho Cuc Code Section 54964 2 at 10500 Civic Center Dnv nn // If you need speaal assistance or accommodations to participate m this meeting, please contact the Planning Division at (909) 477-2750 Notification of 48 hours poor to the meeting wilt enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility Listening devices are available for the heanng impaired Vicinity Map Planning Commission June 11, 2003 A anc * City Hall City of Rancho Cucamonga ~ JUNE 11, 2003 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA INDEX ITEM NO. ITEM TITLE PAGES A ends 2 - 4 A - B Addendum to Environmental Impact Report & 5 - 161 General Plan Amendment DRC2003-00254 Addendum to Environmental Impact Report & Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00255 C Conditional Use Permit DRC2002-00953 162 - 196 D Prelimina Review DRC2003-00477 197 - 202 • H E C I T Y O F ANCttO CUCAMONGA Sld1L 1~1 L DATE June 11, 2003 TO; Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FF{O~ Brad Buller, City Planner gy, Debra Meier, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT; ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-00254 -JPI WESTCOAST DEVELOPMENT, L.P. - A proposed amendment to Section 2.5.5.6 of the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan, and Table III-9, of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan to increase the allowable number of multi-family residential units from 1,388 to 1,887 -APN• 0210-082-47. Related File: Rancho Cucamonga • IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00255. An Environmental Impact Report was previously certified in June 1994. The addendum is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND RANCHO CUCAMONGA IASP SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-00255 -JPI WESTCOAST DEVELOPMENT, L.P. - A request to modify the permitted land uses allowed within Subarea 18 Planning Area VII to allow High Density residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre), located at the northwest corner of Milliken Avenue and Fourth Street -APN: 0210-082-47. Related File: General Plan Amendment DRC2003-00254. An Environmental Impact Report was previously certified in June 1994. The addendum is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surroundino Zonino: Protect Site -Planning Area VII of the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specrfic Plan - Mixed-Use CommerciaUlndustnal North - Planning VIII of the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specrfic Plan - Mixed-Use Residential/Senior Housing and Office South - City of Ontario -Ontario Center/Commeraal East - Industrial District Subarea 12 -Industrial Park West - Planning Area VI of the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan -Mixed-Use Multiple Family Residential ITEMS A & B PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2003-00254 & DRC2003-00255-JPI WESTCOAST DEVELOPMENT, L. P. • June 11, 2003 Page 2 B. General Plan Designations: Protect Site - Mixed Use North - Mixed Use South - City of Ontario -Commercial East - Industrial Park West - Mixed Use C. Surrounding Land Use and Site Characteristics: The protect site is located at the southeast corner of the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan at the northwest corner of Milliken Avenue and 4th Street The site contains an abandoned vineyard, and a City of Ontario well site is located along Milliken Avenue north of 4th Street. North - Existing office building South - City of Ontario -Kohl's Department Store East - Existing office buildings and vacant land within the master planned Bixby Business Park West - Existing Medium-High density residential apartment development referred to as Ironwood and Fairway Palms Apartments ANALYSIS: • A The applicant is requesting an amendment to the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan to add multi-family residential as a permitted use within the Mixed Use Land Use designation for Specific Plan Planning Area VII and a General Plan Amendment that includes a modification to Table III-9 of the General Plan to indicate the modified allocation of residential uses. Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment: The Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan was approved for the General Dynamics properties in June 1994. The Specific Plan addressed the reuse of over 1,000,000 square feet of existing office space and the future development of 300 acres of adfacent undeveloped land. The intent of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan was to create a unique master planned protect that integrated a broader mix of uses in this area, including office, light industrial, hoteUconference, retail, 'restaurant, entertainment, multiple-family residential, and research and development uses around a championship golf course The Specific Plan has been amended three times since the original approval in 1994. in November 2000, the City Councl approved an amendment to add multi-family residential development as a permitted use in the Mixed-Use Planning Area IX; in May 2001, the City Council approved an amendment to add multi-family residential development as a permitted use in Mixed-Use Planning Area VI; and in September 2002, the City Council approved an amendment to add market rate senior housing as a permitted use in Mixed-Use Planning Area VIII These amendments equated to a total of 1,352 dwelling units. Planning Area VII consists of 24 acres, and currently the Specific Plan allows for approximately 730,000 square feet of bwlding space for mixed commercial uses such as retail, restaurant, banking, and office uses The proposed Specific Plan amendment would add multi-family residential as a permitted use in the planning area, utilizing up to ~~~ a PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2003-00254 & DRC2003-00255 -JPI WESTCOAST DEVELOPMENT, L.P. . June 11, 2003 Page 3 20 of the 24 acres within the planning area, and allow up to 499 dwelling units at a density of 24-30 dwelling units per acre Planning Area VII also includes a minimum of 4 acres of mixed-use commercal development. General Plan Amendment. The General Plan Amendment involves Section 2.5 5 6 which pertains to 'Special Planning Direction for Mixed-Use Areas'/Industrial Area Subarea 18 Speafic Plan, Table III-9. The percentages of multi-family residential and commercial/industnal land uses represented in Table III-9 will be amended to be consistent with the modifications of the Speafic Plan. B. Environmental Assessment: The Subarea 18 Specific Plan was approved in conjunction with an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and the Mixed Use Land Use concept was also addressed in the General Plan Update and EIR adopted m 2001. The Calrfomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) provides that once a Master EIR has been certified, no further EIR or Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects within the scope of the Master EIR. However, Planning Area VII of the Specific Plan will be amended to include multi-family residential as an allowed use, and an addendum to the previously certified EIR was prepared to address the issue of incorporating residential development into the Planning Area. . In summary, the addendum analyzes the differences between the land uses that were previously approved by the City for the Subarea 18 Specific Plan and the City of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, and the currently proposed land uses for Planning Area VII. The proposed residential development will have less environmental impact than other mixed uses, such as industrial, office or commercial; and the residential land use would result in a reduction m the generation of vehicular traffic when compared to the existing approved land uses for the Planning Area. The amendment to the Subarea 18 Specific Plan has been prepared m conjunction with an addendum to the previously certified Rancho Cucamonga Subarea 18 Specific Plan EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 93102055). An a to the previously certified City of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report and the previously certified Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Speafic Plan Subarea 18 Final EIR is the appropriate documentation because some changes and additions are necessary to allow for multiple family residential uses as a permitted use within the Mixed-Use land use designation of Planning Area VII within the Subarea 18 Specific Plan The addendum identified that there are no substantial changes m the project that require major revisions to the previous EIR The appropriate findings of the addendum are included m the attached Resolution of Approval. CORRESPONDENCE. This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Vallev Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the project site. • ~4~b 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2003-00254 & DRC2003-00255 -JPI WESTCOAST DEVELOPMENT, L.P. . June 11, 2003 Page 4 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2003-00254 and the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00255, through adoption of the attached Resolutions recommending approval by the City Council, and to consider that the addendum is within the scope of the certified Master EIR for the project. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:DM!mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" -Applicant's letter of justification dated May 6, 2003 Exhibit "B" - Proposed amendment to the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Exhibit °C" - Letter of support from Meadows Realty Company dated May 5, 2003 Exhibit "D" - Letter of support from Richard Dick & Assoaates dated May 5, 2003 Exhibit "E° -Addendum to City of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final EIR and Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan Final EIR (provided under separate cover) Exhibit °F" -Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Speafic Plan (provided under separate cover) Draft Resolution recommending approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2003-00254 Draft Resolution recommending approval of Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00255 C~ A/~ ~ • LSA OTtleR OPPICH9 PT COLLINS LSA ASSOCIATBR INC ABtLHLBY S6$0 SPRUCH 9TAH8T SYtl PLOOR 909 781 93 r0 T8L IRVlNB 909 q81 g177 PA% PT AICHNOND ROC[LIN RIV BR81D6 CALIPORNIA 91507 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~1AY 0 82003 May 6, 2003 RECEIVED -PLANNING Ms Heidi Mather Regional Development Manager IPI Westcoast Development, L.P. 8910 University Center Lane, Suite 150 San Diego, California 92122 General Dynamics Planning Area VII GPA/SPA Subject. Deaz Ms. Mather. IPI Westcoast Development is proposing a General Plan AmendmenUSpecific Plan AmenPd~amm~g modify the land uses permitted in Planning Area VII of the General Dynazmcs Property Area VII is located on the northwest comer of the intersection AFourth~treetSan Bemazdmo County the City of Rancho Cucamonga. LSA A Traffic Impact Analyss (TIA) for the General Dynamics Congestion Management Program (CMP) oved b the City of Rancho Cucamonga and property in January,1994. The TIA was subsequently appr General Dynamics and the City of Rancho the San Bemazdmo Associated Govertunents (SANBAG)the intersection improvements that would be Cucamonga signed a development agreement idennfymg amics ro rty required in conjunction with the development of the General Dyn P Pe I.SA has analyzed the trap generation of the land uses pernutted in Planning Area VII under the proposed General Plan AmendmenUSpecific Plan Amendment and compared it to the trap generation assumed for the same Planning Area in the approved TIA. This letter summarizes the results of our analysis. The General Plan AmendmendSpecific Plan Amendment would permit 499 apartment units. 15, g p ak hour and squaze feet of restaurant uses, and 30,748 square feet of eneral retail uses. T e m. zes the m eneration rates from the daily trap generanon for the proposed lan Tn eGenerat on 6`" Fdition) Table A summan P ro osed land Institute of Transportation Engineers (1TE) P ~ hour. peak hour and daily trap generation for the proposed land uses. As shown mane the p.m• Pe uses are expected to generate 6,583 daily traps, with 588 trips occumng g Table A also summarizes the trap generanon for the land uses assumed for the Planmng Area in the approved General Dynatmcs TIA. As shown in Table A, the approved land uses are expected to generate 16,178 daily trips, with 1,755 traps occumng during the p m Peak hour Thus, the trap generanon of the proposed land uses is substantially lower than the trip generation approved for the Planning Area in the TIA, upon which the improvements identified m the General Dynazmcs development agreement were predicated ~, (/`/x.\\X~'' S/6/03(R VPw330VP1 Tnp Gee Letter wpd) ~/~ / y \ I I DHSIDN {{// 111 PLANNING eN VIRONMRNTAL SCIRNCes LSA AS SOCIAT83 INC i The proposed changes to the land uses approved for Planning Area e II a ion of the General Dynarmcs use changes that have substantially reduced the total potentral trip g property previous changes include the followrng• planning Area II -Approved for retarl, theater, recreational, and restaurant uses, now proposed for • 285 000 square feet of office uses. olf course planning Area III -Approved for office and retazl uses; now part of the g • planning Area N -Approved for office uses and a restaurant Pad; built with only the office uses • (Empire Lakes Corporate Center). planning Area V -Approved for hoteUconference center, retail, and restaurant uses, now proposed • for business park. Plannrng Area ~ _ Approved for office uses, under construction wrth 496 apartments. • plaaning Area IX -Approved for restaurant and office uses; burl[ with 521 apartments. • planning Area ~ - Approved for office, restaurant, and business park uses; now proposed for • distribution facrhty Table B presents a comparison of the total daily trip generation for the General Dynamics property as approved and with the cumulative rmpact of the land uses changes detarled above As shown in Table B, the project as originally approved was expected to generate 64,011 daily traps With the land use changes that have been rmplemented or are currently proposed, the entire General Dynamres property would be expected to generate 27,043 daily trips, which represents a reduction of over 57 percent. If you have any questions regarding the analysis presented rn this letter, please feel free to call me at (909)781-9310. Sincerely, LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. Steven Greene Project Manager 5/6/03(R Upw330UP1 Tnp Gen Letter wpd) ~/a c~ G9A ASSOCIAT E3 INC . Table A -General Dynamics planning Area VII Trip Generation Proposed Land Uses P.M. Peak Hour Land Use IINts In Out Total Daily Aparmtents 499 D U. Tnps/Umtt 0 42 0 20 0.62 6 63 Tnp Generation 210 100 310 3,308 Shopping Center 30.748 TSF Tnps/Umt2 1 80 1 94 3.74 42 92 Tnp Generation 55 60 115 1,320 Restaurant 15.000 TSF Tnps/[Jmt' 6 52 4 34 10.86 130 34 Tnp Generation 98 65 163 1,955 Total Parcel Tnp Generation 363 225 588 6,583 Approved Land Uses P.M. Peak Hour Laud Use Units In Out Total Daily Retat] 130 TSF Tnps/Umt° 2 98 2 98 S 96 64.05 Tnp Generation 388 388 776 8,327 Restaurant 20 TSF Tnps/Umt° 8 78 7 48 16.26 205 36 Tnp Generation 175 150 325 4,107 Bank 30 TSF Tnps/Umt° 7.63 9 72 17 35 140 61 Tnp Generation 229 292 521 4,218 Office 450 TSF Tnps/(Jmt° 0 21 104 1 25 9 72 Tnp Generation 96 467 563 4,375 Total Pazcel Tnp Generation 888 1,297 2,185 21,027 RetatVRestaurantPass-by reduction(39%) 220 210 430 4,849 Net New Pazcel Tnp Generation 668 1,087 1,755 16,178 t Ra[es based on Land Use 220 -Apartments from Institute of Trans nation Fat po grocers (ITE) Tnp Generation , 6th Edtnon s Ra[es based on Land Use 820 - Shopptag Center from ITE Tnp Generation , 6th Fd a Rates based on Land Use 832 - Htgh Turnover (Sn-!)own) Restaurant from ITE Tnp Generation , 6th Fd ° Rates for approved land uses are taken from the G ! D enera ynamics Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Jmpact Analysis (LSA, January 1994), which reti e d on ITE Tnp Generation , 5th Rdmon /~ (~ / ~ 5/6/2003 (R UPW3301model\GPTti Gen Co )/ ~ / p mp LSA ASSOCIATES INC Table B -General Dynamics Project Daily Trip Generation Comparison A roved (Per General natmcs TIA Actual or Currentl Pro sed/A raved d Use Stu Units Rate Tn s Land Use Srze Unrts Rate Tn amm~g Area I Golf Course 155 Acres 8 33 1,291 (No Chan a 1,291 leaning Area II (Proposed for Office Use) Retail 130 TSF 64 OS 8,327 Office 285 TSF 10 87 3,09 Theatre 12 Screens 153 33 1,840 Health Club 120 TSF 15 94 1,913 Restaurant 40 TSF 20536 8,214 Bowling Alley 60 TSF 33 33 2,000 d3ustment for mtarUrestaucarltpass-by (38%) 10,255 ubtotal 16,008 lannrng Area III (Part of golf course) Office 150 TSF 12 71 1,907 Golf Courx 19 Acres 8 33 15 Retarl 90 TSF 73 52 6,617 Restaurant 10 TSF 205 36 2,054 dlustmentforretail/rrstaurantpass-by(45%) 4,769 ubtotal 6,675 amm~g Area N (Office constructed wrthout restaurant) - Office (w/support retail) 240 TSF I1 33 2,720 Office 240 TSF 11 33 2,72 Restaurant 20 TSF 205.36 4,107 dlus[men[ for restaurant pass-by (75%) 1,027 ubmtal 3,747 among Area V (Proposed for business park, as specrfied below) HoteVCoof Ctr 150 Room 15 97 2,396 Lrght Industnal 133 TSF 6 SS 875 Office 150 TSF 12 71 1,907 Office 119 TSF 13 45 1, Retat 120 TSF 66 00 7,920 Restaurant 20 TSF 205 36 4,107 dlustment for retarUrestaurant pass-by (40%) 7,216 ubtotal 11,519 leaning Area VI (Approved for 496 apartments) 3,288 Office 425 TSF 986 4,190 amm~g Area VII (Proposed for uses below) Retarl 130 TSF 6405 8,327 Retarl 1,32 Restaurant 20 TSF 205 36 4,107 Restaurant 1,955 Bank 30 TSF 14061 4,218 Apartments 3,308 Office 450 TSF 9 72 4,375 dlustment for retatUrestaurantpass-by (39%) 7,585 ubtotal 16,178 amm~g Area VII[ (No change) 4,71 Office 150 TSF 1271 I,Q07 Restaurant 10 TSF 205 36 2,054 Business Park 160 TSF 14 37 2,299 d~uswent for restaurant pass-by (75%) 513 ubtotal 4,719 1 LJ 5/62003 (R VPW330\GD nip genWD'I) ~.} / ~ g LSA A990CIAT [9 INC Table B -General Dynamics Project Daily Trip Generation Comparison ~~ A roved er General amres TIA Acwal or Cwrentl Pro A ved d Use Stu Units Rate Tn Land Use Stu Units Rete Tn 8 Area ~ (Approved for 521 apartments) 3,4 Office 140 TSF 12 93 1,810 Restaurent 10 TSF 205.36 2,054 gu~pe~ paw 140 TSF 14 37 2,012 Jttsmtent for restaurant pass-by (75%) 513 ubtoml 4 335 8 Atea % (No change) 4.1 Retail 50 TSF 9165 4,583 g~~ p~ 150 TSF 14 37 2, L56 Jtrstment for retail pass-by (57%) 1,971 abro~ 4126 amm~g Area XI (Proposed for dtstnbunon facthty) Oda 115 TSF 1356 1,560 Warohouse 412 TSF 4S9 1,89 Restaurant 10 TSF 205.36 2,054 g p~ 150 TSF 14 37 2,156 Jusb~nt for restaurent pass-by (7596) 513 ubtoml 4,228 Metrohtilt Station 3,000 dJustment for internal TDM tnp capture (20%) 600 ubm~ 2,400 ennrn Area Subtotal 6,628 AL GROSS NEW TRIPS 80,015 , 33,80 AL TRIP CAPTURE (1096) 7.702 ~ 3.381 M/1'RANSIT REDUCTION 7,702 3,38 AL EFFECTIVE TRIP GENERATION 64,011 27.04 Nom: Tnp generation rates for origmaily approved development are from the 1TE Tnp Genenmon manual, Fifth Fdtnoa Tnp generenon rates for subsequently approved development are from the 1TE Tnp Generetron manual, Stith Edrnon. Tnp genereuon revs for Lrght Industrral and Ware hottse ate average of 1TE rates and rates from "'!tuck Ttip Generation Charecterrsbes of Nonresidential Land Uses", ITE Journal, July 1994, convened m passegoer car egwvelents a/aq af'frI• nr R.•~.~•c ~~n C't~ c : l,~In~~•~. ~i Gc~~•cR. ~ r_ P1_•i ~t 2.5.5.6 Industrial Specific Plan-Sub-Area 18 Mixed use The Sub-Area 18 Mined-Use area reflects the land use mined approved through the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan. This Mixed-Use area is bound oB the south by 4th Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the AT&SF Railroad, and on the west by Utica Street. The site surrounds an 18-hole golf coarse and includes the City's MetroGnk Station off Milliken Avenue. The intent of the Mixed Use Designation is to: • Promote planning flezibility to achieve more creative and imaginative employment-generation designs; • Integrate a wider range of retail commercial, service commercial, recreation and office uses within the industrial area of the City; and • Alkrvv for the sensitive inclusion of high-density residential development that offers high quality multi-family condominiums and apartments for employees desiring house close to work and transit. cable m-9 mUSTRtAL SPECffIC PLAN -SUB-AREA 18 MIXED-USE • Acreage Range • Average Density (ddaere) • Dwelling Uarta Estimated °Most Cau^ Lsad Use Percent Range Acres/Dwellia Uoid d Commercu4Retad, Source 15°/.-25'/e 34-57 acres 40 acres Comnierc,el, loons[ commeneml, ot5a (commeroml ~ f 0~10°e1 OlBre-Proteadoaal 40°/.-50% 90-115 acres S95 acres Medical Cotpofate Offices _ _ , < <___- 165 acres 5-71 acres Q I 71 acres CaJ 27 ddatrc 27 ddure TOTALS aw ~° lad[tatea hrget density. not a range Acttul density may i•emx up to 20 du/sc as long u the rotsl of 1,857 dweWag amts b sot exceeded. 2.5.5.7 Historic Alta Loma -Amethyst Site This site is a relatively small (3.24 acres), bat significant, site within the historic Alta Loma commercial area. Once the location of a large citrus packinghouse, the site, sow vacant, is rx r , P.I,gi' llt.1. !kr•8ri 1 ~. ?OD1 . ~'1~4a L't L'.1?r .n ::4'1 err ..'i:f :J lt.xw Fr?u" L.. yfinnj) yn,.y :W. 1lv'A',~1~ ''^•~•ja MEADOWS REALTY COMPANY 190 Newport Center Drive, Suite 100 Newport Beach, CA 92660 (O) 949.644.1860 (I~ 949.644.1142 CITY CF RANCHO CUCAMONGA May 5, 2003 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission P.O Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re: JPI at Empire Lakes Center MAY 0 82003 RECEIVCD -PLANNING Gentlemen: The Fait Family Trust has had a long and successful relationship investing in real • estate with Richard Dick and Associates. We are extremely pleased with out success at Empire Lakes Centet as aze out tenants in Fairway Business Centre. Fairway Business Centre is located immediately north of the existing JPI multi-family ptolect and we look forward to the second JPI protect and again being our berg our neighbor m Empire Lakes Center. JPI's national reputation and financial strength with their partner GE Capital, reaffirms our selection of being a part of Empire Lakes Center. We believe the mixed-use concept of housing, office and our northern neighbor, the Metrolink, is good not only for our project but the entire community We would appreciate your support of the JPI project ;} Operating Officer LJ ~~r~ ~ ~ ~'~' ~~~ RICHARD D1CK ~~~ & ASSOCIATES May 5, 2003 Planning Commission of The City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dnve Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re Empire Lakes Center -Parcel 7 Dear Commissioners: CIN OFRANCHO CUCAMONGA SAY 08 ~ RECEIVED - pLgNNING As the owner of Fairway Business Centre in Rancho Cucamonga we have made a substantial investment in the purchase and development of three parcels at Empire Lakes Center We have constructed two office buildings totaling 90,000 sq ft and are currently under construction for a third office budding of 54,000 sq ft and under contract to purchase an additional 5 acres of land to the south of Sixth Street and • Milliken Avenue for an office budding of approximately 62,000 sq ft We have been supportive of the high-density residential development within Empire Lakes Center as have our lenders and tenants Having quality residential protects within close proximity of our office buildings continues to help us market our faal~ties to the Southern California business community Empire Lakes Center has developed into a unique mixed-use business environment that capitalizes on the location of the Metrolink Station, encourages fobs to housing balance and is easily accessible to regional amenities including entertainment (Ontario Mills), transportation (Ontaro airport) and recreation (Empire Lakes Gof Course ) We are pleased to be a part of Empire Lakes Center and the City Of Rancho Cucamonga, and strongly encourage the City Officials to support the quality high- density residential mixed-use protect proposed by such a supenor company as JPI on Planning Area VII Sincerely, RICHARD DICK AND ASSOCIATES r ~ ~ • rd i k ~/ f~ 0(, P~ Manager ~/ ~, 171i Westcliff Dnve, Newport Beach, California 92660 (949) 642-6515, FAX (949) 631-8813 4 . ADDENDUM TO CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 2001 GENERAL PLAN FINAL EIR AND RANCHO CUCAMONGA IASP SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN PROVIDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER EXHIBIT "E" L_~ ~/6 t 3 C~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA IASP SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN PROVIDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER EXHIBIT "F" • ~/a i~ • RESOLUTION NO 03-81 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-00254, A REQUEST TO INCREASE THE ALLOWABLE NUMBER OFMULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA IASP SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN MIXED-USE LAND USE DESIGNATION, LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 4TH STREET AND MILLIKEN AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0210-082-47. A. Rentals. 1. JPI Westcoast Development, L.P., filed an application for a General Plan Amendment of the Mixed-Use Land Use designation of the Subarea 18 Speefic Plan, as described m the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject amendment is referred to as °the application." 2. On the 11th day of June 2003, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2 Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on June 11, 2003, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property within the City; and b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment; and c. The proposed amendment is consistent with the flexible land use concept of the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows• . a. The amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Pollees of the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan or the General Plan and will provide for the logical development of the Specific Plan and the General Plan and with related development; and ~1b i~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0.03-81 GPA DRC2003-00254-JPI WESTCOAST DEVELOPMENT, LP. . June 11, 2003 Page 2 c. The proposed amendment wdl not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially intunous to properties or improvements in the vianity; and d. The subject application is consistent with the obtecUves of the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan, and the purposes of the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan; and e. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified as a Master EIR for the Industrial Area Subarea 18 Specific Plan. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 21157.1 provides that the preparation and certification of a Master EIR allows for the limfted review of subsequent protects that were described in the Master EIR as being within the scope of the reporting accordance with certain regwrements. However, because of the changes that are submitted by this protect, an addendum was prepared for said protect. An addendum to the Subarea 18 Specific Plan final EIR is appropriate documentation because some changes or additions are necessary to describe the proposed residential project but none of the conditions described in the CEQA Gwdelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the attached addendum based on the following findings• a. There have not been substantial changes in the protect that regwre mator revisions to the previous EIR because of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in seventy of previously identified significant effects. b. There have not been substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the protect is undertaken, which wdl regwre mator revisions to the previous EIR because of the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the seventy of previously identified significant effects c. There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified as complete, that shows any of the following: 1) the protect will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR, 2) significant effects previously examined wdl be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR, 3) mitigation measures oraRemaUves previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the protect but the protect proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative, or 4) mitigation measures or alternatives, which are considerably different from those analyzed in the final EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the protect proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2003-00254, as shown in the staff report. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2003. ~/a ~~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0.03-81 GPA DRC2003-00254-JPI WESTCOAST DEVELOPMENT, LP. June 11, 2003 Page 3 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Dan Coleman, Acting Secretary I, Dan Coleman, Acting Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 11th day of June 2003, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ~-/p i ~- RESOLUTION N0.03-82 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA IASP SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-00255, A REQUEST TO ADD MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE MIXED-USE PLANNING AREA VII, LOCATED ON THE NORTHW EST CORNER OF 4TH STREET AND MILLIKEN AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0210-082-47. A. Recitals. 1. JPI Westcoast Development, L.P., fled an application for Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00255, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 11th day of June 2003, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 3 All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on June 11, 2003, including wntten and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to property within the City, and b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment; and c The proposed amendment is consistent with the flexible land use concept of the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission dunng the above- referenced public heanng and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan or the General Plan and will provide for the logical development of the Planning Area VII and the General Plan and with related development; and b The amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the lndustnal Distracts Chapter of the Development Code; and ~ /~ I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0.03-82 SUBAREA 18 AMENDMENT DRC2003-00255 -JPI WESTCOAST DEVELOPMENT, LP. June 11,2003 Page 2 c. The proposed amendment will not be detnmental to the public health, safety, or welfare or matenally injunous to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and d. The subject application is consistent with the objectives of the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan, and the purposes of the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan; and e. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified as a Master EIR for the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 21157.1 provides that the preparation and certification of a Master EIR allows for the limited review of subsequent projects that were descnbed in the Master EIR as being within the scope of the reporting accordance with certain requirements. However, because of the changes that are submitted by this project, an Addendum was prepared for said project. An addendum to the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan Final EIR is appropnate documentation because some changes or additions are necessaryto descnbe the proposed residential project but none of the conditions descnbed in the CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the attached addendum based on the following findings: a. There have not been substantial changes in the project that require major revisions to the previous EIR because of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in seventy of previously identified significant effects. b There have not been substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which will require major revisions to the previous EIR because of the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. c. There is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified as complete, that shows any of the following 1) the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR, 2) significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR, 3) mitigation measures or altematfves previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative, or 4) mitigation measures or alternatives, which are considerably different from those analyzed in the final EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of Rancho Cucamonga IASP Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-00255, as shown in the staff report 6 The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution R/a Iq PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO 03-82 SUBAREA 18 AMENDMENT DRC2003-00255-JPI WESTCOAST DEVELOPMENT, LP. • June 11, 2003 Page 3 APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2003. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY. ATTEST• Larry T. McNiel, Chairman Dan Coleman, Acting Secretary I, Dan Coleman, Acting Secretary of the Plamm~g Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted bythe Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Plamm~g Commission held on the 11th day of June 2003, by the following vote-to-wit: . AYES. COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS• ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ~~ ~ a~a RANCHO CUCAMONGA IASP SUB-AREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN PLANNING AREA VII • ADDENDUM TO CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 2001 GENERAL PLAN FINAL EIR and IASP SUB-AREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR (SCH No. 93102055) Prepared for. JPI Westcoast Development, L.P. 8910 University Center Lane, Swte 150 San Diego, California 92122 Prepared by: BonTerra Consulting 151 Kalmus Drive, Suite E-200 Costa Mesa, California 92626 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MAY 0 6 2003 RECEIVED -PLANNING May 5, 2003 ~~ ~ ~~ ~TEr~ ~~~ IASP Sub-Area 18 Specfic Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum to Previously Cert~ed EIRs ADDENDUM TO CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 2001 GENERAL PLAN FINAL EIR AND IASP SUB-AREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN FINAL EIR 1. PURPOSE OF ADDENDUM This Addendum to the previously certified City of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the previously certified Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Sub-Area 18 Final EIR was prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Public Resources Code §21000, et seq and the CEQA Gwdellnes California Code of Regulations §15000, et seq CEQA Gwdellnes §15164(a) states that "the lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR If some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred " Pursuant to CEQA Gwdellnes §15162, a subsequent EIR Is only regwred when a) substantial changes are proposed In the prolect or, b) substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the prolect Is undertaken which will require major revisions to the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previcusly identified significant effects or, c) new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete that shows that (i) the prolect will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR, or n) significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR, or ui) mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would In fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the prolect, but the prolect proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative, or iv) mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment but the prolect proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative." This Addendum analyzes the differences between the land uses which were previously approved by the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the Industrial Area Speafic Plan (IASP) Sub- Area 18 Planning Area VII and the City of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and the currently proposed land uses for Planning Area VII The City of Rancho Cucamonga has determined that changes associated with the proposed land uses are minor and not substantial No new significant impacts will result from these changes, nor is there substantial Increase in the severity of any previously identified environmental impacts In addition, there are no substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the prolect will be undertaken that would require any revisions to the previously certified Final EIRs These conclusions have been reached based on the preparation of technical analyses, as necessary, to assess the potential environmental Impacts of the proposed land uses The proposed land uses would result in a reduction In the generation of vehicular traffic when compared to the existing approved land uses for Planning Area VII Although the existing land uses would not directly generate students, the student generation rate associated with the type of residential development that has been implemented within the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan site has resulted in a substantially lower generation rate than assumed by the applicable school districts However, prolect applicants are regwred to pay school fees based on the adopted student generation rates of the applicable school districts While the proposed land uses would require increased potable water when compared to the existing permitted land uses for Planning Area VII, there is suffiaent water supply to accommodate the needs of the proposed land uses Therefore, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15164, an Addendum to the previously certified Clty of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 R 1Prolec4sVPIV00415peafic Plan-0W5003 DOC 1 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area VII Addendum to Previously Cert~ed EIRs General Plan Flnal Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the previously certified Rancho • Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (/ASP) Sub-Area 18 Fina/ EIR Is the appropriate environmental documentation R ~Pro)eas41Pi00061Specfic PIarW505003 OOC 2 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area f8 Specific Plan Planning Area VII Addendum to Previously Certified EIRs 2. LOCATION The approximate 380-acre Sub-Area 18 Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) is located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California, as depicted in Exhibit 1 The IASP Sub-Area 18 is bordered on the south by Fourth Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue, on the north by the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station, and on the west by Cleveland Avenue and Utica Street Planning Area VII is one of the 11 planning areas that comprise the Speafic Plan site Planning Area VII is bordered by Fourth Street to the south, Fifth Street to the north, Milliken Avenue to the east, and two apartment communities to the west, as depicted on Exhibit 2 Existing and planned land uses surrounding the protect site include the following • To the north Fifth Street and an existing office bwlding on the southern portion of Sub- Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area VIII. • To the south City of Ontario Fourth Street, Kohl's department store, and a vacant mixed-use parcel • To the east Milliken Avenue, existing office and light industrial development, and a vacant parcel A City of Ontario water well site is located contiguous to Planning Area VII on the west side of Milliken Avenue • To the west Ironwood and Fairway Palms Apartment Communities (Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area VI) . 2.1 SITE CHARACTERISTICS The approximate 24-acre site contains grape vineyards with a fairly dense cover of invasive and non-native annual plants. The site contains no structures or predominant features Onsite elevations range from approximately 1,055 feet above mean sea level (nisi) to the north to 1,040 feet above nisi to the south, total relief across the site is 15 vertical feet over approximately 1,2001inearfeet CJ R ~Pro~egsVPIV004\SpeaSC Plan-0505003 DOC 3 Rancho Cucamonga C ~.. ~~./ _. ~^~ sr - ~--~.-~-- ~.-°x_ _. ~- •-.-°-`. iii - `-- - ^~^ `==- ~ 11165- =i- .~ __ «IA ~ = i_ ~_ 7= - ~= ^ _ __ ~~ - _ s -egl t ND =~ ~ •- -~ - _ --7 ~ _ , A Y~ ~t ~f'~d~ era-~r~c~~ _~ _ ~~ ---_=--"°-.,-a1tt-°°_- _ _.._-'iv.___ _.. __- ~ ^y -----• cx r~' __ Welt ---°. T^~,~._~'"~~. --i-,.'°..._ _,a_ ° ?' _~_ ~ r~'~=,~ _ _ Pro ec[ „a~~-=a-.:'°=J= 134=~;-~I _° ~--_--=~3 ~ __=°r`s"r-~_~`^_~a_a_.__.- _ __ ~ 1 --= ° l ~- _ m roll r ~~ j _ _._-a~~. ___- ==~a`~-_-..~ - _ ` ~~ ~~- _ e..-=~S~.-) ~ --"°-~ Q~~~~ ~` _ ~ - - ~ Ili u . : / ~~~~- _ - "~ 'f^'_"„e--.Null' -~_-_.._ _ .a I ' = ` ^ = II ~' ""_-=I~. ~ 1 ~,T fir: -°'~r-=.'E_. ~ = - + - -°.~- _`- ~-~~~~~<-(.t1f C11Al'G.t--~ I I ~ ~ C-- 6 C-0HP.:. =' i'a r ~ 31~ _ ' p 1 MOT K~~ ~~ DWr'El' ~I ~~, I - ~~ '0"- i' • all 21 ~, P~"f '~`„° .'d} P,.a ~; - I~, $I, ~--,~.- ~=I~~ i»- = ' °~~~ ' ,- '-1 ~ ~ -~ ~,`~ ° ~ " - 123 ~~,e~,~ ~~~-- _ __-- _ ~~~~ ~_ ^ _ ~"~ -==~= - ~ ~ -- ~~ i 1e' _________ _ _ _ .- __ _________~ ~ - _ -- _ - _ --. ..e.--- _ LL, '_ ~+-• ~_--_l-- -=r...~ 963-°~•..~._ = - ~ '-= _-- _ =_-i'.`~-~-' _ y p.~ _ - _.._..° ° ^ ~ 'm ' '-- ` ' ~ _ _y^_ ° ~ , ..- .=.-,- _i :. ~ 1:- Vi _. = '1Y .._-,.._ »_- _° I _ - _ ~ _,v - ~ ~ ~ =-==°'- _~~_ ~--~ Wes-, ~---=. r :~ _._ ' `-: =~ xl ~~ = ~ y :.-= -_ P . ~-'-° ate __-=='==25e =*--=-_-~-` .._~-~ _W=_.~~': _-, Y le tl d E v ) 5 M G harm ~--= ..,- ----_- - /e i g mta ms USGS Project Site Location Exhibit 1 .lBffB/SOIL 8f FOUlffl 8l1C1 Nflf(IfCEII (Case # DRC 2003-00254 and ORC 2003-00255) ' N b y~~y, p~~~ ~~/~cw / ~I 1 000 0 1 000 2000 Feec C O N S U L T I N G i 5 S IGIS_Ex~i0i15 IJPIJ003 SIeLOCabpn Od303 pof Surrounding Land Uses Jefferson at Fourth and Milliken Icase u oRC zoos-oozsa and oRCzoos-oozssl N 250 0 250 500 Fee[ ~E 5 Exhibit 2 C O NY~I uC/~~I IPIJ003 SLU 04303 pGf IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area VII Addendum to Previously Certrred EIRs 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION . 3.1 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECT In July 1994, the City of Rancho Cucamonga certified a Final EIR (SCH No 93102055) and approved the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan for the approximate 380-acre site, inclusive of Planning Area VII, incorporating a mix of land uses The intent of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan was to create a unique master planned protect that integrated a broader mix of uses in this area, including office, light industrial, hotel/conference, retail, restaurant, entertainment, multiple family residential, and research and development uses around a championship golf course Planning Area VII is designated Mixed-Use in the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan and the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan The adopted Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan assumed the development of Planning Area VII with up to 730,000 square feet of mixed commercial uses such as retail, restaurant, banking, and office uses Residential development is a permitted use within the Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan area, however, not within Planning Area VII With respect to Planning Area VII, the IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan states "Planning Area Vll, located at the intersection of Milliken Avenue and Fourth Street, is approximately 24 acres and could include mixed-use commercial, indoor recreation/ entertainment, an option for hotel/conference center, office, research and developmenU light industnal/business park, and multiple family residential Planning Area Vll is a key entry parcel to Sub-Area 1.8 and is posdioned to respond to economic/market factors both within the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the City of Ontano " 3.2 CURRENTLY PROPOSED LAND USES As depicted on Exhibit 3, the protect applicant, JPI Westcoast Development, L P , is requesting an amendment to the City of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan and the /ASP Sub- Area 18 Specihc Plan to allow multiple-family residential uses as an additional permitted use in Planning Area VII The proposed amendment to the General Plan and Specific Plan would allow for up to 499 high-density multi-family dwelling units and up to 43,738 square feet of commercial uses on Planning Area VII The General Pian would be amended to increase the allowable acreage and dwelling units allocated for residential development within the IASP Sub- Area 18 Specific Plan site The IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan would be amended to identify multiple family residences as an additional permitted use within the Mixed-Use land use designation for Planning Area VII The Rancho Cucamonga General Plan (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan) states that the purpose of the Mixed-Use designation is to stimulate and guide development in special oppoRunity areas where land use change is desired Mixed Use development may occur in two ways 1) as a combination of uses in a single development project on a single parcel of land, or 2) as a combination of uses on multiple parcels within a specified distract of the City In either case, the intent is to achieve a complete integration of the uses and their support functions into a common concept With respect to IASP Sub-Area 18, the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan) states R 1PropctsUPIVOWISpeufic PIarW 505003 DOC 4 Rancho Cucamonga • I~ 6 3 a Empire Lakes Golf Course i0 LL Sth - c Mission Vista v Y L ., -. a M - d 4th ~,_ - --`. Kohl's Department Store ~ Mills u Land Use Designation Existing Mixed Use Proposed Same, amend to permit Multiple Famtly Residential Ontano Mills Shopping Center Swru US Canws &vuu TIGER 2000 Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation Exhibit 3 Jefferson at Fourth and Mtlltken (casa n oRC zoo3-oozsa and oRC zoo3-oozssl R N ~^AA ~ E ~~ 250 0 250 500 Fee[ CON_'UITING I s S IGIS Ev0i0pYJPIJ003 PropUSe OC3003 pd( IASP Sub-Area 18 Spec~Bc Plan Planning Area VII Addendum to Previously Cert~ed EIRs °The Sub-Area 18 Mixed-Use area reflects the land use mix approved through the • Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan .The Intent of the Mixed Use designation Is to • Promote planning flexibility to achieve more creative and imaginative employment- generating designs, • Integrate a wider range of retail commercial, service commercial, recreation and office uses within the Industrial area of the City; and Allow for the sensitive inclusion of high density residential development that offers high quality multi-family condominiums and apartments for employees desiring housing close to work and transit " AaProval Actions The following approval actions by the City of Rancho Cucamonga are as follows Approval of the Addendum to Previously Certified City of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final EIR and Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Final EIR. Any approval actions related to the general plan and specific plan amendments would first require the acceptance of an environmental document as having been prepared in compliance with CEQA, CEQA Gwdelines, and City of Rancho Cucamonga CEQA Guidelines • City of Rancho Cucamonga change Table III-9 Industrial allowable residential acreage acreage 2001 General Plan Amendment. This amendment would Specific Plan-Sub-Area 18 Mixed-Use to increase the and dwelling units and reduce the allowable commeraal • Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Sub-Area 18 Amendment This amendment would expand the previously approved IASP Sub-Area 18, Planning Area VII designation of Mixed-Use to allow for residential uses, in addition to the currently permitted office, research and development, and commeraal uses for the planning area • a ~aropnswiuooa~soenec aia~asosoo3 ooc 5 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 16 Speafic Plan Planning Ala Vll Addendum fo Previously Certnred EIRs 4. COMPARATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS • The following provides a summary analysis of the environmental impacts previously Identified In the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Final E/R, which Included development of Planning Area VII, as well as consistency with the mitigation program set forth in the Clty of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final E/R A comparison of the identified impacts for the previously approved protect to the potential impacts associated with the currently proposed land uses is provided below 4.1 LAND USE Previously Aaproved Project Planning Area VII contains grape vineyards Development of this planning area would result In the conversion of farmland to urban land uses and the removal of all vineyard remnants from the site The loss of vineyards and the conversion of farmland were identified in the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Final E/R as significant unavoidable Impacts associated with development of the Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan area, Including Planning Area VII The vineyards would be removed by development of Planning Area VII These unavoidable impacts were overridden by City of Rancho Cucamonga in favor of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan development goals and obtectives. As a part of certification of the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Final E/R and approval of the Sub-Area 18 protect, Planning Area VII was designated Mixed Use and approved for development with up to 730,000 square feet of mixed commercial uses such as retail, restaurant, banking, and office These land uses were identified as being compatible with existing and planned onsite and offsite surrounding land uses Adopted Mitigation Program No feasible mitigation measures were available to mitigate the removal of active grape vineyards from Planning Area VII No other mltlgation was regwred Currently Proposed Land Uses The amendment to the General Plan and Specific Plan would allow for future development of Planning Area VII with up to 499 of high-density multi-family residential dwelling units and up to 45,738 square feet of commercal uses As Indicated in Table 1 (Table III-9 Industrial Specific Plan-Sub-Area 18 Mixed-Use of the Clty of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan), this change would result in an increase in the overall number of residential dwelling units and acreage within IASP Sub-Area 18 and an overall decrease in commercal acreage vnthin the IASP Sub-Area 18 Although residential development was not specifically proposed when the IASP Sub-Area 18 Final EIR was certified and the Specific Plan protect originally approved, the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Mixed Use land use designation for IASP Sub-Area 18 permits residential uses Subsequent to approval of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, the Specific Plan has been amended to allow for multiple family residential uses In designated planning areas • R 1PropclsVPIV001G5pacific Plan-0505003900 6 Rancbo Cucamonga IASP SuirArea 78 Speafic Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum to Previously Certifietl EIRs CJ TABLE 1 EXISTING AND PROPOSED LAND USES INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN-SUB-AREA 18 MIXED USE • Acreage Range • Average Density Percent (dulac) Estimated "Most Case" Land Use Range • Dwelling Units Acres/Dwelling Units (du) Commercial-retail, service 9% - 15% 34 - 57 acres 40 acres commercial, tounst commercial, office (commercial and professional) Office-Professional 46°6--64°.6 80--136~asres des Medical Corporate Offices 24% - 30% 90 -115 acres 89 5 acres PubliciQuasi-Public 43% 165 acres 165 acres Recreation Residential 1 O,-~,r•-'~' ,°~ 8 388 x d 684-te-~28 du 25.71 acres @ ; - u 71 acres 27 du/ac' 27 du/ac 694 to 1,887 du 1,887 du ROW-Metrohnk Parking 7% 10 3 acres 10 3 acres TOTALS 100% 375 8 acres 375 8 acres ' Indicates target density, not a range Actual density may increase up to 20 dWac as long as the total of 1,887 dwelling units is not exceeded As with the previously approved pro)ect, future development of Planning Area VII with residential and commercial uses would remove grape vineyards and result In the loss of farmland This significant, unavoidable impact was contemplated by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in their approval of the IASP Sub-Area 18 pro)ect, the currently proposed land uses would not result in any new significant impacts associated with the loss of vineyards and farmland The proposed land uses for Planning Area VII would allow for the Integration of residences into the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan that would provide mixed-use urban scale residential and retail uses In this portion of the Clty of Rancho Cucamonga The Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Mixed-Use land use designation Includes residential uses as one of the typical land uses within a mixed-use pro)ect The General Plan states that the Mixed-Use designation Is Intended to " stimulate and guide development in special opportunity areas where land use change is desired the intent is to achieve a complete integration of the uses and their support functions into a common concept Wlth respect to the IASP Sub-Area 18 area, the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan (City of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan) states "The Sub-Area 18 Mixed- Use area reflects the land use mix approved through the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan .The intent of the Mixed Use designation is to Allow for the sensitive inclusion of high density residential development that offers high quality mutt-family condominiums and apartments for employees deslnng housing close to work and transit " The proposed land uses would be consistent with the applicable mitigation measures set forth In the Clty of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final EIR as follows R IPropciSVPIV006lSpeafic PIarv0505003 DOC 7 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum to Previously Certrred EIRs LU-1 Accommodate new development in a manner that enables the City's residents and . businesses to readily be integrated into the social and physical structure of the City LU-2 Promote development that is sustainable in its use of land in relation to the impact upon natural resources, energy, air and water quality LU-3 Promote opportunities to develop mixed-use areas and protects in carefully selected areas LU-4 Restrict strip commeraal development in favor of more focused commercial or mixed-use centers LU-5 Restrict the intensity of commeraal concentrations at intersection, other than town center and regional center locations, to two comers LU-7 Development densities and intensities shall be implemented within the ranges specified in the General Plan neither higher nor lower than the limits in the range LU-11 Allow medium and high density residential uses along transit routes in mixed-use areas and in the vanity of activity centers Mitigation Program IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Mitigation Measures As previously noted, no feasible mitigation measures were available to mitigate the removal of grape vineyards from Planning Area VII No other mitigation is regwred, 4.2 TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION Previously Aoaroved Protect The IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Final E/R traffic analysis identified that the Specific Plan protect would generate approximately 64,011 average daily trips (ADT), with 7,648 trips during the p m peak hour Of these vehicular trips, the approved mix of land uses for Planning Area VII would generate 16,178 ADT (approximately 25 3 percent of the total protect ADT), with 1,755 trips during the p m peak hour (approximately 22 9 percent of the total protect p m peak trips) Table 2 identifies the trip rates and trip generation for the approved Planning Area VII land uses Since certification of the Final EIR and adoption of the Specific Plan, changes in the intensity of development and/or mix of land uses within some of the planning areas have occurred resulting in an overall reduction in the total vehicular trips associated with the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan area These changes are as follows • Planning Area II Approved for retail, theater, recreation, and restaurant uses, proposed for 285,000 sq ft of office uses • Planning Area III Approved for office and retail uses, the planning area is a part of the • Empire Lakes Golf Course R rPropcuVPN00d\Spcafic PIaM0505003 DOC 8 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum fo Previously Certrred EIRs r~ LJ TABLE 2 EXISTING PERMITTED LAND USES IN PLANNING AREA VII TRIP RATES AND TRIP GENERATION ADT P.M. Peak Hour Land Use Size Rate Trtps Rate Total In Out Retail 130 TSF 64 OS 8,327 5 97 776 388 368 Restaurant 20 TSF 205 36 4,107 16 26 325 176 150 Bank 30 TSF 140 61 4,218 17 35 521 229 291 Office 450 TSF 9 72 4,375 1 25 563 96 467 Adiustment for Retail/ Restaurant Pass-by (39%) <7,585> <672> <344> <328> Total 16,178 1,755 669 1,087 ADT =Average dally tops TSF =thousand square feet Source IASP SubArea 18 Speafic Plan EIR, 1994 • Planning Area IV Approved for office uses and a restaurant pad, the planning area was built with only office uses (Empire Lakes Corporate Center) • Planning Area VI Approved for office uses, under construction with 496 apartments J • Planning Area IX Approved for restaurant and office uses, built with 521 apartments Table 3 provides a comparison of the total top generation for the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, as approved and with the land uses changes noted above As shown In Table 3, the previously approved Specific Plan was expected to generate 64,011 ADT Wlth the land use changes noted In the table, bulldout of the Specific Plan site would generate 38,068 ADT, a reduction of approximately 40 percent development goals and obtectives The Final EIR noted that the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan pro)ect would contribute to significant unavoidable Impacts to the regional circulation system These unavoidable Impacts were overridden by City of Rancho Cucamonga In favor of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Adopted Mitigation Program Mitigation adopted as a condition of approval for the previously approved overall IASP Sub- Area 18 Specific Plan protect Is as follows Assuming that potential traffic Impacts occur as pro)ected in the traffic Impact analysis, the proposed Sub-Area Specific Plan shall contribute a traffic fee in accordance with the City's adopted traffic Impact fee program (Transportation Development Impact Fee Ordinance No 445) as the protect's fair share contribution to circulation Improvements Identified as necessary at the time of Issuance of building permits These Improvements may consist of the improvements described in Section 5 2 3 (of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Final EIR) R \PmppsUPI000a\SpttiSC Plan-0505003 DOC Rancho Cucamonga IASP SufrArea 18 Specific Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum to Previously CeR~fied EIRs TABLE 3 IASP SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN DAILY TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON Approved Actual or Currently Proposed/Approved Land Use Size Units Rate Trips Size Units Rate Trips Planning Area I Golf Course 155 Acres 8 33 1,291 (No 1,291 Change) Planning Area II (Proposed for Office Use) Retail 130 TSF 64 OS 8,327 285 TSF 10 87 3,097 Theatre 12 Screens 153 33 1,840 Health Club 120 TSF 15 94 1,913 Restaurant 40 TSF 205 36 8,214 Bowling Alley 60 TSF 33 33 2,000 Adjustment for 10,255 retail/restaurant pass-by (38%) Subtotal 16,008 Planning Area III (Part of golf course) Office 150 TSF 12 71 1,907 19 Acres 8 33 158 Retail 90 TSF 73 52 6,617 Restaurant 10 TSF 205 36 2,054 Adjustment for 4,769 retail/restaurant pass-by (45%) Subtotal 6,675 Planning Area IV (Office constructed without restaurant) Office (w/support 240 TSF 11 33 2.720 240 TSF 11 33 2,720 retail) Restaurant 20 TSF 20536 4,107 Adjustment for 1,027 restaurant pass-by (75%) Subtotal 3,747 Planning Area V (No change) 11,519 Hotel/Conf Ctr 150 Room 15 97 2,396 Office 150 TSF 12 71 1,907 Retail 120 TSF 66 00 7,920 Restaurant 20 TSF 20536 4,107 Adjustment for 7,216 retail/rezstaurant pass-by (40%) Subtotal 11,519 • s R NrgectsVPIV000\Speufit Plan-05050°3 HOC 10 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specfic Plan Planning Area VII Addendum fo Previously Certfied EIRs ~_~ TABLE 3 (continued) IASP SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN DAILY TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON Approved Actual or Currently ProposedlApproved Land Use Size Units Rate Trips Size Units Rate Trips Planning Area VI (Approved 3,288 for 496 apartments) Office 425 TSF 986 4,190 Planning Area VII (Proposed for uses below) Retail 130 TSF 64 OS 8,327 Retal 1,320 Restaurant 20 TSF 205 36 4,107 Restaurant 1,955 Bank 30 TSF 140 61 4,218 3,308 Apartments Office 450 TSF 9 72 4,375 Adjustment for 7,585 retall/restaurant pass-by (39%) Subtotal 16,178 Planning Area VIII (No change) 4,719 Office 150 TSF 12 71 1,907 Restaurant 10 TSF 205 36 2,054 Business Park 160 TSF 14 37 2,299 Adjustment for 513 restaurant pass-by (75%) Subtotal 4,719 Planning ArealX (Approved 3,454 for 521 apartments) Office 140 TSF 1293 1,810 Restaurant 10 TSF 205 36 2,054 Business Park 140 TSF 14 37 2,012 Adjustment for 513 restaurant pass-by (75%) Subtotal 4,335 Planning Area X (No change) 4,126 Retail 50 TSF 9165 4,583 Business Park 150 TSF 14 37 2,156 Adjustment for retail 1,971 pass-by (57%) Subtotal 4,126 R ~Pro~edsUP1U°061Spec,fic Plan-0505003 DOC 11 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan Planning Area VII Addendum to Pn;viously Cert~ed EIRs TABLE 3 (continued) IASP SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN DAILY TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON Approved Actual or Currently Proposed/Approved Land Use Size Units Rate Trips Size Units Rate Trips Planning Area XI (No change) 6,628 Office 115 TSF 13 56 1,560 Restaurant 10 TSF 205 36 2,054 Business Park 150 TSF 14 37 2,156 Adjustment for 513 restaurant pass-by (75%) Subtotal 4,228 Metrohnk Station 3,000 Adjustment for 600 internal TDM tnp capture (20%) Subtotal 2,400 Planning Area 6,628 Subtotal Total Gross New Tnps 80,015 47,584 Internal Tnp Capture (10%) 7,702 4,758 TDM/Transit Reduction 7,702 4,758 Total Effective Tnp Generation 64,011 38,068 Note Tnp generation rates for onginally approved development are from the ITE Trip Generation manual, Fifth Edition Trip generation rates for subsequently approved development are from the ITE Tnp Generation manual, Sixth Edition Currently Proposed Land Uses Table 4 Identifies the trip generation rates and the resulting trip generation for the proposed land uses Based on these trip generation estimates (see Appendix A), the proposed land uses would generate 6,583 average dally trips (ADT), with 588 p m peak hour trips The previously approved land uses for Planning Area VII were expected to generate 16,178 ADT, with 1,755 trips during the p m peak hour. Therefore, the proposed pro)ect represents the following reduction in total daily traffic and p m peak hour traffic when compared to the previously approved pro)ect 9,595 ADT and 1,167 p m peak hour taps, respectively ~J ~J R \Pro~edsUPIV004\Specific Plan-0505003 DOC 12 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum to Previously Certrred EIRs TABLE 4 . PROPOSED LAND USES IN PLANNING AREA VII TRIP RATE AND TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY P.M. Peak Hour Land Use Units/S.F. In Out Total ADT Tnp Rates Multi-family Residentiala Du 0 42 0 20 0 62 6 63 Shopping Center° TSF 1 80 1 94 3 74 42 92 Restaurant` TSF 6 52 434 10 86 130 34 Trip Generation Multi-family Residential 499 du 210 100 310 3,308 Shopping Center 30 738 55 60 115 1,320 Restaurant 15 000 98 65 163 1,955 Total 363 225 588 6,583 Du dwelling unit TSF thousand square feet a Rates based on Land Use 220•Apartments, Source Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Tnp Generehon, 6'" Edibon b Rates based on Land Use 820-Shopping Center, Source Insutute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Tnp Genarebon. 6'" Etldion c Rates based on Land Use 832•High Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant, Source Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Tnp Generet~on. 6'" Edition • The proposed land uses would be consistent with the applicable mitigation measures set forth In the Cfty of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final E/R as follows TC-9 The Clty will allow the following 7 Intersections to operate at a LOS E or better Milliken Avenue and 4`" Street (D, E) " Mitigation Program No new mitigation is required because the amount of traffic generated by the proposed land uses would be less than the amount of traffic that was expected to be generated by the previously approved land uses for Planning Area VII The mitigation program adopted as conditions of approval for the Planning Area VII of IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan protect and set forth In the Development Agreement between the Clty of Rancho Cucamonga and General Dynamics Corporation Concerning Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, July 6, 1994, Is applicable to the currently proposed land uses 4.3 NOISE Previously Approved Project The potential for noise impacts is typically evaluated for short-term construction noise and long- term operational noise Construction noise generally represents ashort-term Impact on ambient noise levels Noise generated by construction equipment and construction activities can reach high levels, ranging from approximately 65 dBA to 105 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the source, depending on the type of equipment being used Plle driving noise levels are the R NroixisUPNOW\Spenfic Plan-0505003 DOC 19 Rancho Cucamonga IASP SutrArea 18 Specific Plan Planning Area VII Adtlendum to Previously Cert~ed EIRs highest noise levels associated with construction, however, pile drivers would not have been . regwred for the previously approved land uses on Planning Area VII Grading activities generally have the next highest levels of noise At 50 feet, grading activities commonly have average noise levels (e g , Leq noise levels) of 85 dBA with maximum noise levels as high as 95 dBA General construction is considered to be gweter than grading operations The same peak noise levels are often reached during general construction as during grading, but the average noise levels are 5 to 10 dBA less Because sensitive receptors were not contemplated in the protect vicinity, the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Final EIR did not Identify any significant construction-related noise Impacts The City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Noise Element (in effect at the time of certification of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Final EIR) indicated that the "normally acceptable' exterior noise levels for office development and research and development uses Is 70 dBA CNEL or less, and "conditionally acceptable' noise levels are 70 to 75 dBA CNEL The City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code stated, with respect to office and commercial activities • All commercial and office activities shall not create any noise that would exceed an exterior noise level of 60 dBA during the hours of 10 p m to 7 a m ,and 65 dBA during the hours of 7 a m and 10 p m Loading and unloading activities are not allowed during the hours of 10 p m to 7 a m if such activities would cause a noise disturbance to a residential area (Source CIty of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, Section 17 10 050, Performance Standards in NOISE ZONE ll ) Further, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has noise standards for land uses within the IASP area Planning Area VII is designated a Class B area Applicable Class B noise and vibration performance standards are as follows Noise The maximum allowable noise level of any use shall not exceed 75 Ldn as measured' at the lot line of the lot containing the use Where a use occupies a lot abutting residentially zoned land, the noise level shall not exceed 65 Ldn as measured at the common lot line Noise caused by motor vehicles and trains are exempted from this standard Vibration All uses shall be operated so as not to generate vibration discernible without instruments by the average persons beyond the lot upon which the source is located Vibration caused by motor vehicles, trains, and temporary construction or demolition work is exempted from this standard Community noise assessment changes In noise levels greater than 3 dBA are often identified as significant, while changes less than 1 dBA are not discernible In the range of 1 to 3 dBA, people who are very sensitive to noise may perceive a slight change No scientific evidence Is available to support the use of 3 dBA as a significance threshold In laboratory testing situations, humans are able to detect noise level changes of slightly less than 1 dBA However, in a community noise situation, the noise exposure is over a long time period and changes in noise levels occur over years, rather than the immediate comparison made In a laboratory situation Therefore, the level at which changes In community noise levels become discernible is likely to be some value greater than 1 dBA, and 3 dBA appears to be most appropriate for most people • The IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Final EIR noted that vehicular traffic noise levels adtacent to Planning Area VII along Milliken Avenue and Fourth Street would be significant for outdoor R \PropnsUPIUD0A15p•nfic PIarv0505003 DOC 14 Rancho Cucamonga IASP SubArea 18 Specific Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum fo Previously CerlTed EIRs activity areas All office, research and development, and/or retail outdoor activity areas within the 70 dBA Ldn noise contour would have to be shielded Onsite operational noise associated . with loading and unloading activities at the office, research and development, and/or commercial land uses was not Identified as a significant Impact Adopted Mitigation Program Mitigation measures adopted as conditions of approval for the previously approved pro)ect, applicable to Planning Area VII, are as follows. • Construction equipment and trucks shall be properly muffled • Development of the pro)ect site shall be in conformance with the Performance Standards Identified in the proposed Sub-Area Specific Plan • Active outdoor use areas associated with office, commercial, and industrial activities shall be placed outside of the 70 dBA Ldn contours from vehicular and rail traffic, and industrial activities Any active outdoor uses associated with office, commercial, and industrial activities within the 70 dBA Ldn area are required to be shielded from the dominant noise source, by utilizing sound barrier walls or structures acting as effective sound barriers, to ensure conformance with the City's noise standard • A detailed noise impact analysis shall be conducted for new onsite commercial or Industrial development with the potential of generating high outdoor noise levels In outdoor areas of existing office, commercial, and industrial areas • Prior to issuance of a building permit, all commercial and industrial structures shall be designed outside of the 70 dBA Ldn area If such structures are designed within 70 dBA Ldn contour from any noise sources, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements shall be made and needed noise insulation features shall be included in the design Currently Proaosed Land Uses As identified on Table 5 (Table V-3, Land Use Noise Standards in the General Plan), the Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Identifies noise standards for land use types TABLE 5 LAND USE NOISE STANDARDS Land Use Interior Standards Exterior Standards Residential -10pm to7am 40 dBA 45 dBA -lam to tO p m SS dBA 60 dBA Commercial/Office -10 p m to l a m None identified 60 dBA - 7 a m to 10 p m None identified 65 dBA Industnal - Class A (industnalpark) 60 Ldn 65 Ldn -Class 8 (general industrial) 65 Ldn 75 Ldn - Class C (heavy Industnal) 65 Ldn 85 Ldn R \ProlttlsV PI000415pecific Plan-0505003 DOC 15 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum to Previously Certrred EIRs Proposed land uses in Planning Area VII would be required to comply with requirements set • forth for residential and commercial land uses The General Plan identifies existing and future (year 2020) exterior noise levels along mayor roadways in the Clty of Rancho Cucamonga The following information is applicable to Planning Area VII Foisting 2020 Distance to Contours (feet) Distance to Contours (feet) Roadway 65 dBA 60 dBA 65 dBA 60 dBA M~Iliken Avenue 4"' Street to 146 315 315 680 6 Street 4l" Street Haven Avenue to 146 315 315 680 Milliken (2020 west of Milliken) The proposed land uses would be consistent with the appllcable mitigation measures set forth in the Clty of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final E/R as follows N-1 Prior to the issuance of any grading plans, the Clty shall condition approval of subdivisions that are ad)acent to any developed/occupied noise sensitive land uses by requiring applicants to submit aconstruction-related noise mitigation plan to the City for review and approval The plan shall depict the location of the construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment will be mitigated during construction of the pro)ect through the use of such methods as • Temporary noise attenuation fences, • Preferential location of equipment, and • Use of current technology and noise suppression equipment While the methods described above will reduce the disturbance created by onsite construction equipment, they do not address the potential impacts due to the transport of construction materials and debris The following measures shall then be required of any proposed development N-2 The construction-related noise mitigation plan required as part of the previous noise mitigation measure shall specify that haul truck deliveries be sub)ect to the same hours specified for construction equipment (i a ,Monday through Saturday, 6 30 a m and 8 00 p m and not allowed on Sundays and national holidays) Additionally, the plan shall denote any construction traffic haul routes where heavy trucks would exceed 100 daily trips (counting those both to and from the construction site) To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings Lastly, the construction-related noise mitigation plan shall incorporate any other restrictions imposed by City staff N-3 Applicants for new proposed land uses shall specify increased setbacks such that land uses do not lie within the 65 dBA CNEL overlay zone for commercial office and sensitive uses (60 dBA CNEL for residential uses) depicted in Exhibit 5 7-3 This would ensure that any proposed land uses do not exceed the goals of the City • General Plan Noise Element If increased setbacks are not provided, an applicant may implement the following R 1PralaclsVPIV004l5pec~fic Plan-0505003 DOC 16 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Spac~fic Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum fo Previously Cert~ed EIRs Prior to development, a developer shall contract for asite-specific noise study for the specific site prolect The noise study shall be performed by an acoustic consultant . experienced in such studies and the consultants qualifications and methodology to be used in the study must be presented to City staff for consideration The acoustic consultant shall then prepare asite-specific noise study for the site under consideration At a minimum, the study shall include an evaluation of the existing setting based on both field measurements and noise modeling Field measurements are to be prolect-specific in that they will include measurements at those locations where the most sensitive uses are to be placed in elevated noise area (e g ,nearest dwellings, or rooms to the roadway or freeway) Measurements shall be obtained using a certified Type 1 or 2 integrating sound level meter and shall be of sufficient duration to accurately quantify ambient noise levels To the extent feasible, roadway noise, with simultaneous traffic counts shall be obtained to document traffic-generated noise These measurements are to be obtained m accordance with methodology prescribed by Caltrans and/or FHWA Using the obtained traffic noise data, the study shall then prolect year 2020 traffic volume noise impacts at the prolect site and any noted sensitive areas The study shall also note specific measures that will be requued to reduce exterior noise levels to meet City Standards Such measures could include, but are not limited to increased setback, sound walls and/or berms, bwlding orientation to shield more sensitive outdoor recreation areas, etc If the study determines that the applicant cannot reasonably mitigate exteror noise to less than 65 dBA CNEL, the study shall also include measures to assure that any interior habitable areas do not exceed the interior noise levels included in Table 5 7-4 Any proposed residential development that does not meet the 65 dBA CNEL exterior level with proposed mitigation shall be so noted in the deed of trust and disclosed at the time of initial and all subsequent sales No residential dwellings shall be placed in areas with exterior noise levels in excess of 70 dBA CNEL, even with the inclusion of mitigation measures Furthermore, if the study finds that exterior habitable areas at commercial and public use facilities cannot meet a 70 dBA CNEL noise level, the developer shall post warning signs at any entrances to such facilities stating such Actual wording and placement of these signs shall be determined in consultation with City staff No development permits or approval of land use applications shall be issued until an acoustic analysis is received and approved by the City Planning Department Mitigation Program Mitigation measures adopted as conditions of approval for the previously approved prolect are applicable to Planning Area VII land uses 4.4 AIR QUALITY Previous Aaaroved Project . Potential short-term construction-related air quality impacts and long-term operational impacts were assessed in the IASP Sub-Area Specific Plan Final E/R for the overall prolect Construction and operational emissions are considered by the South Coast Air Quality R 1Pro)ec4sVPN0041Spenfic Plan-0505003 DOC 17 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum to Previously Cert~ed EIRs Management District (SCAQMD) to be significant if they exceed the thresholds shown in • Table 6 In addition to the thresholds Identified In the table, an Increase In carbon monoxide concentrations In an area that already exceeds national or state CO standards Is also considered significant If the increase exceeds one part per million (ppm) fora 1-hour average or 0 45 ppm for an 8-hour average TABLE 6 EMISSION THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCEe Construction Operations Pollutant pounds/day tons/quarter poundsfday Carbon Monoxide (CO) 550 24 75 550 Sulfur Oxides (S0.) 150 6 75 150 Nitrogen Oxides (NO.) 100 2 5 55 Particulate Matter (PM,o) 150 6 75 150 Reactive Organic Compounds (ROC) 75 2 5 55 ' Toxic emissions are considered significant if they expose sensitive receptors to a cancer risk of 1 in 1 million or 10 in 1 million if best available control technology for towcs (T-BACT) is employed Source South Coast Air Qualiry Handbook Construction Impacts The SCAQMD CEQA Air Quarry Handbook estimates that each acre of disturbed sod creates i 26 4 pounds/day of PM,a On a worst-case basis of the entire 24-acre Planning Area VII site undergoing grading on one day, dally emissions were estimated to be 633 6 pounds of PM1o on the peak day, prior to mitigation Employee vehicles and equipment emissions would have also resulted in carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, reactive organic compound, and sulfur oxide emissions Construction-related carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxide emissions would be significant These unavoidable Impacts were overridden by City of Rancho Cucamonga In favor of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan development goals and obtectives Operational Impacts Mobile sources of regional emissions associated with Planning Area VII would Include employee and visitor vehicle use and the use of electricity and natural gas Localized carbon monoxide emissions at Intersections (I e , "hot spots") associated with the Sub-Area Specific Plan would be lower than baseline levels and would not result In the exposure of sensitive receptors to unhealthful concentrations of carbon monoxide The IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Final E/R noted that the protect would help to Implement the regional growth management policy through a reduction In vehicle trips, and an improved lobs/housing balance Moreover, the impacts of the protect are generally within those forecast In the Alr Quality Management Plan for the subregion Therefore, the protect would not increase protected exceedances of air quality standards, cause or contribute to new violations, or delay timely attainment of air quality standards Implementation of office, research and development, and/or commercial land uses on Planning • Area VII was not expected to generate toxic pollutants Moreover, the site Is not located within 0 25 mile of a source of toxic emissions R WropcnUPIV00a\Speafic plan-0505003 DOC 18 Rancho Cucamonga IASP SutrArea 18 Spec~Bc Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum to Previously Certdied EIRs Adopted Mitigation Program • Mitigation measures adopted as conditions of approval for the previously approved protect, applicable to Planning Area VII, are as follows • The following SCAQMD mitigation measures were incorporated into the protect To reduce particulate emissions from paved and unpaved roads, and construction activities, the protect applicant shall 1 Use low-emission alternative fuel (i a ,methanol, butane, or propane) as practicable in mobile construction equipment (e g ,tractor, scraper, dozer) 2 Develop a trip reduction plan to achieve 1 5 AVR for construction employees 3 Water site and clean equipment morning and evening, at least twice daily 4 Spread soil binders onsite, and on unpaved roads and parking areas 5 Comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 concerning implementation of dust suppression techniques to prevent fugitive dust from creating a nuisance offsite 6 Employ construction activity management techniques, such as extending the construction period, reducing the number of pieces of equipment used simultaneously, increasing the distance between emission sources, reducng or changing the hours of construction, and scheduling activity during off-peak hours . 7 Sweep streets if silt is carried over to adtacent public thoroughfares 8 Suspend grading operations during first and second stage smog alerts 9 Suspend all grading operations when wind speeds (as instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour 10 Wash off trucks leawng the site and cover all loads of loose material 11 Maintain construction egwpment engines by keeping them adequately tuned 12 Use low-sulfur fuel for stationary construction equipment 13 Use existing power sources (e g ,power poles) or clean-fuel generators rather than temporary power generators 14 Use low-emission onsite egwpment (e g ,methanol-, propane-, or butane-powered internal combustion engines) instead of diesel or gasoline • To reduce automobile emissions by reducing the number of vehicles driven to a work site on a daily basis, the protect applicant shall 15 Provide local shuttle services, and access to regional transit systems and transit shelters R 1Pro~easUPIV00/65pecific Plan-0505003 OOC 19 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area VII Addendum to Previousty Certfied EIRs 16 Work with the City of Rancho Cucamonga to develop and implement a TDM • ordinance The project shall also comply with the requirements of the TDM ordinance 17 Ensure efficient parking management 18 Provide preferential parking to high-occupancy vehicles and shuttle services To reduce vehicular emissions through traffic flow improvements, the protect applicant shall 19 Configure parking to minimize traffic interference 20 Minimize obstruction of through-traffic lanes 21 Provide a flagperson to guide traffic and ensure safety at construction sites. 22 Schedule operations affecting traffic for off-peak hours 23 Develop a traffic plan to minimize traffic flow interference from construction activities The plan may include advance public notice of routing, use of public transportation, and satellite parking areas with a shuttle service 24 Schedule goods movements for off-peak traffic hours 25 Provide dedicated turn lanes as appropriate To reduce stationary emissions of operation-related activities, the protect applicant shall• 26 Require development practices that maximize energy conservation as a prerequisite to permit approval 27 Improve the thermal integrity of buildings, and reduce the thermal load with automated time clocks or occupant sensors 28 Introduce window glazing, wall insulation, and efficent ventilation methods 29 Introduce energy-efficient heating and cooling appliances, such as water heaters, cooking equipment, refrigerators, air conditioners, furnaces, and boiler units 30 Incorporate appropriate passive solar design and solar heaters 31 Use devices that minimize the combustion of fossil fuels 32 Capture waste heat and re-employ it in nonresidential buildings 33 Landscape bwlding and median landscape areas with native drought-resistant species, as appropriate, to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits • R IPropc4aUPIV00615peuRC PIarW5050~3 DOC 20 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 SpecrBC Plan P/annmg Area Vll Addendum to Previously Cert~ed EIRs To protect sensitive land uses from mator sources of toxic air pollution, the protect applicant shall 34 Reqwre design features, operating procedures, preventive maintenance, operator training, and emergency response planning to prevent the release of toxic pollutants, as appropriate 35 Ensure compliance with notification and asbestos removal procedures outlined in SCAQMD Rule 1403 to reduce asbestos-related air quality impacts and health hazards Currently Proposed Land Uses Construction Impacts The currently proposed land uses would be expected to have the same grading Impacts as would the previously approved protect It is antiapated that regardless of land use, the entire Planning Area VII site would be graded Operational Impacts Future Implementation of residential and commercal land uses In Planning Area VII would result in reduced but similar operational air quality emissions when compared to the previously approved protect for Planning Area VII Proposed land uses would generate less vehicular traffic than the approved office, research and development, and commercial uses for the planning area, therefore, SCAQMD thresholds would not be exceeded The proposed land uses would be consistent with the applicable mitigation measures set forth in the Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final EIR as follows AQ-1 All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions Contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per the manufacture's speafication Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City venfication AQ-2 Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, all applicants shall submit construction plans to City of Rancho Cucamonga denoting the proposed schedule and protected equipment use Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that there use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the protect Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the SCAQMD as well as City Planning Staff AQ-3 All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113 Paints and coating shall be applied either by hand or high volume, low-pressure spray AQ-4 All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted In SCAQMD Rule 1108 AQ-5 All construction shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 Additionally contractors shall include the following provisions R 1PropctsUPIV004lSpeafic FIarM505003 DOC 21 Rancho Cucamonga IASP SubArea 18 Speafic Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum to Previous/v Cert~ed EIRs • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering • Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time • Schedule actroities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated sod during and after the end of work penods • Dispose of surplus excavated matenal in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices • Sweep streets as necessary if silt is carved over to adtacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling • Suspend grading operations during high winds in accordance with Rule 403 requrements • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means AQ-10 The proposed commercial areas shall incorporate food service AQ-11 All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or more employees shall be required to post both bus and MetroLink schedules in conspicuous areas AQ-12 All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 of more employees shall be requested to configure their operating schedules around the MetroLink schedule to the extent reasonably feasible AQ-13 All residential and commeraal structures shall be required to incorporate high effiaency/low polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters AQ-14 All residential and commeraal structures shall be regwred to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping AQ-15 All residential, commeraal, and industrial structures shall be regwred to incorporate light colored roofing materials Mitigation Program The previously adopted mitigation program for Planning Area VII would apply to the proposed land uses, where applicable for residential and commeraal development 4.5 EARTH RESOURCES Previously Approved Project A strong seismically induced ground-shaking event could affect the protect site during the operational lifetime of the development To reduce the potential impacts assoaated with seismically induced ground shaking on the protect site to a level considered less than significant, structures would be designed in accordance with the seismic requirements of the Uniform Building Code The potential for erosion on the protect site is considered to be moderate where vegetation cover is present (i a ,grape vineyards) (source Soil Conservation Service, 1980) Dust storms are known to occur within the region in which the protect site is located However, due to the R WropcnUPIUOW\Speafic PIarW505003 DOC 22 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 78 Speck Plan Planning Area VII Addendum to Previously Cert~ed EIRs high permeability and low shrink-swell potential assoaated with the sods present on the protect site, significant erosion impacts are not expected Root and stock material may have been disposed of at shallow depths on the protect site m the areas of the existing grape vineyard operations The uncovering, collection, and disposal of these materials during grading actmties from development of the protect site would reduce the potential impacts from the settlement of these materials Adopted Mitigation Program Mitigation measures adopted as conditions of approval for the previously approved protect, applicable to Planning Area VII, are as follows Similar to all development within the City of Rancho Cucamonga, structures to be constructed under the proposed Sub-Area Speafic Plan would be regwred to comply with all local and state development standards (grading permits, Algwst-Paolo Zone Act of 1972, Uniform Budding Code, etc) As typically regwred for individual developments within the IASP prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the following is a mitigation measure to reduce the potential impact of seismic settlement and differential compaction in the protect site under the development of the proposed Sub-Area Speafic Plan to a level considered less that significant • Prior to the Issuance of a grading permit, a subsurface geotechmcal investigation shall be conducted to determine the likelihood of seismic settlement and differential compaction on the protect site Findings of this investigation shall be submitted to the City and grading operations shall adhere to the recommendations identified m the . geotechmcal report Currently Proposed Land Uses A due-diligence level geotechmcal study was prepared for Planning Area VII by Leighton and Assoaates, Inc m February 2003 The findings of the report are summarized below and the report is included m its entirety as Appendix B Soils and Geology Plannmg Area VII Is underlain by thick alluvial sod deposits Groundwater was not present in borings to a depth of 26 5 feet below the existing ground surface nor Is It expected to be present up to 350 to 400 feet below the ground surface based on review of regional groundwater maps Based on site-speafic subsurface geotechmcal investigation of Planning Area VII, no new significant impacts are antlapated Based on additional subsurface investigation, the sod located within the upper five to 10 feet Is considered to be slightly to moderately compressible with a mild hydrocollapse potential Onslte soils are also expected to have a very low expansion potential and are mild to moderately corrosroe to ferrous metals Seismicity The site is located in southern California, a known seismically active area No active faults pass . beneath Piamm~g Area VII nor is it located within a designated Algwst-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone Therefore, there is little potential for surface fault rupture However, the presence of R NropcISVPIV00dl5paufic Ran-0505003 DOC 23 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan Plann\ng Area Vll Addendum to Previously Certdied EIRs regional faults within a 60-mile radws of the site creates a potential for strong ground motion at • the site The Cucamonga fault, located approximately 10 kilometers north of the site, is potentially capable of producing the greatest amount of peak horizontal ground accelerations (ground shaking) on the protect site No new significant impacts are antiapated As stated before, the depth of groundwater at Planning Area VII is in excess of 50 feet below the existing ground surface This factor, in addition to the fact that the site is not located in an area mapped as potentially liquefiable in the San Bernardino County OfFclal Land Use Plan for the Guastl Quadrangle indicates that the potential for liquefaction is virtually nonexistent With respect to the Clty of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final EIR, there are no applicable mitigation measures Mitigation Program The previously adopted mitigation program for Planning Area VII would apply to the proposed land uses 4.6 HYDROLOGY/DRAINAGE AND WATER QUALITY Previously Aaaroved Project Hydrology and Drainage Existing surface water runoff drains via sheetfiow to existing facilities in Cleveland Street . Development of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan protect, inclusroe of Planning Area VII, would increase impervious surfaces and surface water runoff However, master planned downstream drainage facilities have been designed to accommodate the bwldout of General Plan land uses, including the Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan area Groundwater The City of Rancho Cucamonga overlies two groundwater basins, the Cucamonga Basin and the Chino Basin The Specific Plan area overlies the central portion of the Chino Basin The basin is recharged primarily from rainfall and stormwater runoff The IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan EIR noted that overall development of the Speafic Plan may include the use of groundwater resources Withdraw of groundwater within the Chino Basin would require a well permit from the Chino Basin Municipal Water District Water Quality Short-term water quality impacts could occur on Planning Area VII from grading operations during the rainy season and cause erosion and the transport of silt in downstream surface water flows Long-term impacts could occur from the transport of urban constituents (i a ,oil, grease, fire particles) within onsite surface flows Due to the depth of groundwater in the area, no impacts to groundwater quality are expected Adopted Mitigation Program Mitigation measures adopted as conditions of approval for the previously approved protect, . applicable to Planning Area VII, are as follows R 1PropclsUPl W04\Speafic Plan-0505003 DOC 24 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area VII Addendum to Previously Cert~ed EIRs • Similar to development that would be allowed on the protect site under the existing IASP, various storm drain Improvements will be installed, as development of the proposed Sub-Area Speafic Plan progresses, to convey the post-development onsite storm flows Into the existing storm drain facilities adjacent to the site The proposed storm drain facilities will be sized and located to conform to the City's current storm flow conveyance policy • Prior to the issuance of a grading permit for development of structures, erosion control measures that include Best Management Practices (BMPs) and compliance with NPDES stormwater quality regwrements shall be included within construction plans Currently Proaosed Land Uses Runoff from Planning Area VII would drain Into a 57-inch storm drain facility proposed to be located in Fourth Street As with the previously approved land uses for Planning Area VII, the proposed land uses would result in the introduction of Impervious surfaces to the site Required open space within Plamm~g Area VII would allow for continued percolation within the site Future development of the site with commeraal and residential uses would result In a similar amount or a reduction In impervious surfaces when compared to overall development of Planning Area VII with commercial uses, and therefore a similar amount of surface water flow As with the previously adopted land uses for Planning Area VII, the proposed land uses would result in a similar incremental decrease In the quality of surface water Like the proposed Sub- Area 18 Specific Plan, proposed land uses would not significantly affect downstream facilities Groundwater quality would not be affected either by proposed uses or the approved Sub- Area 18 Specific Plan The proposed land uses would be consistent with the applicable mitigation measures set forth In the Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final EIR as follows SG-21 The City shall require agricultural operations and new construction to comply with City provisions for preventing soil erosion and excessive generation of dust where the property Is vulnerable to these conditions HD-5 During the construction and operation of new development the City of Rancho Cucamonga will require the implementation of best management practices to minimize pollutant runoff This will include, where applicable, the preparation of Storm Water Pollution Prevention Programs (SWPPPs) to control runoff from construction sites HD-8 During the construction and operation of new development, the CIty of Rancho Cucamonga will implement best management practices to minimize pollutant runoff and percolation into the groundwater basin This will include, where applicable, the preparation of SWPPPs to control runoff from construction sites Mitigation Program The previously adopted mitigation program for Planning Area VII is applicable to the proposed land uses • R \ProKdsVPIV006\SO~~fic Plan-0505003 DOC 25 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 78 Specific Plan Planning Area VII Addendum to Previously Certified EIRs 4.7 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Previously Approved Proiect Implementation of urban land uses on Planning Area VII would result in the removal of grape vineyards, anon-native habitat During biological surveys conducted for the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan EIR, a single San Diego horned lizard (Phrynosoma coronatum blainvdlei) was observed within Planning Area VII The San Diego horned lizard is a Category 2 candidate species for federal listing as threatened or endangered The removal of this species from the site was not considered significant because of the protect site's isolation from important natural open space areas, high amount of human disturbance, and lack of native plant communities The Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly (DSFLF) was not found on the site during focused surveys (BonTerra Consulting, 1998 and February 2003, see Appendix C). The absence of indicator plants, the overall high density of vegetative cover, and the highly disturbed condition of the site makes it highly unlikely that the habitat site would support the DSFLF Impacts to the DSFLF are not expected to occur from protect implementation due to the lack of appropriate soils and vegetation conditions, as well as the adtacency of the existing urban land uses Adopted Mitigation Program No significant impacts on biological resources would occur, no mitigation was required Currently Proposed Land Uses Future development of Planning Area VII with proposed commercial and residential land uses . would result in the same amount of habitat removal as would occur with the previously approved land uses for Planning Area VII No significant impacts to biological resources are expected There are no biological resources mitigation measures set forth in the Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final EIR that would be applicable to the proposed land uses for Planning Area VII Mitigation Program No mitigation is required 4.8 PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES Water Supply Previously Approved Project Development of the 24-acre site with office, research and development, and commercial land uses was protected to generate a demand for approximately 72,000 gallons per day of water, this demand could be met by the Cucamonga County Water District. No significant impacts were anticipated Adopted Mdiaation Program No mitigation measures are regwred However, incorporation of the following measures would • conserve water supplies and reduce impacts to the region's water resources R 1Pro~ecISUPIU00al5peafic Plan-0505003 OOC 26 Rancho IASP Sub-Area 18 Speatic Plan Plamm~g Area VII Addendum to Previously Cert~ed EIRs • All toilet, shower, and faucet fixtures shall be of an "ultra low-flow" nature • Onsite landscaping shall use water-conserving plant material Automatic landscaping irrigation systems shall be used • Automatic shut-off faucets shall be used in offices/commercial/retail facilities • Landscaping and irrigation systems shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of Xeriscape as defined in Chapter 1916 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Currently Proposed Land Uses Planning Area VII is within the service area of the Cucamonga County Water Distract (CCWD) Development of Plamm~g Area VII with residential and commercial uses would increase demand of water from approximately 72,000 gallons per day to approximately 87,970 gallons per day It is expected that the Water Distract can serve the proposed land uses The proposed land uses would be consistent with the applicable mitigation measures set forth in the Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final E/R as follows W-1 The City shall coordinate with the CCWD and Inland Empire Utilities Agency to ensure that adequate water supplies and facilities are available to meet future growth W-3 Structures to retain preapitation and runoff on-site should be integrated into the design of the development where appropriate Measures that may be used to minimize runoff and to enhance infiltration include Dutch drains, precast concrete lattice blocks and bricks, terraces, diversions, runoff spreaders, seepage pits, and recharge basins W-4 The City shall continue to support the CCWD's efforts to develop the canyon water supply and to encourage 'water conservation Water conservation techniques appropriate for new and existing development include • Installing flow restrictors in showers • Repairing leaky water fixtures • Promoting drought resistant low maintenance vegetation W-5 The City shall cooperate with efforts of the CCWD to expand the re-use of wastewater for such uses as the irrigation of parkways, golf courses, landscaped areas, and parks, and, if feasible, for industrial processes W-6 The City shall implement applicable provisions of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) for municipal and private protects to protect ground water recharge areas from construction and other potential pollutant runoff Mdiaation Program • The previously adopted mitigation program for Planning Area VII is applicable to the proposed land uses R 1Pro~actsUPN0041SPK~fit Plan-0505003 DOC 27 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Spec~c Plan P/annmg Area Vll Addendum to Prev~ous/y Cert~ed EIRs Wastewater Previously Approved Project Development of the 24-acre Planning Area VII site would generate approximately 76,800 gallons per day of wastewater The CCWD indicated the existing wastewater system m the protect area was adequate to serve the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan protect Adopted Mitigation Prooram Development of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan would require payment of fees in accordance with the Cucamonga County Water District wastewater facility fee program Currently Proposed Land Uses The Cucamonga County Water Distract antiapates the existing sewer system and sewage treatment plant capacity to be adequate for the proposed land uses Future development of Planning Area VII with residential and commeraal uses would result m an increased generation of wastewater from approximately 76,800 gallons to 140,670 gallons per day because of higher generation rates assoaated with residential development when compared to office, research and development, and commeraal development uses This increase is not expected to significantly affect master planned wastewater facilities The proposed land uses would be consistent with the applicable mitigation measures set forth m the Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final E/R as follows WW-1 The City shall coordinate with the Inland Empire Utility Agency and Cucamonga County Water Distract to ensure that adequate wastewater factlities are available to meet future growth. Mitigation Program The previously adopted mitigation program for Planning Area VII is applicable to the proposed land uses Solid Waste Previously Approved Project Development of Planning Area VII with office, research and development, and commeraal uses would result in the generation of approximately 5 3 tons per day of solid waste While development of the planning area would increase existing solid waste generation, the development of the Sub-Area Specific Plan would be required to comply with the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element and City-approved source reduction and recycling programs No significant impacts were identified Adopted MdigaUon Program • The protect applicant shall implement a source reduction and recycling program for the . proposed Sub-Area Specific Plan which may include the following - Provide recycling faalities that allow paper, metal, plastic and glass to be separated - Compost green waste a w.o~ect:vPivooa~sv~~e~ aiaM-0sosoos ooc 28 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan Planning Area VII Addendum to Previously Cert~ed EIRs - Use minimal maintenance plants for landscaping Currently Proposed Land Uses Development of Planning Area VII with residential and commercial uses would not significantly impact existing and future solid waste faalities Because of the reduction in future development of Planning Area VII based on residential and commercal land uses, no new significant impacts would occur The proposed land uses would be consistent with the applicable mitigation measures set forth in the Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final EIR as follows SW-1 The City shall continue to implement waste reduction procedures consistent with AB 939 SW-2 The City shall coordinate with the County of San Bernardino, the San Bernardino Association of Governments, and solid waste haulers to ensure adequate services and facilities are available within and outside the County to collect and dispose of solid waste Mitigation Prooram The previously adopted mitigation program for Planning Area VII is applicable to the proposed land uses Schools Previously Approved Project The IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan site is located within the boundaries of the Cucamonga School District (CSD) and Chaffey Joint High School District (CJUHSD) The EIR determined that protect implementation would have indirect impacts Future employees at the protect site could create a demand for additional housing, these employees may have children who attend schools within the CSD and CJUHSD Adopted MdigaUon Program • Prior to occupancy, development impact fees in accordance with CSD and CJUHSD shall be paid Currently Proposed Land Uses Development of the protect site would directly generate new students attending schools within the Cucamonga School District (CSD) and Chaffey Joint Union High School Distnct (CJUHSD) Within the area served for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, CJUHSD has three high schools CJUHSD has a generation rate of 0 20 high school students per dwelling unit, a design capacity of 15,485 and an enrollment of 19,567 students (source Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan) A fourth high school site is planned east of Chaffey College The Cucamonga School District (CSD) operates three schools within the Rancho Cucamonga service area, two elementary schools and one tumor high school The CSD design capacity is 2,260 students (source Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan) For multi-family residences, the CSD uses a generation rate of 0 223 students per dwelling unit (source Rancho R \ProledsUPIV004\Speafic Plan-0505003 DOC 29 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum to Previously CeR~ed EIRs Cucamonga 2001 General Plan) Based on a maximum of 499 multi-family dwelling units in . Planning Area VII, future development would generate 111 elementary//unior high school students and 100 high school students Within the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan site, there are four other residential developments that have been implemented and/or constructed, one of these being a senior housing project As of March 2003, the generation rate associated with existing Specific Plan residential development has resulted in a student generation rate of 0 09, compared to 0 20 for CJUHSD and 0 223 for CSD Following the approval of Proposition IA by the voters of the State of Califomia, Senate Bdl 50 (SB 50), was fully implemented on November 4, 1998 One of the provisions of SB 50 was the suspension of the Mira-Hart-Murneta court decisions until January 1, 2006 Under SB 50, statutory caps have been placed on developer fees, and local governments cannot deny a project based on the adequacy of school faalities In lieu of the powers granted to the school distracts by the Mlra-Hart-Murneta court decisions, SB 50 provides school districts with a reformed statutory school fee collection procedure that, subject to certain conditions, authorizes school districts to collect alternative school fees on residential developments In order to levy alternative fees, a school distract must first approve aone-time School Faalities Needs Analysis that assesses existing capaaty and unhoused students. In accordance with California Government Code §65995(h)(I) "The payment or satisfaction of a fee, charge, or other requirement leveed or Imposed pursuant to Section 17620 of the Education Code in the amount specified in Section 65995 and, If applicable, any amounts specified in Section 65995 5 or 65995 7 are hereby deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjudicative act, or both, Involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property, or any change in governmental organization or reorganization as defined in Section 56021 or 56073, on the provision of adequate school facilities A State or local agency may not deny or refuse to approve a legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property, or any change In governmental organization or reorganization as defined in Section 56021 or 56073 on the basis of a person's refusal to provide school facilities mitigation that exceeds the amounts authonzed pursuant to this section or pursuant to Section 65995 5 or 65995 7, as applicable " There are no school mitigation measures set forth in the Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final EIR that are applicable to the proposed land uses Mdioation Program The previously adopted mitigation program for Planning Area VII is applicable to the proposed land uses 4.9 ENERGY DEMAND AND CONSERVATION Previously Approved Project Development of Planning Area VII with office, research and development, and commercial uses would result in a demand of approximately 5 19 million kilowatt hours per year of electncity Although the approved land uses would result in an increase in existing demand for electricity, project demand is within service projections of Southern California Edison , R 1PropckVPIV0041SDacific Pbn-0505003 DOC 30 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan Planning Area VII Addendum to Previously Certified EIRs Development of the site would demand approximately 25 4 mllllon therms of natural gas per year While land uses proposed on the site would Increase the existing demand for natural gas, the demand can be met by the Southern California Gas Company Adopted Mitigation Program No mitigation measures are required However, the following measures are proposed to minimize overall energy consumption. In order to conserve energy, Individual developments on the project site shall incorporate energy efficient technologies, practices, and equipment to reduce the onsite demand of electricity, natural gas and fuel • Implementation of the pro)ect shall comply with Title 24 of the California Uniform Building Code Currently Proposed Land Uses As shown in Table 7, implementation of the proposed land uses would decrease the annual demand for electricity from approximately 519 million kWh annually to approximately 2 36 mllllon kWh annually, and would decrease the annual demand of natural gas from approximately 25 4 million therms annually to 23 OS mllllon therms annually compared to the approved land uses for Planning Area VII Because the proposed land uses would reduce both natural gas and electrical demands associated with future development of the Planning Area VII site, no new significant impacts would occur TABLE 7 ENERGY DEMAND Land Use Units/Area Demand Factor Annual Demand (million therms) Natural Gas Residential 499 du 43,138 cf/unlUyr 21 53 Commercial 43,738 sq ft 34 8 cf/sUyr 1 52 Total 23 05 Land Use UnitslArea Demand Factor Annual (million kWh) EleMncrty Residential 499 du 5,626 5 kWh/uniUyr 0 28 Commercial 43,738 sq ft 47 45 kWh/sf/yr 2 08 Total 2.36 cf/unNyr cubic feet per dwelling unit per year cf/sf/yr cubic feet per square foot per year du dwelling unit sq ft square feet kWh/unNyr kilowatt hour per dwelling and per year kWh/sf/yr kilowatt hour per square foot per year The Southern California Edison Company can Install electric distribution facilities and provide electric service in accordance with its Tariff Schedules that are the effective rules and rates of the Southern California Edison Company on file with the Public Utilities Commission of the State ft \ProiecfsVPI0004\Specific Plan-0505003 DOC 31 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum [o Previously CeRrFed EIRs of California The Southern California Gas Company has faalities in the area where the protect is proposed Gas service to the protect could be provided from an existing main located in Milliken Avenue The service would be in accordance with the Company's policies and extension plans on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the time contractual agreements are made The proposed land uses would be consistent with the applicable mitigation measures set forth in the City of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan as follows NG-1 The City of Rancho Cucamonga shall provide population projections to The Gas Company to ensure they have adequate Information upon which to protect natural gas demands NG-2 The City shall coordinate with The Gas Company to ensure adequate services and facilities are available to provide for future development ES-1 The Clty will promote and pursue strategies to decrease dependence on imported non-renewable energy resources ES-2 The Clty will promote energy efficiency and renewable energy resources ES-3 The City shall initiate and promote measures into land use and circulation planning that will contribute to the reduction of operational energy requirements ES-4 The City shall review existing land use and zoning regulations to assess and identify further opportunities for energy conserving measures, including development of an infrastructure to support the use of alternative fuel ES-5 The City will establish and coordinate energy efficiency programs to assist residential users ES-6 The City will promote energy efficent design In all projects ES-7 The City well promote integration of energy efficient programs in all types of commercial development protects ES-9 The City shall continue pursing strategies to promote a balance of housing and employment opportunities within the City and surrounding region Mitigation Program The previously adopted mitigation program for Planning Area VII is applicable to the proposed land uses 4.10 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Previously Aaaroved Project Use of the protect site for grape vineyards indicates the potential for herbiade site soils Herbicides are not considered to be a public health threat and can necessary, using readily available techniques residue in shallow be remediated, if R \PmlegsUPI000a\Spetific Plan-0505003 OOC 32 Rancho IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area Vll Addendum to Previously Cert~ed EIRs Research and development land uses on Planning Area VII could use and/or generate hazardous materials, however, local, state, and federal regulations/requirements and gwdelmes provide mechanisms to ensure proper storage and transport of hazardous materials and framed response to any potential hazardous material incidents Adopted Mitigation Program Development currently being proposed, constructed, or completed under bwldout of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan are regwred to comply with all existing local, state, and federal regulations/requrements and gwdelmes that provide for mechamsms to ensure proper storage and transport of hazardous materials and treatment of any potential hazardous material incidents Therefore, no further mitigation measures are regwred Currently Proposed Land Uses Implementation of future development associated with the proposed land uses would be regwred to comply with all mandated regulations Implementation of the residential and commeraal land uses are not expected to result in a significant impact with regard to hazardous materials Residential development would not be expected to generate or use hazardous materials No new significant impacts would occur The proposed land uses would be consistent with the applicable mitigation measures set forth in the City of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan as follows HMC-1 The City shall continue to support the County of San Bemardino's management . of the Hazardous Materials Disclosure Program (HMDP) to identify and regulate businesses handling extremely hazardous materials, or hazardous materials within regulated quantities HMC-2 The City shall continue to maintain and implement the Household Hazardous Waste Element, in accordance with State law, to provide handling and emergency response services for household hazardous waste HMC-3 The City shall continue to participate in the County-wide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program to address storm water runoff, pollution prevention, and illegal discharge of waste into storm drains in the community Mitigation Program The previously adopted mitigation program for Planning Area VII is applicable to the proposed land uses R 1ProredsVPI000615peafit Plan-0505003 OOC 33 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Planning Area VII Addendum to Previously Certrred EIRs 5. CONCLUSIONS • An Addendum to the previously certified Clty of Rancho Cucamonga 2001 General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and the previously certified Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Sub-Area 18 Final EIR is the appropriate documentation because some changes or additions are necessary to allow for multiple family residential uses as additionally permitted use within the Mixed-Use land use designation as set forth in the General Plan for IASP Specific Plan Sub-Area 18 and in the Spectfic Plan for Planning Area VII None of the conditions described in the CEQA Gwdelines §15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred The City of Rancho Cucamonga finds that • there have not been substantial changes in the protect that require mator revisions to the previous EIR because of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects, • there have not been substantial changes with respect to the arcumstances under which the protect is undertaken, which will require mator revisions to the previous EIRs due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects, or there is no new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exerase of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified as complete, that shows any of the following a) the protect will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIRs, b) significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIRs, c) mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the protect, but the protect proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative, or d) mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Final EIRs would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the protect proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative CI R \Propt4UPIV00/\Spaofic Plan-0505007 DOC 34 Rancho Cucamonga IAay-05-03 O9•l6am Fram-LSA Associatac LSA LSA A990CI ATEY. niC x65o seaves sraaar Sra PLCOa ASV SReiDa OAl,wa%iw gaSO7 May S. 2003 Ms Heidi Mather Regional Development Manager JPI Westcoast Development. L.P. 8910 University Center Lsne, Suite 15U San Diego, California 92122 9097914277 T-675 P 002/006 F-985 ore[( OPPlCt3 pT CCLLINS qoq TB x.qe xo 78L iRTroB aeaaeuT qoq T8x SSTT PnR er ucwvono aocacxw Subject: General Aynames Planning Area VII GPA/SPA Dear Ms Matk~Cr. JPI 1Vestcoast Development is proposing a General Plan Amendment/Specific Plan Amendment to modify the land uses permitted m Planning Area VII of the General Dynamics property. Planning Area VII is located on the northwest comer of the intersection of Fourth Street and Milliken Avenue, in the Ciry of Rancho Cucamonga. LSA Associates, Inc. (LSA) prepared a San Bernardino County Congesnon Managetttent Program (CMP) Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the General Dynamics property to January, 1994. The TIA was subsequently approved by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG). Genera] Dynamics and the Ctty of Rancho Cucamonga signed a development agreement identifying the intersection improvements that would be required m conjunction with the developmcn[ of the General Dynamics property LSA has analyccd the tap generation of the land uses petmttted in Planning Area VII under the proposed General Plan AmendmertdSpecifiePtan Amendment and compared it to the trip generation assumed for the same Planning Area in the approved T1A- This leuer summarizes the results of our analysis The General Plan Amendment/Speeific Platt Amendment would perm(( 499 apartrnent units, 15,00(1 square feet of restaurant uses, and 30,748 square feet of general retail uses The p.m peak hour and daily trip genemnon for the proposed land uses was calculated using utp generation rates from the lnshtute of Transportation Engnrxrs (fI'E) Trtp Gexerativn (GW Edition). Table A summarizes the p.m peak hour and daily trip generation for the proposed land uses As shown in Table A, the proposed land uses are expected to generate G,583 dmly nips, with 588 nips occurring during the p.m peak hour. Table A also sumutarius die uip generation for the land uses assumed for the Planning Ate:( in the approved General Dynatttics TIA. As shown in Table A, the approved laud uses are expected to genexate 1G,178 daily trips, with 1.755 trips occumng during the p.m peak hour. Thus, the tap generation of the proposed land uses is substantia]]y lower than the tap genemnon approved for the Planning Area in the TIA, upon which the improvetttet+tc identified to the General Dynamics development agreement were predicated sisroxn vrw330Vr~ rip Ocn irnLT wpa> iLAN%!%G Crt VIYONMGNTAL YCICNCYY I YtlYION flay-05-03 Ofi.lfiam From-LSA Accociatec 9097814277 T-675 P 004/009 F-995 I YA Ar4llelATr,S. INC 1r u Table A - 4th & Milliken Parcel Vll Trip Generation Proposed Land Uses P.M.Peak Hour Land Use Units to Out Total Daily Apartments 467 D.U Trips/[7mtr 0 42 0 20 0.62 6 63 Tnp Gencranon 196 93 289 3.096 Shopping Crnmr IS 360 TSF Tnps/[Jmr'' 1 SO l 94 3.74 42 92 Tnp Generation 28 30 58 659 Restaurant 15 000 TSF Tnps/LTntts 6 52 4.34 10 86 130 34 Trip Generation 98 65 163 1,955 Tocil Parcel Tnp Generation 322 188 510 5.711 CJ Apprroved Lnna uses P.M.Peak Hour Laud Use Uai~c Iln Out Total Daily Retail 130 TSF Trips/Unit` 2 98 2.98 5.96 64 OS Trlp Generation 388 388 776 8,327 Restatrruot 20 iSF 7nps/Umt` 8 78 7 4S 16 26 205 36 Tnp Geaeratron 175 150 325 4,107 Beak 30 TSF Tnps/Uait` 7 63 9 72 17.35 140 61 Tnp Generadon 229 292 521 4Y18 Office 450 TSF Trips/LTnit` 0 21 104 1.25 9 72 Tnp Generation 96 467 563 4.375 Total Parcel Tnp Geneaadoa 888 1.297 2,185 21,027 RetaillRcsffimantPass-byrcducnon(39%) 220 21n a30 a,849 Nct Ncw Parcel Tnp Generation 668 1,057 1,755 16,178 I Rates ba4a1 on Land Ux 220 - Apartments from Insatate of'franspmtanon Enpneers (iTE) Tnp Ccncrntlon. 6th Edrtton = Rates baxd on Land Usc 820 - Shopping Center from 1TE Tnp Grnemrion 6th Ed s Rarer based on I vld Use R32 - Htgh Tumo•er (Stt-Down) Resuuranl from IfE I rep Cenervtton , 6th Ed. ` Rates for approved lwd arts ate taken ftom fife Csalrmf Dynamrcr Raacho Cucamonga Traj(ic Impact Analyrts (1SA, January 1994), wtuch rchcd on fi'b Trrp Genararwn. Sih Edmore 5/5/2003 (R VPWS30(maden'hrp Cea Comp) IAay-05-03 O6•ITam From-LSA Accoclatsc A097914277 T-675 P 006/006 F-965 LbA A540 CIwT[b INC Table B - General Dynamics Project Daily Trip Generation Comparison Ap ptovcci Actual or Cttttcnd vsed/A roved d Use Sla Units ltatc Tnpn Sue Units Rstc T^ amm~g A[+xa 1X (Approved Cur 321 apanments) 3,45 O~~ I40 TSF 12.93 1,810 Rcvalm4rt[ 10 TSF 203 36 2,034 Busmas Park I40 TSF 16 37 2,012 dlusmten[ for tcs[a[nan[ pe55-by C/55b) 513 ubtotal 4.333 g Anew X Q3o ehange) 4.12 gc~ 30 TSF 9161 4,583 Business Park 150 TSF 1437 2.136 dlustment for retail pass-try (3796) 1,971 abm,~ 4,126 amm~g Arca XI (No chtutgc) G• Office 115 TSF 13.36 1,560 RCtaumnt 10 TSF 20536 2,034 Busmcss Perk 130 TSF 14.37 ? ISfi Adjusmtent for tcstautan[pass-by (739'0) 513 ebtoral 428 Menolutk Stanon 3•~ luument for lntuaN TDM tnp capsule (2090) GOtI utnnml 2.400 lannme Area Suhtnni 6.628 OTAL GROSS NEar TRIPS 80,015 47,5 RNAL TRIP CAPTT()RE (10%) 7,702 4,73 OM/CRANSTT RL•DUCIIUN 7,702 4,738 068 38 OTAL EFFECTIVE TRIP GENERATION 64.01 / . Note Tnp gcncranon rmec for onprnaLLy approved dcvelrlpmen[ are from the 1'fE Tnp Generation manual. Flfth Edaron Tnp genereaon rates for subsequendy approved dLwelopmen[ are from the 1TE Tnp Gencrwinn manual, Sixth Edtnon. 5/3/2(103 CR V PW33(nGU tnp gcnv.DT) ~ ~ ~ ~,r, • DUE-DILIGENCE-LEVEL GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE PROPOSED MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, NORTH OF 4T" STREET, WEST OF MILLIKEN AVENUE, CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Prepared for: JPI WESTCOAST DEVELOPMENT, L.P. 8910 University Central Lane, Suite 150 San Diego, California 92122 Project No. 020873-001 February 13, 2003 ~• Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON CROUP COMPANY Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY February 13, 2003 Protect No. 020873-001 To JPI Westcoast Development, L.P 8910 Umverstty Central Lane, Sutte 150 San Dtego, California 92122 Attention. Ms. Heidi Mather Subject Due-Diligence-Level Geotecluucal InvestigaUOn of the Proposed Multi-family Residential Development, North of 4u' Street, West of Milliken Avenue, City of Rancho Cucamonga, Califomta • In response to vour request, Leighton and Associates, Inc has conducted a due diligence-level geotechnical investigation of the proposed multi-family residential development located at the northwest comer of 4`" Street and Milliken Avenue m the City of Rancho Cucamonga. California. "I1us srudy is intended to address the geotechnical feasibility of the site for development and to provide preliminary geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the proposed development. Additional geotechnical review and/or investigation will be required based on final project plans. Based upon our preliminary mvesttgatton and analysts, the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical viewpoint, provided our recommendations aze incorporated in the design and construction of the project. The most significant geotechmcal issues a[ the site are those related to compressible soil. The site is underlazn by -oose to medium dense or medium stiff to stiff silty sand and sandy silt with some gravel. Partial removal and recompaction of this soil will be necessary to reduce the potential for adverse settlement of structures and other site improvements. Although no grading or construction plans are available, we anticipate that minor cuts and fills will be required to attazn desired grades. The site is not located in a currently designated Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Study Zone, and • is not identified as a potentially liquefiable area on the Geologic Hazazd Overlay for Guasti 14125 Telephone Avenue, Suite 1 ^ Chino, CA 91710.5770 909.590.4909 ^ Fax 909.590.2989 ^ vawev leightongeo coin 020873-001 Quadrangle of the San Bemazdino County Official Land Use Plan (1994) No mapped active or potentially active faults traverse or trend toward the site. However, rt is located within an azea of • histoncally high seismic activity. Thus, s~gmficant ground shaking should be anticipated at the site dunng the anticipated life of the proposed structures. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this protect If you have any questtons, or if we can oe of further service, please call us at your convemence Respectfully subrmtted, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC ~~~ Philip tic aze , CEG 1715 Semor Protect Geologist No 61778 Exp 6.30.05 Jason Hertzberg, RCE 61778 Protect Engineer ~~ Reviewed by David C Smith, RCE 46222 Pnncipal PP/JDH/PB/DCS/rsh Distnbution: (4) Addressee r1 LJ • - 2 - Leighton and Associates, Inc. P LEIGMTON GROUP COMPR NY 020873-001 • TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Paee 1 0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 1 1 1 Proposed Development .............................................................................. 1 1.2 Site Location and Descnption ............................... ...... ............. ............ 1 1 3 Purpose of Investigation ............................................ ....................... 1 1 4 Scope of Investigation ....... ........................................ .......................... 1 2 0 FINDINGS ............................ ............................................................. ~ 2.1 Site Geology .............................................. ............................... 5 2 2 Subsurface Soil Condttions ............... .. ...... ....... ......... ~ 2.3 Groundwater . .............. ..... ................................ ...................... 5 2 4 Faulting and Sersmic~ty ....... .............. .. .. ....... ....... ..... .. 6 2.5 Secondary Seismic Ha2ards .. ............ . . ........... ....... ........ 6 2 6 Soil Compressibility .. . .. ........ ...... .. .- ....... ........ .. 7 2 7 Strength Characteristics . ............................................................ ... 7 2 8 Soil Expansion Potential . .. ........... . ..... - .... - .. .......... • 2.9 Soluble Sulfates .... ...................... ................................................... 7 2 10 Resistivity, Chlonde and pH.. ... ..... .. .. ....... .................. 3 3 0 CONCLUSIONS ..-- ..... .... ...... . ... . ... . . ...... ... ..... .. 9 4 0 RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................... ....... ....................... 10 4.1 Earthwork ................................................ ................................ 10 4.2 Preliminary Foundation Recommendations ........................................................... 11 4 3 Settlement ...... ........................................ ...................................... 12 4 4 Slab-On-Grnde ............. .......................................................................... 12 4.5 Retauring Walls ...................... ................................................................... 14 4.6 Se~smtc Design Parameters ............ ................................................................ I S 4 7 Cement Type and Corrosion Protection ............................................................ 15 4 8 Preltmtary Pavement Des~gn ........................................................................... 16 4.9 Temporary Excavations ......................................................................................... 16 4 10 Trench Backfill ....... ...... .................................................................. 17 4 11 Surface Dramage .................................................................................................. 17 4 12 Add~ttonal Geotechmcal Services .... .......................................................... 17 i • -' - Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGNTON GROUP COMPANY Appendices 020873-001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Appendix A -References Appendix B - Geotechmcal Bonng Logs Appendix C -Laboratory Test Results Appendix D -General Earthwork and Grading Specifications Fieures LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1 - Srte Location Map -Page 2 Figure 2 -Bonng Location Map - Reaz of Text Figure 3 -Retaining V~Jall Backfill and Subdrain Detazl - Rear of Text • • • -"- Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGNTON GROUP COMPANY 020873-001 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Proposed Development Based on the Stte Plan, the proposed development is expected to consist of the construction often multi-family apartment buildings, a leasing center, pool, underground uuhmes, access roads, and other associated improvements The preliminary plans include a 3-acre retail center at the southeast comer of the site. However, we understand that this plan is prelminary and that the development may not include the retazl center. Based on the proposed improvements and the existing topography, we anticipate that minor cuts and fills (on the order of 5 feet or less) will be required to obtain the desired finish grades 1.2 Site Location and Description 1 The approximately 20-acre, roughly trapezoidal-shaped site is located at the northwest f comer of 4's Street and Milliken Avenue m the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. The site is bounded on the north by 5'" Street, on the south by 4`s Street, on the east by Milliken Avenue and on the west by a new multi-family residential development. The site currently consists of a vineyard crossed by several dirt roads and slopes gently to the I• southwest 1.3 Purpose or Investigation The purpose of this study has been to evaluate the general geotechnical conditions at the site, to identify major geotechnical or geologic issues that would impact site development, and to provide preliminary geotechmcal recommendations for design and construction This report is based on our corespondence with you, our understanding of the site conditions, and the 100-scale Scheme `B' Site Plan, prepared by Architects Orange, dated December 9, 2002 1.4 Scope of Investigation The scope of our investigation has included the following tasks. • Back2rouad Review - A background review of readily available, relevant, in-house I geotechmcal reports, literature, and aerial photographs was performed. We also reviewed the geotechmcal reports previously prepared by others for the site and I adjacent sites • I -1 Leighton and Associates, Inc A LEIG NTON G0.0UP COMPANY PROPOSED MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTU\L DEVELOPMENT North of 4th Street, West of Mllllken Avenue Clty of Rancho Cucamonga, Callfomla SITE PROJECT NO LOCATION 020873-001 • DATE MAP February 2003 Figure No. 1 -~- BASE Mnv Topo InteraWve Maps on C0.Rom, NO SCALE Los Angels County, GuasL Quadrangle 020873-001 • • Pre-field InvesU2arion Acuviues -Coordinated vnth Underground Servtce Alert (USA) to have extsttng underground uttlittes located and mazked pnor to our subsurface tnvesttgauon. • Field Lzvestteahon -Our field invesugatton conststed of the excavation, logging and sampling of five hollow-stem auger bonngs at representative locations wtthtn the site The bonngs were excavated to a depth of 26.5 feet below the existing ground surface. Each bonng was logged by a member of our technical staff Representauve relatively undisturbed and bulk soil samples were obtained at selected intervals for laboratory testing. Logs of the geotechnical borines are presented in Appendix B Approximate boring ]ocauons aze shown on the accompanying Bonng Location Map, Figure 2. • Laboratory Tests -Laboratory tests were performed on selected relatively undisturbed and bulk soil samples obtained dunng our field investigation. The laboratory testing program was designed to evaluate the engmeenng chazactenstics of the onsrte soils Tests performed include In situ moisture content and dry density of esisung sods • - Atterberg Limns to classify the soil and to evaluate eneineenng properties of the soil - Maximum dry density and optimum moisture content to valuate the re)aUve compaction of onsrte earth matenals - Direct sheaz on remolded soil samples to evaluate the strength chazacteristics of the onsrte material when used as compacted fill. - Consolidation and hydroconsohdation to evaluate soil compression charactensttcs. - Expansion Index to evaluate the expansion potential of the neaz-surface soils. - Water-soluble sulfate concentration in the soil for sulfate exposure and cement type recommendations - Resistrvity, chlonde content and pH to evaluate corosion potential of the onsrte sods. - 3 - Leighton and Associates, Inc P LEIGHTON GROUP COM PPNY 020873-001 • Enemeenne Analvs~s -The data obtained from our background review, field • exploration, and laboratory testing program was evaluated and analyzed in order to provide the conclusions and recommendations in the following sections. • Report Prenazation -The results of our geotechnical investigation have been siunmanzed in this report, presenting our findings, conclusions and recommendations I-1 U ~ • - a - Leighton and Associates, Inc A ~EIG NTON GROUP COMPANY 020873-001 • 2.0 FINDINGS 2.1 Site GeoloQv The srte ~s located wtthtn the Chino Balm in the northern portton of the Pemnsulaz Range geomorphic province of Caltfonia MaJor structural features surround the regton mcludtng the Cucamonga fault and the San Gabnel Mountans to the north, the Chino fault and Puente Chino Hills to the west, and the San Jacinto fault to the east. In addition. this is an azea of lazge-scale crustal disturbance as the relauveiy northwestwazd moving Pemnsulaz Range Provtnce, collides with the Trattsverse Mange Provtnce (San Gabnel Mountatns~ to the north. Several active or potentially active faults have been mapped in the regton and aze believed to accommodate compression associated with tlvs collision The srte is located approximately 10 ltilometers south of the Cucamonga Fault Zone. This is a maJor active fault zone forming the steep escarpment between the San Gabnel Mountains to the north and the basin floor on the south The srte is underlain by alluvial soil eroded from the San Gabnel Mountains and deposited m the srte vicinity 2.2 Subsurface Soil Conditions I• Based upon our review of pertinent geotechntcal literature. and our subsurface exploration, the srte is underlain by flock alluvial soil deposits. Within the upper 10 feet, these deposits generally consist of loose to medmm dense or medium stiff to stiff, silty sand and :,andy I silt with some gravel. Below 10 feet the alluvial soil generally consists of loose to dense, tine- to coarse-grained silty sand, gravelly sand, and sand to the depths mvesUgated Occasional cobbles were encountered at the surface and to some of the bonngs dttring dnlling. Bedrock was not encountered during our exploratory bonngs 1'he to situ moisture content of the soil wttlun the upper 10 feet ranged from 1 percent to 14 percent. 2.3 Groundwater 1 Groundwater was not encountered many of our bonngs performed during tlus investigation to a maximum depth of 26 5 feet Based on our review of vanous groundwater maps (Wildermuth, 1997, CDWR, 1970), groundwater is expected to be on I the order of 350 to 400 feet below the ground surface hn the vicinity of the srte. As such, groundwater is not expected to be a constraint to the proposed development. i~ I _ ~~ - 5 Leighton and Associates, Inc I A LEIGNTON GROUP COMPANY 020873-001 2.4 Faulting and Seismicity Our review of available in-house literature indicates that there aze no known active or • potentially active faults that traverse the site, and the site is not located within an Algwst- Pnolo Earthquake Fault Study Zone. The pnnctpal seismic hazard that could affect the site is ground shaking resulting from an earthquake occurring along one of several major active or potentially active faults m southern California. The known regional active and potentially active faults that could produce the most significant ground shaking at the site include the Cucamonga, San Jose, San Jacinto, and Chino-Central Avenue faults. Design of the development in accordance with current UBC regwrements is intended to reduce the impact of seismic shaking on the site improvements. Peak Honzontal Ground Accelerations (PHGA) for the site were estimated using a deterministic seismic hazard analysis, based on currently available earthquake and fault information The analysis computes the site PHGA that could be expected to result from an earthquake on a specific fault using the estimated maximum magnitude earthquake event PHG.4's were estimated using the EQFAULT computer program (Blake, ?000), based on the attenuation relattonslup by Sadigh et al (1997). Based on the analysts, the Cucamonga fault (located approxunately 10 kilometers north of the site) is potentially capable of producing the greatest PHGA at the site, due to its proximity, fault type, and its maximum earthquake magnitude of 7 0 (Mw) It is estimated that such an earthquake • on this fault near the site could produce seismic shaking with a PHGA of 0.41 g 2.5 Secondary Seismic Hazards L~uefaction Potential Liquefaction is the loss of soil strength or stiffness due to a buildup of pore-water pressure dunng strong ground shaking Liquefaction is associated pnmanly with loose (low density), saturated, fine- to medium-grained, cohesionless soils. Effects of liquefaction can include sand boils, settlement, and bearing capacity failures below stmctural foundations. The site is not located m an azea mapped as potentially hquefiabie m the San Bernazdino County Official Land Use Plan for the Guastt Quadrangle (San Bemazdino County, 1994). In addition, regional groundwater maps indicate that shallow groundwater conditions do not exist locally. As such, the potential for liquefaction occurrence at the site is considered to be nil. ~' • - 6 Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY 020873-001 • Setsmrcally Induced Settlement Dttnng a strong seismic event, setsmtcally induced settlement can occur wttlun loose to moderately dense, dry or saturated granulaz soils. Settlement caused by ground shaking is often nonuniformly distnbuted, winch can result in differential settlement We have performed analyses to estimate the seismically induced settlement using the methods set forth by Toktmatsu and Seed (1987) The potential total settlement resulting liom seismic loading is estimated to be less than 1 inch. and potential setstmcally induced differential settlement is estimated to be less than %z inch over a distance of 50 feet. 2.6 Sod Comoressibility Based on our subsurface investigation and laboratory testing, the soil located wttlun the upper 5 to 10 feet is generally considered to be slightly to moderately compressible The onstte soils exlvbtt a mild hydrocollapse potenttal. 2.7 Strength Characteristics A direct sheaz test was performed on a representattve remolded soil sample to evaluate • the strength chazactenstics of the soils onsrte when toed as compacted fill fhe results of :tic laboratory test are presented m Appendix C. 2.S Sod ~xoansion Potential A representattve sample of the subsurface soil was tested for expanston potential The results of this test indicate a very low expanston potenttal (Expansion Index of 2) Based on this result and the granulaz nature of the onstte soil, the neaz-surface soils aze expected to have a very low expanston potenttal. 2.9 Soluble Sulfates Water-soluble sulfates ,n soil can react adversely with concrete. However, concrete structures in contact with soils containing sulfate concentrations of less than 0.10 percent aze considered to have negligible sulfate exposure (IBCO, 1997 edition, Chapter 19). A representattve sample of the subsurface soil was tested for water-soluble sulfates The results of tlvs test indicate a soluble sulfate content of approximately 0.01 percent by weight, indicating negligible sulfate exposure - 7 Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIG NTON GROUP COMPANY 020873-001 2.10 Resistivity, Chloride, and off • Soil corrosivrty to ferrous metals can be estimated by the soil's pH level, electncal resisUvrty, and chlonde content. In general, soil having a mimmum resisnvrty between 1,000 and 2.000 ohm-cm ~s consrdered corrosive. Soil with a chlonde'content of 500 ppm or more is considered corrosive to ferrous metals As a screemng for potentially corrosive soil, a representative soil sample was tested to detemune its mrnimum resisnv~ty, chlonde content, and pH level The chlonde content was 43 ppm The mmimum resrsUVrty of the sample was 10.000 ohm-cm, and the pH value was 7 11. Based on these results, the onsne soils are considered to be rruldly to moderately corrosive to ferrous metals n L I ~ • - 8 Leighton and Associates, Inc A LEIGMTON G0.OUP COMPANY 020873-001 I• 3.0 CONCLUSIONS Based upon this study, we conclude that the proposed Improvements are geotechnically feasible. We have found no significant geologic or soil-related constraints dtinng the course of this investigation that cannot be mitigated by proper design and construction practices Specific conclusions are below. I • Compressible Soil -The onsrte, neaz-surface soil Is considered slightly to moderately compressible. Partial removal and recompactton of this matenal will be necessary to reduce I the potential for excesstve total and differential settlement "Che onsrte sotls exhibit a mild hydrocollapse potential • Groundwater -Groundwater was not encountered during drilling Based on the regional groundwater data, eoundwater will not be a constraint to the proposed development. • Seismiciri -Although no active or potentially active faults aze known to pass through the site, the proposed improvements aze expected to expenence strong ground shaking dunng their design life. I~ • Secondary Seismic Hazards -Based on cw-rent groundwater conditions, the potential for liquefaction is considered ml. The total settlement resuitmg from seisimc loading is estimated to be withun generally accepted tolerable limits. • Sulfate Attack - Concrete m contact with the onsrte soil is expected to have negligible exposure to water-soluble sulfates m the soil • Corrosion -The onsrte soil is considered mildly to moderately corrosive to ferrous metals (. I I - 9 - Leighton and Associates, Inc A LEIGHION GROUR COMRA NY 020873-001 • 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS The recommendations presented herein are preliminary and may be revtsed based on future geotechmcal studies once development plans aze finalized 4.1 Earthwork All earthwork should be performed in accordance with the General Earthwork and Grading SpecificaUOns presented m Appendix D, unless specifically revtsed or amended below or by future review of protect plans. Srte PreDarat:on Pnor to construction, the site should be cleared of vegetation, trash, and debris. which should be disposed of offsite Trees and vines should be removed and grubbed out Any underground obstructions onsite should be removed The resulting cavities should be properly backfilled and compacted. Efforts should be made to locate any existing utility fines. -Those fines should be removed or rerouted if they interfere with the proposed construcnon, and the resulting cavities should be properly backfilled and compacted In • addition, any undocumented artificial fill, such as stockpiled soil, should be removed from the area of the proposed improvements. Overexcavatron and Recompactron To reduce the potential for adverse differential settlement of the proposed structures, the underlying subgrade soil must be prepazed m such a manner that a uniform response to the applied loads is achieved For the proposed buildings, we recommend that the soil underneath conventional shallow footings be overexcavated and recompacted to a mimmum depth of 2 feet below the bottom of the proposed foundations, for one-story structures, 3 feet below the bottom of the footings for 2- and 3-story structures, or 3 feet below the existing grade, whichever is deeper. The overexcavation and recompactton should extend a minimum lateral distance of 5 feet away from the footings. The soil below slabs-on-grade should be overexcavated and recompacted a mtmmum depth of 1.5 feet below the bottom of the proposed slab or 2 feet below the existing ground surface, whichever is deeper - to - Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON G0.OUP COMPANY 020873-001 Local condtttons may requtre that deeper overexcavatton be performed. such azeas should be evaluated by Leighton and Associates durtng grading • Areas outside the overexcavation Itmtts of the proposed buildings planned for asphalt or concrete pavement and flatwork and azeas to receive fill should be overexcavated to a mtmmum depth of 12 inches below the existing ground surface or 12 inches below the proposed finish grade, whichever is deeper. After completion of the overexcavatton, and pnor to fill placement, the exposed surfaces should be scanfied to a minimum depth of 6 inches, moisture-conditioned to or slightly above optimum moisture content, and recompacted to a minimum 90 percent relative compaction Frl! Placement and Compactron The onsrte soil rs generally suitable for use as compacted sttvctttral fill, provided rt is free of debns, oreantc matenal, and oversized matenal (greater than 8 inches to lazges: dimension). Any soil to be placed as fill, whether onsrte or rmported material, should be accepted by Leighton and Assocrates All fill ~otl should be placed to thin, loose lifts, moisture-condrtroned, as necessary, :o neaz optimum moisture content, and compacted to a minunum 90 percent relative compaction as detennmed by ASTtvt Test \lethod D ] 557- • 98. Aggregate base should be compacted to a mtnunum of 95 percent relative compaction Shrrnkaee and Bulkrnu The change to volume of excavated matenals upon recompaction as fill varies according to soil type, density, and location This volume change is represented as a percentage increase (bullang) or decrease (shrinkage) to volume of fill after removal and recompaction. Based on our field and laboratory data, we estimate an average compaction shrinkage to the range of 10 to 15 percent for the near-surface soils. "These estimates aze preliminary and do not factor in removal of oversize matenal or debns. 4.2 Prefimmarv Foundation Recommendations Based on our investigation, conventional shallow foundations may be used to support the loads of one to three-story, wood-frame-type structures. Overexcavatton and recompaction of the footing subgrade soil should be performed as detailed in Seaton 4 I. For platmutg purposes, the footings should have an embedment depth of 18 inches for 2- to ~ • - I I - Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGMTON GNOUP LOMPANT 020873-001 • 3-story buildings and 12 inches for one-story buildings. Isolated and continuous footings should have a minimum width of 24 and 18 inches. respectively An allowable beanng capacity of 2,000 psf may be used, based on the minunum embedment depth and width. The allowable bearing value may be increased by 300 psf per foot increase in depth or width to a maximum allowable beanng pressure of 4,500 psf. The allowable beanng pressures are for the total dead load and frequently applied live loads. The soil resistance available to withstand lateral loads on a shallow foundation is a function of the fi-ictional resistance along the base of the footing and the passive resistance that may develop as the face of the structure tends to move into the soil. The frictional resistance between the base of the foundation and the subgrade soil may be computed using a coefficient of friction of 0 35. The passive resistance may be computed using an equivalent fluid pressure of 300 pcf, assuming there is constant contact between the footing and undisturbed soil. . The allowable beanng pressure and coefficient of fraction values may be increased by one Hurd when considering loads of short duration, such as those imposed by wind and seismic forces. • ~` Footing reinforcement should be designed by the structural engineer. As a minimum, ' footing reinforcement should consist of one No 4 rebar at the top and at the bottom of continuous footings and No. 4 rebars spaced at 24 inches on center in each direction for I isolated footings. 4.3 Settlement The recommended allowable beanng capacity is generally based on a total allowable, post constniction settlement of 1 inch. Differential settlement is estunated at 1/2-inch over a horizontal distance of 30 feet Since settlement is a function of footing size and contact bearing pressure, differential settlement can be expected between adjacent columns or walls reviewed by Leighton and Associates when final foundation plans and loads for the proposed structures become available. 4.4 Slab-0n-Grade ~ Concrete slabs subjected to special loads should be designed by the structural engineer. I Where conventional light ~ floor loading conditions exist, the following minimum I r I -12 - Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIG NTON GROUP COMPANY 020873-001 recommendations, wtuch aze based on a very low soil expansion potential, should be used • - A mmunum slab tluckness of 4 inches (nominal) reinfbrced with a mimmum of No. 3 rebaz placed at 24 inches on center in each direction and placed vnth adequate concrete cover. - A moisture barrier consisting of 6-mil Vtsqueen (or equivalent) placed below slabs where moisture-sensitive floor covenngs or equipment is planned The moisture bamer should be covered with a mimmum of 2 inches of sand. The moisture bamer may be placed directly on the prepared bwlding pad subgrade, provided that gravel and other objects that could puncture the moisture bamer aze removed pnor to placement. As an altemauve, one inch of sand should be placed pnor to placement of the moisture bamer. - The subgrade soil should be moistwe conditioned to neaz optimum moisture content 'o a minimum depth of 12 inches pnor to placing Visqueen, steel or concrete. The irxpansion Index of representative soils at tinish grade should be verified by Leighton and Associates d~stng grading ivtinor cracking of the concrete as n cures, due to drying and shntkage. is normal and • should be expected. However, cracking is often aggravated by a high water/cement ratio, high concrete temperature at the time of placement, small nominal aggregate size. and rapid moisture loss due to hot dry, and/or windy weather conditions during placement and curing Cracking due to temperature and moisture tluctuanons can also be expected The use of low slump concrete (not exceeding 4 inches at the rime of placement) cdri reduce the potential for shrinkage cracking Addmonally, our experience indicates that the use of reinforcement in slabs and foundations can generally reduce the potential for concrete cracking. To reduce the potential for excessive cracking, concrete slabs-on-grade should be provided with construction or weakened plane joints at frequent intervals. Joints should be laid out to form approximately square panels. Moisture bamers can retard, but not elimuiate moisture vapor movement from the underlying soils up through the slab The floor covenngs contractor should test the moisture vapor flux rite pnor to attempting application of moisture-sensitive flooring "Breathable" floor coverings or special slab sealants should be considered if the vapor flux • - 13 - Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY 020873-001 • rates aze high. Floor coveting manufacturers should be consulted for specific recommendations 4.5 Retairnng Walls Areas planned for retatmng walls should be overexcavated in accordance with the recommendations provided for one-story buildings in Section 4 1. We recommend that retatmng walls be backfilled with onsite, very low expansive soil and constructed with a backdratn in accordance with the recommendations provided on Figure 3 (reaz of text). Using expansive soil as retaining wall backfill will result in higher lateral earth pressures exerted on the wall. Based on these recommendations, the following pazameters may be used for the design of conventional retatmng walls up to 5 feet tall: Condition Equivalent Fluid Pressure (psf/frl Active 35 (Level Backfill) At-Rest ~5 (Level Backfill) Passive 300 with a maximum value of 3,500 psf The above values do not contain an appreciable factor of safety, so the structural engineer should apply the applicable factors of safety and/or load factors dunng design. Cantilever walls that are designed to yield at least 0 001 H, where H is equal to the wall height, may be designed using the active condition. Rigid walls and walls braced at the top should be designed using the at-rest condition Passive pressure is used to compute soil resistance to lateral structural movement. In addition, for sliding resistance, a factional resistance coefficient of 0.35 may be used at the concrete and soil interface The lateral passive resistance should be taken into account only tf it is ensured that the soil providing passive resistance, embedded against the foundation elements, will remazn intact with time In addition to the above lateral forces due to retained earth, surchazge due to improvements, such as an adjacent structure, should be considered to the design of the retaining wall. Loads applied within a I 1 projection from the surchazgmg structure on the stem of the wall should be considered m the design • ~ - 14 - Leighton and Associates, Inc A LEIGH TON GROUP COMPANY 020873-001 4.6 4.7 The total depth of retained earth for design of canulever walls should be the vertical distance below the ground surface measured at the wall face for stem design or measured at • the heel of the footing for overtuirung and sliding A soil unit weight of 120 pcf may be assumed for calculating the actual weight of the soil over the wall foonng Retaining wall footings should have a minimum width of 24 inches and a minimum embedment of 12 inches below the lowest adjacent grade. An allowable beanng capacity of 2,000 psf may be used for retaining wall footing design, based on the minimum footing width and depth. This beanng value may be increased by 300 psf per foot increase in width or depth to a maximum allowable beanng pressure of 4,500 psf Seismic Design Parameters Seismic parameters presented in this report should be considered donne project design. In order to reduce the effects of ground shaking produced by regional seismic events, seismic design should be peifonned in accordance with the most recent edinon of the Umfonn Building Code (iJBC). The following data should be considered for the seismic analysis of the subject site 1997 UBC Seisimc Pazameters Seismic Zone• Soil Profile Type: Seismic Source. Seismic Source Type: Distance to Seismic Source• Neaz Source Factor, NE. Neaz Source Factor, N~ a • So Cucamonga Fault Type A 10 km ]0 I:ZO Cement Tvoe and Corrosion Protection Based on the results of laboratory testing, concrete structures m contact with the onsrte soil will have negligible exposure to water-soluble sulfates in the soil. Common Type II cement may be used for concrete construction onsite and the concrete should be designed in accordance with Table 19-A-4 of the Uniform Building Code. Based on our laboratory testing, the onsite soil is considered mildly to moderately corrosive to feaous metals. The corrosion information presented in this report should be provided to your underground subcontractors. ~ • - is - Leighton and Associates, Inc A IEIGHTON GROUP COMPAHT 020873-001 • 4.8 Preliminary Pavement Design Based on the design procedures outlined in the current Caltrans Highway Design Manual, and using an assumed R-value of 50 for subgrade and 78 for aggregate base course, the following flexible pavement sections may be used. Final pavement design should be based on future street subgrade soil samples collected dunng construction of the street subgrade and the Traffic Index determined by the protect civil engineer. Traffic Index Recotnmended Pavement Section 6 or less 3" asphalt concrete over 4" aggregate base 7 4" asphalt concrete over 4 5" aggregate base i `~ All pavement construction should be performed in accordance with the Standazd Specifications for Public Works Construction Field inspecion and penodic testing, as needed dunng placement of the base course matenals, should be undertaken to ensure that the requirements of the standazd specifications are fulfilled Pnor to placement of base, the subgrade soil should be scanfied to a mininum depth of 6 inches below finished subgrade, moisnve-conditioned, as necessary, and recempacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction Aggregate base should be placed in thin lifts, moisture conditioned, as necessary_ and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction. 4.9 Temoor~ Excavations All temporary excavattons, including utility trenches, retaining wall excavattons and other excavations should be performed m accordance with project plans, specifications and all OSHA requirements No surchazge loads should be permitted withun a honzontal distance equal to the height of cut or 5 feet, whichever is greater from the top of the slope, unless the cut is shored appropnately. Excavations that extend below an imaginary plane inclined at 45 degrees below the edge of any adjacent existing site foundation should be properly shored to maintain support of the adjacent structures. e ~. Typical cantilever shonng should be designed based on the active fluid pressure presented to the fetaining wall Sectton If excavattons aze braced at the top and at specific design intervals, the active pressure may then be approximated by a rectangulaz soil pressure distnbution with the pressure per foot of width equal to 25H, where H is equal to the depth of the excavation being shored - 16 - Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP LONPANY 020873-001 Dunng construction, the soil conditions should be regularly evaluated to venfy that • conditions aze as anticipated. The contractor shall be responsible for providing the "competent person" required by OSHA. standards to evaluate soil conditions. Close coordination between the competent person and the geotechmcal engineer should be maintained to facilitate construction while providing safe excavations. 4.10 Trench Backfill Utility-type trenches onstte can be backfilled with the onsrte matenal, provided rt is free of debns, organic and oversized matenal Prior to backfilling the trench, pipes should be bedded in a granular matenal that has a sand equivalent of 30 or erecter. The pipe bedding should be densified in-place by betting. The native backfill should be placed in thin lifts, moisture conditioned, as necessary, and mechamcally compacted using a minimum standard of 90 percent relative compaction 4.11 Surface Drainage Surface drainage should be desigried to be directed away from foundations and toward approved drainage devices. litigation of landscaping should he controlled to maintain, as much as possible. a consistent moisture content sufficient to provide healthy plant erov`Kh without overwatenng. • 4.12 .4dditional Geotechrncal Services The preliminary geotechmcal reconunendations presented m this report aze based on subsurface condittons, as interpreted from hmtted subsurface explorations and limited laboratory testing This study is intended to address the geotechmcal feasibility of the site for development and to provide preliminary geotechnical recommendations for design and construction of the proposed development Additional geotechnical review and/or investigation will be required based on final project plans Leighton and Associates should review the site and grading plans when available and comment further on the geotechmcal aspects of the project. Geotechmcal observation and testing should be conducted dunng excavation and all phases of grading operations. Our conclusions and recommendations should be reviewed and verified by Leighton and Associates dunng construction and revised accordingly if geotechmcal conditions encountered vary from our preliminary findings and interpretations. The recommendations presented in this report are only valid if Leighton and Associates venfies the site conditions dunng construction - 17 - Leighton and Associates, Inc. A LEIGHTON GROUP COMPANY i ~• 1 (• I i i 1 ~~ 9 i ozoar-ool Geotechmcal observation and testing should be provided by Leighton and Associates: • Afrer completion of site cleanng • Dunng overexcavahon of compressible soils • Dunng compaction of all fill matenals. • Afrer excavation of all footings and pnor to placement of concrete. • Dunng utility trench excavation, bac)~lling and compaction • Dunng pavement subgrade and base preparation • When any unusual conditions are encountered. - Is - Leighton and Associates, Inc 4 LEIGMTON GROUP COMPANY SJBDRAIN OPTIONS AND BACKFiLL WHEN NATIVE MATEClAL HAS E~CP4NSiON INDEX OF <:9 OPTION I PIPE SUR0.WNDED wIT}+ OPrtOn 2 .iRAVEl waAPVE^ CLASS i PE4 MEABLE ATE0.UL N FjLTER FA&tIC wtTY1 P0.0PER `N rTM RiOPER EUR FA¢ DMINAGE ~ SUR FALT 70.AINAGE :APE ;~nvE ~/` ~ JR .FIFE ~ RJR ll:VE~ S ` - r ±,~ r 2 I NAi1VE I ~ %i N<T7VE I ~<iE~PR OOFlNG ~` SEE ;E"+E:<L NOTEi _` iF SE2 ~ENE0.AL vQiE_'1 ~ ;+L.Ea 'ABR IC ~ SEE NOTE +) ~• I ~_ -- 2- MINIMUM ~ k ' _~ ]- °U+IMUM ` ' ~ LASS : vE0.MEPBtE ~ g j -r ~ rILiER MATE0.IAL WEED YOIf ~ y A ~ ~'h ~d 5~ - vEEV YOIE ~~ v SEc C0.ADAr10N1 SEE NOTE EI G~uvFl .vR<P•FD w sR[FR ~~-~ ~ SEE NOTE -1 J~ "eFl[ Ni~°` rr I~ I ~ < INCH OIAM~E0. ,J,t~J~ ~ ~ E / ~ PE0.FORATED PIPE ' LEVEL OR ~~ ~~!!//~~" ' r ~ , ~ v ~~ ~ `O~ SEE VOTE 1 SIOVE "'+T Ciao ~ Fdter PertneaDle Md[endl Grd0a0m Pg Cdllidn5 ~OeCPCa00n5 S+eve Slze Percent Pas9na - 100 3/<- ?0-100 3l9- <0-100 N6 a 25-~ N0. 8 18-33 Nn 30 `-'=5 Na SO o-7 Nn :00 0-3 GENEr7AL NOTES • waterproofing should be provided whee molsNre nuisance problem through the wall is unde~rable • Water proamg of the walls is not under purnew of the geotecnmal engineer • All d21ns should have a gradient of 1 percent minimum 'Outlet poroon of the subdrain should have a 4-Inch dlame!el solid pipe discharged into a sudable disposal area designed by [he Dro)ect engineer The subdrain pipe should be acce<sble for maintenance (radding) 'Other subdrain backrill optlons are sub]ect to the renew by the aeoterhnlcal engineer and madificanon of deign parameters. Notes: 1) Sand should have a sand equivalent of 30 or greater and maybe densfiied by water7etling 2) 1 Cu ft per ft of 1/4- m 1 1R-+nch Stze gravel wrapped in filter fabnc 3) Pipe type should be ASM D1527 Aoylrnlfile Butadiene Styrene (ABS) SDR35 ar ASTM D1785 Polyvinyl Chlonde plasnc (PVC), Schedule 40, Armco A2000 PVC, or approved equivalent Pipe should be Installed with perforations down Perforuons should be 3/8 Inch in diameter placed at the ends of a 120~egree arc m two rwvs at 3-incn on center ( ~ggered) 4) Filer faonc should be hLrafi 140NC ar aoprwed eaurvalent 5) Weeohole should be 3-inch mmlmum diameter and provided at 10-foot mawmum Intervals. If exposure Is permitted, weeohWe should be located 12 inches above finished grade If e~cpasure is not permitted such as 'or a wail ad)acen[ to a StdewalWcum, a pipe under the sidewalk to be discharged through [he curd face ar equivalent should be pronded For a basernent~ype wall, a prope'subd2ln outle! system snouid be pnmvlded 6) Rerinina wall plans should be renewed and approved by the aeotechnical engineer i) Walls ove- six fee! m height are suo]ect [o a special review by the geoterhm~l engineer and modfieatlons to the aoove requiremenCS. REi AINING WALL BACKFiLL AND SUBDRAIN DETAIL ~ ~ FOR WALLS 6 FEET OR LESS IN HEIGHT ;~ • WHEN NATIVE MATErZIAL HAS EXPANSION INDEX OF <50 ~ Figure 3 020873-001 APPENDIX A • References Blake, T. F., 2000, EQFAULT, A Computer Program for the Eshmahon of Peak Honzontal Acceleration from 3-D Fault Sources, Windows 95/98 Version, User's Manual, Apnl 2000 Califorma Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1975, Recommended Gmdelines for Detemuning the Maximum Credible and the Maximum Probable Earthquakes• CDMG Note 43 1998, Maps of Known Active Fault Near-Source Zones in Calrjornra and Adjacent Portions ojNevada, to be used with the 1997 Uniform Budding Code, International Conference of Building Officials, February 1998. Califorma Department of Water Resources (CDWR) of California, 1970, Meeting Water Demands in Chino-Riverside Area, Bulletin No 104-3. Appendix A, Water Supply, Plate 12 & ] 3, dated September 1970 International Conference of Building Officials ~ICBO). 1997, Uniform Buildrng Code, Volume II • -Structural Engmeenng Design Provisions Sadigh, K., Chang, C. Y., Egan, J. A., Makdisi. F., and Youngs R. R, 1997, ''Attenuation Relations for Shallow Crustal Earthquakes Based on California Strong Motion Data" Seismological Research Letters, Vo168, No 1, January/February, pp. 180-] 89 San Bemazdmo County Planning Department, San Bemazdino County Official Land Use Plan, General Plan, Geologic Hazazd Overlay, Guasu Quadrangle, FH 28 D, 1994 Tokunatsu, K., Seed, H. B., 1987, "Evaluation of Settlements m Sands Due to Earthquake Shaking," Journal ojthe Geotechmcal Engineering, Amencan Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 113, No. 8, pp. 861-878. United States Geologic Survey, 1981, Guasti Quadrangle, California, 7.5 Minutes Series (Topographic), Ongmal Map dated 1966, Photo Revised 1973 and 1981. Wildermuth Environmental, Inc , 1997, C}ino Basin Watermaster Water Level Map Zeiser Geotechmcal Inland Empire, Inc., 1993, Background Geotechmcal Review Pnor to Subsurface Investigation, 375-Acre General Dynamics Srte, Rancho Cucamonga, Califota, PN 93291-00, dated October 27, 1993 • A-1 Aenal Photoeraohs Flight Frame Date Scale C-193 31 10/15/72 24,000 C-279 99 1/21/78 24,000 C-279 101 1/21/78 24,000 A¢ency SBCD SBCD San Bernardino County Flood Control Distnct 020873-001 • • C~ A-2 GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-~ Date 1-17-03 Sheet 1 of Proied JPIl4th 8 Milliken Proled No 020873-001 Iling Co 2R Dnlling, Inc. Type of Rlg Hollow stem auger ~le Diameter 8 in. Dnve Weight 140 Ib. (automatic) Drop 30 in Elevation Top of Hole (ft) Location See Bonng Location Map 2 o~ DESCRIPTION C ~. _ tom. u L O1 p C O ~q o ; O a ~~ ~ C ~ N U Rt m = 6 m c LL a 0 J .~. 6 O LL to O 6 b .m• ` f.7 Logged By PP w ' c7 a A a i^ ~ o o ~ w ° ~ rn Sampled By PP I 0 Bag I I . R-i 9 108 7 8 7 SM 2' S~lry SAND brown, molsr, loose, fine to medium sand, slightly porous 5 R-2 16 5' No Recovery Cobbles 1 ~ 1 i 10 I i I ~ ~ ' i R-3 53 I No Recovery Cobbles 10 I y ' t I J ~ i j ~ I _ I 15~ I ~ S-1 10 I 7 8 I ML 15' Sandy Sllt, orang[sh brown, moist, Buff, fine to medium sand 20 S-2 9 7 1 SP 20' SAND, brownish grey, moist, loose, fine to medium sand i ~ I I ML 2I' Sandy SILT, brown, moist, stiff, fine to medmm sand l 25 •~ , S-3 9 SM 25' Silty SAND, brown, moist, loose, fine sand Total Depth = 26 5 No sroundwater encountered dunng dolling Bac~lled with sod tunings 1 30 SAMPLE TYPES Bag=Bulk R=2 San Ring (Ca Mod), 5=SPT, T=Sheltry TuEe Leighton and Associates GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-2 Date 1-17-03 Sheet 1 of 1 Proles JPI/4th 8 Milliken Protect No 020873-001 Dnllmg Co 2R Dnllmg, Inc Type of Rig Hollow-stem auger Hole Diameter 8 in Dnve Weight 140 Ib (automatic) Drop 30 in Elevation Top of Hole (ft) Location See Bonng Location Map o ?' ~ m - DESCRIPTION G m r O L~ 9 0 @@ 3~ 0 C ~ C ~ V m' LL. : o '~ I m p ~ ~ E m m °° i"~ o c o U 'o o~ Logged By PP to I a m w a ~ f ° ) "'" Sampled By PP i i i i i 0 Bag 1 R-1 21 109 7 i 6 SM 2' Silty SAND, brown, mots4 medtum drnse, fine to medtum sand, few rootlets, sltghtly porous, very few fine to medtum gravel 5 R-2 36 114 9 3 9 SM 5' Stl SAND wtth some vet, h t brown sh tl motst/d ry gm gh gh y ry, medtum I dense, fine to coarse sand, fine to medtum gravel, slightly cemented I ~ d ~ {I a{ q 10 ld S-1 30 I 1 ~ SW guy, sltghtly morn. medtum denx to denx, fine to 10' Gravelly SAND, Y ~ ~ i coarx sand fine to coaru gravel, ~ e .~ I I ~ ~ ~ L ~ •~~~:~ 15 a :09 R-3 35 17 SW IS' Gravelly SAND greyish brown slightly moan, medtum denx, fine to . warx sand, fine w caarx gtavel ~ e .~ 20 S-2 6 SM 20' Stlty SAND, brown, mots[, loose, fine to medtum sand 25 S-3 9 SM 25' Stlty SAND, orangtsh brown, mots[, loose, fine to medtum sand Total Depth = 26 5 No groundwaur rncountercd dunng dnlltng ~ Bacldlled with sotl cuttings ,,, ~ ~ ~ I .S GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-3 Date ~-»'03 Sheet 1 of 1 Proles JPI/4th 8 Milliken Proletx No 020873-001 ling Co 2R Dulling Inc Type of Rig Hollow-stem auger ~e Diameter 8 m. Dnve Wetght 140 Ib. (automatic) Drop 30 m. Elevation Top of Hole (ft) Logtton See Bonng Location Map a ~I „ _ DESCRIPTION m m L~ v m 3 C m C U m m m LL n m om LL n o m ~ ~ a a E LL o m m u °° a^ V m ~ o c v - 'n Lagged By PP ut ~ < I m y °' ° ~ v m ~ Sampled By PP ~ 0 Bae 1 R-1 9 111 0 13 8 L-M 2' Sandy SILT brown, mots[, stiff, fine to medium sand few rootleu, cal¢he, non-plastic S R-2 I S 110 6 8 1 M/M i' SOry SAND/Sandy SILT, brown tutus[ loose/snfi, fine to medtum sand few rootleu. cahche, non-plazuc d f f - R_; 27 1 7 SP ine ine to coarse san . 10' SAND grey, slightly mots[. medtum dense c ~' gravel, very Enable • f - .• 15 S-1 6 17 1 SM IS' Stliy SAND, reddish brown mots[. loose, fine to coarx sand i.:..:. 20 . S-2 10 SP 20' SAND, brown, mots[, loose to medtum dense, fine to medtum sand r i i 25~ g_, 18 M/M 25' Sdry SAND/Sandy SILT, brown. tutus[, medtum densdvery stiff. fine : to medtum sand Total Depth = 26 5 I No groundwater encountered dunng stilling Bac~lled with soil cuttings ` 30 11 SAMPLE TYPES Bag=9ulk. R=3 5-~n RIn91Ca MoA), S•SPT, T•Shel6y Tuhe Zeighton and Associates GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-4 Date 1-17-03 Sheet 1 of 1 Prated JPI/4th & Milliken Protect No 020873-001 Dolling Co 2R Dolling, Inc. Type of Rig Hollow-stem auger Hoie Diameter 8 to Dnve Weight 1401b. (automatic) Drop 30 iq~ Elevation Top of Hole (ft) Locahon See Bonng LOC3UOn Map ~~ C = a ~ a „ _ DESCRIPTION N m 6 m L 6 0 m ~ G w ~ O LL C ~, 0 V ~ ' 0 _ tl1 (~ V 'm '~. o ~ ~ -' 3; E io io ~ = y e ~ - y Logged By PP w a °' ~ ° ~ ~ `~ ? Sampled By PP 0 Bag 1 R-1 20 108 3 7 6 SM 2' Stlry SAND, brown, moist, medtum dense, fine to coarse sand, big rootlets, some gravel 5 R-2 37 106 9 5 0 ML 5' Sandy SILT, light greyish brown, dry, very s<tff, fine to coarse sand. slightly porous, caltche .:•. •:= 10 S-1 32 SP y grey, slightly moist dense. fine to medtum gravel, 10' Gravell SAND tine to coarse sand t5 R-3 42 104 5 3 8 SP/S IS' SAND to Silty SAND, Itght brown, moist. medtum drnse, fine sand 20 S-2 12 SM 20' Silty SAND, reddtsh brown, moist, medtum drnse, fine sand 25 S-3 9 SM 25' Stlry SAND, reddtsh brown, moist, loose, fine to medtum sand Total Depth = 26 5 No groundwater encountered dunng dolling Bac~lled with soil cumngs an R=25-in Ring (Ca MoE), S=SPT, T=Sftalby TuEa eag ton an ssocaates GEOTECHNICAL BORING LOG B-S Date 1-17-03 Sheet 1 of 1 Proles JPI/4th & Milliken Proles No 020873-001 ~Iltng Co 2R Dulling Inc. Type of Rtg Hollow-stem auger ole Diameter Sin. Dnve Weight 140 Ib. (automatic) Drop 30 in. ft Loratton See Bonng Locabon Map Ele vation Top of H ole ( ) c a :e „ _ DESCRIPTION p -.. ^. L L 9 q~ ~ ~ G ~ ~ ~ m '. . ti ", CD m ~ ~ 0 E 3 m io ~° v o c U U 'n o Logged BY PP . W ~ < o. Z f o ~ H .. I in ~ ~ Sampled By PP 0 Bag 1 R-1 26 116 3 6 I SM 2' Silty SAND, otangtsh brown moist medium drnse, fine sand 5 R-2 27 3 0 SP/S 5' SAND to SJry SAND, oranglsh brovn. mols[, medmm dense, fine to medium sand I 10 R-3 33 10' No Recovery Cobbles upto 3 5" I 15-~ 6 9 I SM fine to coarse sand mmst loose tsh brown rc IS' Sll SAND : S_l 9 , , y ry , g i i 20 S-2 SO/6" SW 2lY Gravelly SAND, greyish brown, moist, very dense, fine to coarse sand - ~ °."• - ."•: e . ..:.:: u - , S-3 50 SP 25' SAND with some gravel and crushed cobbles, greyish brown, slightly ` ~ -; . moist dense, fine to coarse sand. fine eravel i. :.::• ` Total Depth = 26 5 I No groundwater encountered dunng dnlline Bac~lled wnh sml cuttings 30 SAMPLE TYPES: Bag=Bulk, R=2 Sin Ring (Ca Modl, SeSPT, T=Shalby Tuba Leag/Zton ana ~ssocaaies +~ ATTERBERG LIMITS `~ ASTM D 4318 TeraleslL3b<_ Inc Project Name: JPI / 4th & Mdhken __ _ _ _ ___ _ Tested By: Project No. • 020873-001 _ ___ Input By: Bonng No.. B-3 ~eck~ BY Sample No.: R-1 _ __ _ ____ Depth (ft.) Visual Sample Description: Yellowish brown silty clay (CL-ML) ~ - _ _ PLASTIC LIMIT--- -- - TEST NO _ _ _ 1 2 _ 1 Number of Blows LN] ___-_ __ _ -_ __ _ _ 31 Wet Wt. of Sod + Cont. (gm) 10.60 _ 11.07 16.52 Dry Wt. of Sod + Cont. (gm) __9.05 _ 9.45 _ _ _13.68 Wt. of Container (gm) 1.07 104 1.04 Moisture Content (%) f~Nnl 19.42 19 26 22 47 Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index USCS Classification PI at "A" -Line = 0.73(LL-20) _ One -Point Liquid Umit Calculabon -PROCEDURES USED _ Wet Preparation Muitipoint -Wet ~X I Dry Preparation Multipoint -Dry X Procedure A Multipoint Test Procedure B One-point Test RA Date• 01/24/03 • LF Date. 01/28/03 LF Date 01/28/03 2.0 LIQUID LIMIT 2 3 21 13 16 77 18 71 _ 13.79 15.24 102 104 23.34 24 44 • 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 60 90 100 Liqwd Limit ILL) 23 su 19 _ 50 4 -- - n CL-ML x a 40 --- - -` 30 _ _ _ _T 2.19 - °- 20 N A a 10 0 25 00 za o0 c w c 0 U a 23 00 'o .~ ~ - - - - ~\ 10 zz o0 • 20 25 30 a0 50 60 70 80 90 100 Number of Blows 60 Far cfasvficatron of fino- 50 yramed sods and fino-gramed ~ frad~on of coanie-ynmed sad5 , CH w OH a ~ x d ' -A" Lne c c 30 I CL w OL u ,- m 20 a 1 O MH Or OH ' ML or OL 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 60 90 70 0 L~gmd Limrt (LL) GRAVEL SAND FINES COARSE ~ FINE CRSE MEDIUM I FINE ' SILT U S STANDARD SIEVE OPENING U S STANDARD SIEVE NUMBER HYDROMETER 30" 11/2' 3/4' 3/8" #4 #8 #I6 #30 #60 #100 #200 100 , 90 I I I I I I! I II I I I II. 80 I I i i i II ~ ~ , 70 I I I I I I' III , 1 ' I III' ' I ~ I II ~ I I I I ~ 60 I ~ ~ I I I I I I I 3 ~ I I m' s0 ~ ~ ~ III I III I II ~ I I ? 40 I I ~ iI li;1, I I I I I I I ~ 1 I U 90 ~ I I I , I II ~ ~ I II I I I I I ' i ~ I , , , I I ' w I I I ~ a I I I I (' I I I I ' 20 I I I ~ I I ~ i ~ I I ~ I ~ 1 ~ lil ~ ~ I r l l ~ I 10 i I ~ i t '' I' I I I I I I D I rl I I - 100 000 10 000 1 000 0 100 0 010 PARTICLE -SIZE (mm) Boring No.: Sample No.: i Depth (ft.): Soil Type i GR:SA:FI I LL,PL,PI B-3 ~ R-1 I 2 I s(ML) ~ 0:50: 50 NA r Soil Description: Yellowish brown sandy silt s(ML) Proled No 020873-001 ~ ~ ATTERBERG LIMITS, PARTICLE -SIZE CURVE JPI / 4th & Milliken >':'a:?S; _8~5 I`L ASTM D 4318, D 422 ab -. ~..d ra .~pa.nn ]an-03 saeaan®z No Time Re adings 10500 1 a5oo , 09500 0 9500 5 O 11500 0 8500 9q 0 7500 0 7500 K m 0 6+00 ' 0 5500 (] c ~ 0 5500 m 05500 04500 04500 0 3500 0 3500 0 2500 0 2500 1 0 1 0 0 10 0 Log of Time (min) Spuam Root of Time (min '~) -2 00 Iii i 0 00 2 00 Inundate wM rao water o I -- a oo -- c o , m ~ i ' __ __ .- _ 600 O _ I __ - I ~ ii i Q I --- B 00 - i ' 10 00 , i ~ 1 , ~ l i ' ~ , ~ I I i ~ I I ~ ~ 1 ~ I ' i t 12 00 0 10 1 00 10 00 100 00 Pressure, p (ksf) Bonng Sample Depth Moisture ~ Dry Density (pt~l Vold Ratlo ~ 'o ~ %) Inroal ; Fnal , InNal Fnal , Inlnal Fnal In10al ' Fnal B-4 R-2 5.0 5.0 ~ 17.8 1107.0 i 115.3' 0.575 ~ 0.440' 23 ~ 100 Sample DesrnpGon: Pale olive sandy sdt (ML) Pro)eR No.• 020873-00 ONE -DIMENSIONAL CONSOLIDATION PROPERTIES of SOILS )PI / 4th & Milliken TeratestLabs Inc (0.5TM D 2435) .. uax.o. axarx coa.... 02-03 • • ~j~ TerG!es! Laos-Irc ~/ 1E14rLJx UwCVw Vi61~~ Tested By RA Date 01/24/03 Checked By LF Date 0_t_/2_SI03 Sample Type Dnve Depth (R) 5 0 • Pro)ed Name JPI 14N & Mlihk_e_n_ _ _ _ Pro)ect Na 020873-001 Bonng No B-2 Sample No RR=2 _ Sample Descnptlon Brown silty sand (SM) _ _ Intial Dry Density (pcf) i 1? 2 _ Initial Moisture (%) 3 88 Initial Length Qn) 1 0000 Intial Dial Readmg _ 0 2743 Diameter in 2 a16 1 i- ~• Final Dry Density (pcf) 7 t0 8 Final Moisture (%) 17 3 _ Initial Void Ratio 0 5158 Specific Gravity(assumetl) 2 70 Initial Saturation %) 20 3 Apparent Load Swell (+) Corrected Pressure (p) Final Reading Thickness Compliance Settlement (-) Void Ratic Deformation (ksf) Unl (in) (%) % of Sample (%) Thickness 0 100 0 2741 __ - _ 0 9998_ 0 00 _ -0 02 0 5155 -0 02 0 600 _ __ . _0 2712- 0 9969 0 09 -0 31 0 5124 -0 22 _ H2O 0 2642 0 9899 0 09 -1 01 0 5018 -0 92 Percent Swell /Settlement After Inundation = -0.70 Vold Ratio -Log Pressure Curve 0 5180 0 5160 0 5140 0 5120 05700 o: 0 5080 0 5060 0 5040 0 5020 0 5000 I i Inundate with Tap water i I I' 0 100 One-Dimensional Swell or Settlement Potential of Cohesive Sotls (ASTM D 4546) 1 000 Log Pressure (ksf) 7 0 000 c°r.°E. ea a-:~ s One-Dimensional Swell or Settlement ~ ierates[ Laos 'nc Potential of Cohesive Sods Proled Name _ JPI / 4th 8 Millike_n_ ___ Tested By RA Date 01/24/03 Pro)ect No 020873-001 Checked By LF Dale 01/28_/03 Bonng No B-3 Sample Type Dnve Sample No RR=2 _ Depth (ft) 5 0 Sample DescnpUOn Brown sil sand SM __ Initial Dry Density (pcf) 111 9 __ Final Dry Density (pcf) 110 5 _ Inttial Moisture (%) 8 O6 Final Moisture (%) 17 3 Initial Length (in) 1 0000 _ Initial Void Ratio 0 5065 Inttial Dtal Reading _ 0 2465 _ _ Specific Grawry(assumed) 2 70 Diameter in 2 416 ImUal Saturation % 43 0 Apparent Load Swell (+) Corrected Pressure (p) Final Reading Thickness Compliance Settlement (-) Void Ratlo DeforrnaUOn (ksf) (tn) pn) , (/°) ~ of Sample ' ° (/`) Thickness 0 100 _ _ 0 2470 __ _ _ _ 1 0005 0 00 _ 0 OS 0 5072 0 OS '~, _ _ 0 600 _ _ __0 24_47 0 9902 0 08 _ -0 18 0 5049 -0 10 H2O 0 2431 0 9966 0 08 -0 34 0 5025 -0 26 Percent Swell /Settlement After Inundation = -0.16 Vold Ratlo -Log Pressure Curve 0 5080 0 5070 0 5060 0 m ~ 0 5050 v 0 5040 0 5030 0 5020 _ ___-_ Inundate wiN - -_- _ _ __ ___ _ Tap water --------------- - ---1- I ---- ---- - - - - r 0 100 1 000 Log Pressure (ksf) r1 I`J • • C°Ws~BJ R.t®! 2 00 - 1 50 s-- _ N ~ ~>w~ .... N r N ~' 1 00 - __ -~_-_- . __ - Cn a `m L ~ ~ 050 ~ - -_ _~_ _ _ 0 2 00 1 50 c N Y N to b 1 00 (0 N L In • 0 50 C' SHEAR TEST RESULTS Boring No BB=2 Protect No ozc Consolidated Undralned Sample No Baa 1 Cpl / 4th 8 Mdltken `~ Teratest Laos inc Depth (ft) 00=5 ~ _ , ;, ., ,_ Sotl Descnpnon Brown silty sand (SM) ^ 000 _____ -___ __ 0 00 0 50 1 00 01 02 Horizontal Deformation (in ) 1 50 2 00 2 50 Normal Stress (ksf) 03 3 00 3 50 4 00 Normal Stress kt /ft~) 0 500 1 000 _ ___ _ 2 00_0_ _~ Peak Shear Stress (kip/ft~) • 0 542 ^ 0 920 d 1 578 ! Shear Stress @ End of Test (ksf) 0 0 402 ^ 0 748 _ 1 300 Deformation Rate m /min) _ 0 050 0 050 0 050 ~ Initial Sample Height (tn) 1 000 1 000 1 000 Diameter (in) 2 415 2 415 2 415 Initial Moisture Content (%) 11 54 11 54 11 54 Dry Density (pcf) 109 8 109 9 109 9 Saturation (%) 58 3 58 4 58 4 Soil Height Before Shearing (in) 0 9949 0 9912 0 9788 Final Moisture Content (%) 16 1 16 2 16 0 ! ' OS 62 eeq 1 COMPACTION TEST _ ASTM D 1557 ") C G.~. a.. ~ Pro)ect Name. JPI/4th + Mlillken Tested By . MTR Date: 01/22/03 Project No.: 020873-001 Input By . MTR Date• 01/24/03 . Boring No.: B-2 Depth (ft.) 0'-5' Sample No.: Bag 1 Visual Sample Description: Brown sl sand Preparation Method: 8 Moist XB Mechanical Ram X Dry Manual Ram Mold Volume (ft a) 0.03322 Ram Weight 10 LBS Drop 18 /nches TEST NO. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Wt. Coin .Sod + Mold (g) 3699.0 3775.0 3848.0 ~ 3768.0 ~ ~ ~ Weight of Mold (g) 1803.0 1803.0 ~ 1803.0 1803.0 Net Weight of Sod (g) I 1896 0 ~ 1972 0 ! 2045.0 I 1965.0 ~ I Wet Wel ht of Sod + Cont. (g) 483.50 I 496.90 421.30 447 60 D Weight of Soll + Cont. (g) 459 00 I 460 80 383 50 397 60 ' Weight of Container (g) ~ 55.10 j 50.10 49 50 48.80 Moisture Content (%) 6 07 8 79 11 32 14.33 Wet Density (cf) 125.8 i 130 9 135 7 130.4 i D Densi 118.6 120.3 121.9 1141 Maximum Dry Density (pcf) 122.0 Optimum Moisture Content (% ~^~~'~~~s''~'s~x PROCEDURE USED ® Procedure A Soil Passing No 4 (4 75 mm) Sieve Mold • 4 in (101.6 mm) diameter Layers 5 (Five) Blows per layer 25 (twenty-five) May be used if No 4 retained < 20% Procedure B Sad Passing 3/8 in. (9.5 mm) Sieve Mold : 4 in. (101.6 mm) diameter Layers 5 (Fve) Blows per layer 25 (twenty-five) Use if + #4 > 20°k and + 3/8 " < 20°k Procedure C Soii Passing 3/4 in (19 0 mm) Sieve Mold 6 m (152 4 mm) diameter layers • 5 (Fve) Blows per layer S6 (fifty-six) Use if + 3/8 in >20% and + ~/. in <30°k Particle-Size Distribution: Atterb 7320 127 0 C u a c 122 0 d 0 t] 117 0 nzo I I i i ! i I I ! I ~ ~ I I "I I SP GR =265 ' SP GR =270 I ~ I SP GR =275 I -- I I I I i I I I I I I I r i l l I i I i I i I~ I I I I I j ~ ~ f I I I I I I I I j i ~ I I I i ' I I I j ~ i ' I i j ' I i ' I I I I I I ' I ' i i I so too 1so Moisture Content (%) • zo 0 MX Dar a4 Dp f COMPACTION TEST `~G ASTM D 1557 Testes Laos" Ina ~ro)ect Name: JPI/4th + Mllllken Tested By Pro)ect No : 020873-0.01 _ Input By Bonng No.. B-3 Depth (ft.) Sample No. Bag 1 ___ Vlsual Sample DescnpUOn• Brown si sand MTR Date• 01/22/03 MTR Date 01/23/03 u -~' Preparation Method. Moist X Mechanical Ram X Dry 8 Manual Ram Mold Volume (ft a) 0.03322 Ram Weight 10 LBS Drop 18 inches I~ TEST NO 1 2 3 4 5 i 6 _ Wt. Comp. Sod + Mold (9)__ ___ Wei ht of Mold (g) __ 3728.0 1803.0 3845 0 1803.0 _3842.0 1803 0 T 3763 0 1803.0 Net Weight of Sod (g) 1925.0 2042.0 2039.0 1960 0 I Wet Weight of Sod + Cont. (g) 455 30 505.20 455.00 455 00 Dry Weight of Sod + Cont (g) 427 90 464 70 409.30 401.70 Weight of Container (g) 50.40 S4 70 I 47.60 I 45 20 i Moisture Content (%) 7 26 9.88 12.63 14.95 _ Wet Density ___ __~~c~ __ 127 7 135.5 135.3 130.1 I D Densi 119 1 123.3 120 1 113 2 - ' u_~:_..~ n., n..~..:a.. r."..n 1 7~ n..r:~.. ... u..:"a...~., r"..~r..~r Ioi ~ ~A .. __.. _.- , ___-_ , _~_... _.... -_-___. _ __-._'--_ ~ --i ..~..,_-.-~.v... ® Procedure A Soil Passing No 4 (4.75 mm) Sieve Mold 4 in (101 6 mm) diameter Layers 5 (Five) Blows per layer 25 (twenty-five) May be used if No 4 retained < 20% PROCEDURE USED 132 0 Procedure B Soli Passing 3/8 in. (9 5 mm) Sieve Mold 4 in (101.6 mm) diameter Layers 5 (Fve) Blows per layer 25 (twenty-five) Use if + u4 > 20°k and + 3/8 " < 20°h Procedure C soil Passing 3/4 in (19 0 mm) Sieve Mold 6 in (152 4 mm) diameter Layers S (Frye) Blows per layer 56 (fifty-suc) Use if + 3/8 in >20% and + o/. in <30% I Particle-Size Distribution: I•GR SA'~ Atterber Limits: LL,PL,PI I 127 0 w v a T 122 0 m 117 0 112 0 so SP GR =265 SP GR = 2 70 SP GR = 2 75 I 10 0 1s.a Moisture Content (%) 0208)}001 JPI Y~ M~ki1 Oora3 E°p 11!11 1-22At EXPANSION INDEX Of SOILS ASTM D 4829 Teratest Labs Inc Project Name: JPI / 4th & Milliken Tested By: )HW Date: 02/04/03 Prolec[ No.: 020873-001 Cherked By LF Date: 02/12/03 Bonng No.. B-3 Depth (ft.) 0-5 Sample No.. Bag 1 Visual Sample DesrnpUOn. Brown silty sand (SM) __ Dry Wt of Sod + ConL (g) 1000.00 WL of Container No (g) 0.00 Dry WL of Sod (g) 1000.00 Weight Soil Retained on #4 Sieve 0.00 Percent Passing # 4 100.00 MOLDED SPECIMEN Before Test After Test 5 men Diameter m. 4.01 4.01 _ 5 eamen Hei ht in ~Z---- 1 0000 -- -- 1.0020 - Wt. Coin .Sod + Mold m 618.40 431.30 _ Wt. of Mold 209.00 _ 0 00 s fic Grave (Assumed) 2.70 _ 2.70 Container No _____ Wet Wt of Sod + Cont. _ __ _ O 826 90 O__ 640.3 _ _ D Wt of Sod + Cont. __ _ 760.70 585.60 __ Wt. of Container ____ 0.00 209.00_ _ _ Moisture Content % __ 8.70 14.52 __ _ Wet Densi 123.5 129.8 __ __ _ D Densi _ 113.6 113 4 _ Void Ratio __ 0.484 0.487____ Total Porosi 0.326 0.328 Pore Volume a 67 5 67.9 _ ree of Saturation % 5 meas 48.6 80 5 SPECIMEN INUNDATION m distliled water for the penod of 24 h or expansion rate < 0.0002 m./h. Date Time Pressure (pst) ~ Elapsed Time (mm.) Dial Readings (in.) 02 04 03 10:11 1.0 0 0.0700 02 04/03 i 10:21 ~ 1.0 10 ~ 0.0695 Add Dis011ed Water to the 5 men 02 05/03 8:50 1.0 1349 0.0720 02/05/03 16:33 1.0 1812 0.0720 Expansion Index (EI ~~) _ ((Fnal Rdg -Initial Rdg) /Initial Thick.) x 1000 2.5 Expansion Index (EI) ~ = EI ~~ - (50 -S 0x((65+EI ~~) / (220-5 ~)) 2 • u SOIL RESISTIVITY TEST DOT CA TEST 532 /643 Teratest Labs Inc. • Project Name: JPI / 4th & Milliken Tested By • VJ Proled No.. 020873-001 Data Input By LF Bonng No.. 6-3 Depth (ft) • 0-S Sample No.. Bag i Sample DesrnpUOn• Brown silty sand (SM) Adjusted Resistance Specimen Water Added ' Moisture Reading Sod Resistivity No. (ml) (Wa) , Content (ohm) (ohm-cm) (MC) 1 100 14.72 2500 16865 2 200 22.92 1600 10794 3 300 31.11 1500 10119 4 400 39 30 1550 _ 10456 5 • Date: 01/22/03 Date: 01/30/03 Moisture Con[ent % MG 6.53 Wet Wt. of Soil + Cont (g) 210 39 D Wt of Soil + Cont 201.13 WL of Cor>miner _ 59.25 _ Container No. R2 __ Initial Sod Wt. 1Nt 1300.00 Box Constant 6.746 MC = 1+Ma 100 x Wa +1 -1 x100 Min Resistivity Moisture Content Sulfate Content Chlonde Content Soil pH (ohm-an) (%) (PPrn) (PPm) pH remv (°n DOT G Test 5321643 DOT G Tes[ 417 7aR II- _- _ DOT CJ1 Test 422 ~-_ _--_DOT CA Test 5321643 10100 28.0 79 43 7.11 20.3 17000 16000 ~~ 1 15000 E V C 14000 ~+' .~ 13000 m m G 12000 rn 11000 10000 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 Moisture Content (%) I APPENDIX D LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC GENERAL EARTHWORK AND GRADING SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROUGH GRADING • Table of Contents ~ Section Paee 1.0 GENERAL 1 1.1 Intent 1 1.2 The Geotechmcal Consultant of Record 1 1.3 The Earthwork Contractor 2 2.0 PREPARATION OF AREAS TO BE FILLED 2 2.1 Cleanng and Grubbing 2 2.2 Processing 3 2.3 Overexcavation 3 2.4 Benching 3 I 2 5 Evaluation/Acceptance of Fill Areas 3 3.0 FILL MATERIAL 4 31 General 4 3? Oversize 3 Im ort 3 4 4 p . 4.0 FILL PLACEMENT AND COMPACTION 4 h 1 Fill Layers 4 4.2 Fill Moisture Conditioning 4 4.3 Compaction of Fill 5 4.4 Compaction of Fill Slopes 5 4.5 Compaction Testing 5 4.6 Frequency of Compaction Testing 5 4.7 Compaction Test Locations 5 5.0 SUBDRAININSTALLATION 6 6.0 EXCAVATION 6 7.0 TRENCH BACKFILLS 6 7.1 Safety 6 7.2 Bedding and Backfill 6 7.3 Lift Thickness 6 7.4 Observation and Testing 6 smoavs 0 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. General Earthwork and Grnding Specifications 1.0 General • 1.1 Intent: These General Earthwork and Grading Specifications are for the grading and earthwork shown on the approved grading plan(s) and/or indicated in the geotechmcal report(s). These Specifications are a part of the recommendations contained in the geotechnical report(s). In case of conflict, the specific recommendations inthe geotechmcal report shall supersede these more general Specifications. Observations of the earthwork by the project Geotechmcal Consultant dunng the course of grading may result in new or revised recommendanons that could supersede these specifications or the recommendations in the geotechmcal report(s). 1 2 The Geotechmcal Consultant of Record: Prior to commencement of work, the owner shall employ the Geotechnical Consultant of Record (Geotechmcal Consultant) The Geotechmcal Consultants shall be responsible for reviewing the approved geotechmcal report(s) and accepting the adequacy of the preluninary geotechmcal findings, conclusions, and recotnmendatrons prior to the commencement of the grading. Prior to commencement of grading, the Geotechmcal Consultant shall review the "work plan" prepared by the Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) and schedule sufficient personnel to perform the appropriate level of observation, snapping, and compaction testing. • During the grading and earthwork operations, the Geotechmcal Consultant shall observe, map, and document the subsurface exposures to venfy the geotechmcal design assumptions. If the observed condmons are found to be sigmficantly different than the interpreted assumptions during the design phase, the Geotechnical Consultant shall inform the owner, recommend appropnate changes in design to accommodate the observed conditions, and notify the review agency where required. Subsurface areas to be geotechnically observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested include natural ground after rt has been cleazed for receiving fill but before fill is placed, bottoms of all "remedial removal" azeas, all key bottoms, and benches made on sloping ground to receive fill. The Geotechnical Consultant shall observe the moisture-conditioning and processing of the subgrade and fill materials and perform relative compaction testing of fill to detennuie the attained level of compaction The Geotechmcal Consultant shall provide the test results to the owner and the Contractor on a routine and frequent basis. 3030495 1 • LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Specifications 1 3 The Earthwork Contractor The Earthwork Contractor (Contractor) shall be qualified, expenenced, and knowledgeable in earthwork logistics, preparatron and processing of ground to receive fill, moisture-condmoning and processing of fill, and compacting fill. The Contractor shall review and accept the plans, geotechmcal report(s), and these Specifications pnor to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall be solely responsible for performing the grading in accordance with the plans and specifications. The Contractor shall prepare and submit to the owner and the Geotechmcal Consultant a work plan that indicates the sequence of earthwork grading, the nunber of "spreads" of work and the estimated quantities of daily earthwork contemplated for the site pnor to commencement of grading. The Contractor shall mnfoim the owner and the Geotechnical Consultant of changes in work schedules and updates to the work plan at least 24 hours in advance of such changes so that appropnate observations and tests can be planned and accomplished. The Contractor shall not assume that the Geotechmcal Consultant ms aware of all grading operations. The Contractor shall have the sole responsibility to provide adequate equipment and _ methods to accomplish the earthwork in accordance with the applicable grading • _ codes and agency ordinances, these Specificatrons, and the recommendations in the approved geotechmcal report(s) and grading plan(s). If, in the opinion of the Geotechnical Consultant, unsatisfactory conditions, such as unsintable soil, improper moisture conditron, inadequate compaction, insufficient buttress key smze, adverse weather, etc., are resulting in a quality of work less than required in these specifications, the Geotechmcal Consultant shall reject the work and may recommend to the owner that construction be stopped anal the conditions are rectified. 2.0 Preparation of Areas to be Filled 2.1 Clearine and Giubbine: Vegetation, such as brush, grass, roots, and other __ __ deletenous_matenal shall be sufficiently removed and properly disposed of in a method acceptable to the owner, governing agencies, and the Geotechnical Consultant. The Geotechnical Consultant shall evaluate the extent of these removals depending on specific site conditions. Earth fill matenal shall not contain more than 1 percent of organic matenals (by volume). No fill lift shall contain more than 5 percent of organic matter. Nesting of the organic materials shall not be allowed. ~• 3Ql0495 2 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Specifications If potentially hazardous matenals are encountered, the Contractor shall stop work in the affected azea, and a hazardous material specialist shall be informed unmediately for proper evaluation and handling of these materials prior to continuing to work in that azea. As presently defined by the State of California, most refined petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel, motor oil, grease, coolant, etc.) have chemical constituents that are considered to be hazardous waste. As such, the indiscriminate dumping or spillage of these flnids onto the ground may constitute a aisdemeanor, punishable by fines and/or unprisoninent, and shall not be allowed. 2.2 Processine: Existing ground that has been declared satisfactory for support of fill by the Geotechnical Consultant shall be steed to a m,n;mum depth of 6 inches. Existing ground that is not satisfactory shall be overexcavated as specified in the following section. Scarification shall continue until soils are broken down and free of lazge clay lumps or clods and the working surface is reasonably uniform, flat, and free of uneven features that would unhibnt uniform compaction 2.3 Overexcavation: In addntion to removals and overexcavations recommended in the approved geotechnical report(s) and the grading plan, soft, loose, dry, saturated, spongy, organic-rich, highly fractured or otherwise unsuitable ground shall be overexcavated to competent grotmd as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading. • 2 4 Benchine: Where fills aze to be placed on ground with slopes steeper than 5 1 (honzontal to vertical units), the ground shall be stepped or benched. Please see the Standard Detatls for a graphic illustration. The lowest bench or key shall be a minimum of 15 feet wide and at least 2 feet deep, into competent material as evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant. Other benches shall be excavated a muumum hetght of 4 feet into competent material or as otherwise recommended by the Geotechnical Consultant. Fill placed on ground sloping flatter than 5:1 shall also be benched or otherwnse overexcavated to provnde a flat subgnde for the fill. 2.5 Evaluation/Acceotance of Fill Areas: All azeas to receive fill, including removal and processed areas, key bottoms, and benches, shall be observed, mapped, elevations recorded, and/or tested prior to being accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant as suitable to receive fill. The Contractor shall obtain a written acceptance from the Geotechnical Consultant prior to fill placement. A licensed surveyor shall provide the survey control for determ;mng elevations of processed areas, keys, and benches. Saw ass 3 j ~ ~ ( ~:,, LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. `I ~~ 1 General Earthwork and Grading Specifications • 3.0 Fill Material 3.1 General: Matenal to be used as fill shall be essentially free of orgamc matter and other deleterious substances evaluated and accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to placement. Soils of poor quality, such as those with unacceptable gradation, high expansion potential, or low strength shall be placed in areas acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant or mined with other soils to achieve satisfactory fill matenal. 3 2 Oversize: Oversize material defined as rock, or other irreducible matenal with a maxunum dimension greater than 8 inches, shall not be boned or placed in fill unless location, matenals, and placement methods aze specifically accepted by the Geotechnical Consultant. Placement operations shall be such that nesting of oversized material does not occur and such that oversize material is completely surrounded by compacted or densified fill. Oversize matenal shall not be placed within 10 vertical feet of fimsh grade or within 2 feet of future utilities or underground construction. 3 ImL)Ort. If importing of fill material is required for grading, proposed unport matenal shall meet the requirements of Section 3.1. The potential unport source shall be given to the Geotechnical Consultant at least 48 hours (2 working days) before importing begins so that its swtabihty can be detennuted and appropnate tests performed. 4.0 Fill Placement and Compaction 4.1 Fill Layers: Approved fill material shall be placed in aeeas prepared to receive fill (per Section 3.0) m neaz-horizontal layers not exceeding 8 inches in loose thickness. The Geotechmcal Consultant may accept thicker layers if testing indicates the grading procedures can adequately compact the thicker layers. Each layer shall be spread evenly and mixed thoroughly to attain relative umfonnity of material and moisture throughout. 4.2 Fill Moisture Conditionine: Fill soils shall be watered, dned back, blended, and/or mixed, as necessary to attain a relatively umform moisture content at or slightly over optirnum. Maxunum density and optunum soil moisture content tests shall be performed in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM Test Method D1557-91). 4 3N0 995 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC. General Earthwork and Grading Specifications 4.3 Comnaction of Fill: After each layer has been moisture-conditioned, mixed, and . evenly spread, n shall be uniformly compacted to not less than 90 percent of maximum dry density (ASTM Test Method D1557-91). Compaction equipment shall be adequately sized and be etther spectfically designed for soil compaction or of proven reliability to efficiently ac}ueve the specified level of compaction wtth uniformity. 4 4 Compaction of Fill Slones: In addition to normal compaction procedures specifed above, compaction of slopes shall be accomplished by backrolling of slopes with sheepsfoot rollers at increments of 3 to 4 feet in fill elevation, or by other methods producing satisfactory results acceptable to the Geotechnical Consultant. Upon completion of gradmg, relative compaction of the fill, out to the slope face, shall be at least 90 percent of maxunum density per ASTM Test Method D 1557-91. 4 5 Compaction Testmg: Field tests for moisture content and relative compaction of the fill soils shall be performed by the Geotechnical Consultant. Location and frequency of tests shall be at the Consultant's discretion based on field conditions encountered. Compaction test locations will not necessanly be selected on a random basis. Test locations shall be selected to venfy adequacy of compaction levels in azeas that are judged to be prone to inadequate compaction (such as close to slope faces and at the fill bedrock benches) 4.6 Freuuencv of Comnaction Testmg Tests shall be taken at mtervals not exceeding . 2 feet m verttcal nse and/or 1,000 cubic yazds of compacted fill soils embankment In addition, as a guideline, at least one test shall be taken on slope faces for each 5,000 square feet of slope face and/or each 10 feet of vertical height of slope. The Contractor shall assure that fill construction is such that the testing schedule can be accomplished by the Geotechnical Consultant The Contractor shall stop or slow down the earthwork construction if these mmunum standards are not met. 4.7 Comnaction Test Locations: The Geotechnical Consultant shall document the approximate elevation and horizontal coordinates of each test location. The Contractor shall coordinate vnth the protect surveyor to assure that sufficient grade stakes are established so that the Geotechnical Consultant can determine the test locations with sufficient accuracy. At a mmimum, two grade stakes wtthin a honzontal distance of 100 feet and vertically less than 5 feet apart from potential test locations shall be provided. 3030 495 5 LEIGHTON AND ASSOCIATES, INC General Earthwork and Grading Specrfications . 5 0 Subdrain Installation Subdtain systems shall be installed in accordance with the approved geotechnical report(s), the grading plan, and the Standazd Details The Geotechmcal Consultant may recommend additional subdrarns and/or changes m subdrarrr extent, location, grade, or matenal depending on conditions encountered during grading All subdraurs shall be surveyed by a land surveyor/civil engineer for Ime and grade after installation and pnor to banal. Sufficient time should be allowed by the Contractor for these surveys 6.0 Excavatron Excavations, as well as over-excavatron for remedial purposes, shall be evaluated by the Geotechnical Consultant dunng grading. Remedial removal depths shown on geotechnical plans are estunates only. The actual extent of removal shall be determined by the Geotechmcal Consultant based on the field evaluation of exposed conditions during grading. Where fill-over-cut slopes aze to be graded, the cut portion of the slope shall be made, evaluated, and accepted by the Geotechmcal Consultant pnor to placement of matenals for construction of the till portion of the slope. unless otherwise recommended by the Geotechmcal Consultant. ~` 7.0 'Trench Backfills 7 ] Safety: The Contractor shall follow all OHSA and Cal/OSHA requirements for safety of trench excavations. 7.2 Beddin¢ and Bacl~ll: All bedding and backfill of utilrty trenches shall be done m accordance with the applicable provisrons of Standard Specifications of Public Works COILSTNCtiOR. Bedding matenal shall have a Sand Equivalent greater than 30 (SF>30). The bedding shall be placed to 1 foot over the top of the conduit and densrfied by jetting. Backfill shall be placed and densrfied to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum from 1 foot above the top of the conduit to the surface. The Geotechnical Consultant shall test the trench backfill for relative compaction. At least one test should be made for every 300 feet of trench and 2 feet of fill. 7 3 Lift Thickness: Lift thickness of trench backfill shall not exceed those allowed in the Standard Specifications of Public Works Construction unless the Contractor can demonstrate to the Geotechmcal Consultant that the fill lift can be compacted to the minunum relative compaction by his ahternative equipment and method. 7 4 Observation and Testme• The letting of the bedding azound the conduits shall be • observed by the Geotechnical Consultant. ~a avs 6 --~21>L TR E ~ _ __ 6~~~ _ ~{~ t ~ B ~ wi r ~~ I ~ ~ ~i. ~° -_ ~, ~L IN ~~a.~ C H I - ~ \ ~~ RE(A/L slew i .S/2 Ac 1 _ _As• { ~ 4th STREET "Am. ~ I ~•:~t ~ s ~pgPnlt SCALE 1"= 200' ± i Approximate Bonng Location B-1 PROJECT NO. ~0 ~ Proposed Multi-family BORING Residential Development LOCATION 020873-001 North of 4th SVeet, West of Milliken Avenue, City of Rancho Cucamonga, California DATE MAP February 2003 FwuRE No. 2 j / ~Z.~1` Z~~~ L CONS U L T I N G •An Environmental Plonning/Resource Management Corporohon February 14, 2003 ~i- ~; Ms. Hetdt W. Mather VIA FACSIMILE AND MAIL Regional Development Manager (858) 458-1716 JPI 8910 University Center Lane, Suite 150 San Diego, California 92122 .;-=~ " Subject. Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fdy Habdat Assessment for the - ~ Approximately 24-Acre 4th and Milliken Stte Located to the Ctty of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California _~ _ / 4 ~~ , ~ Dear Ms. Mather BonTerra Consulting performed a focused Delhi sands flower-loving fly (Rhaphromrdas termmatus abdomrnalis) (hereinafter referred to as DSFLF) habitat assessment for the approximate 25-acre located at the northwest corner of the _ - intersection of 4th Street and Milliken Avenue, which is located within the Ctty of - • -~ , ,,. ,,.,._~.: ~- Rancho Cucamonga to San Bernardino County, Caltforma (see Parcel VII on attached exhibit provided to BonTerra Consulting by Qore, Inc) approximately one q~~~ y-, (1) mile northwest of the Interstate 10-Interstate 15 interchange The site was l~/! ~~~\ surveyed by a BonTerra Consulting biologist for the purpose of evaluating the _ potenttal for occurrence of the federally endangered DSFLF --~ ; In September 1997, the U.S Ftsh and Wildlife Service (USFWS) finalized the Delhr Sands Flower-loving flyRecoveryPlan (USFW$,1997) (henceforth referred to as the ' ~ ~ , ~ Recovery Plan) The recovery strategy to the Recovery Plan has three operating goals 1) to work with appropnate land owners and local jurisdictions to preserve - ~- ;- „~' ~ and/or enhance habitat occupied by DSFLF, 2) to implement a restoration program _ for lands with the highest potenttal for DSFLF habitat to be restored, and, 3) indtate ~~ a captive breeding and release program tnorder to introduce/reintroduce the DSFLF ~°~,t into htstonc or restored habitats Based upon the current and htstonc range of the - - I M - DSFLF and the mapped locations of Delhi sands soils, three recovery units (cf, cnttcal • - - habitat areas) were designated wdhin the Recovery Plan These recovery units are - ~ - ~+ designated as Colton, Jurupa, and Ontano ' •k '~ ~.,' The 4th Street and Milliken Avenue site is located wdhin the Ontano Recovery Untt. 151 IColmus Dave Furthermore, according to the Recovery Plan, the area around the 4th Street and • ,~';, ;,: - Milliken Avenue sde is noted as containing Delhi sands sods. The Recovery Plan Sucre E-200. •-' : notes several habitat charactensttcs that have been correlated to locations current - ,. _:; f- and htstonc DSFLF populations These habitat charactenstics are 1) the presence Costa Mesa '- of three indicator plants that are usually present in occupied fly habitat (i e., common - - •~' ~ ~_ buckwheat (Enogonum fascrcu/atum), telegraph weed (Heterotheca grandrflora), and California 92626 Croton (Croton sp ); 2) vegetative coverts less than 50 percent (more typically in the range of 10 to 20 percent), and 3) adult sightings are more likely to relatively 14.444-9199 undisturbed habitat, as indicated by the presence of native annuals and perennials 1714 444-9599 lax www bonterraconsulhng coin Ms Heidi W Mather February 14, 2003 Page 2 (such as those listed in Appendix E of the recovery plan) The presence/absence of these characteristics on the site provides the basis of the habitat assessment for the DSFLF. SURVEY METHODS The purpose of the surveys was determine the presence or absence of DSFLF habitat charactenstics on the sites and to qualitatively determine the potential for DSFLF to occur Surveys consisted of a combination of linear and meander transects that traversed the entire 24-acre site All plant species observed were recorded in field notes and were identified in the field or were identified using taxonomic keys in Hickman (1993). The location and density of the vegetative cover on the site was qualitatively estimated. The overall habitat quality of the site, based upon level of disturbance, was estimated based upon review of aenal photography (TerraServer, 2003) and observations made in the field The survey was performed by Jeff Galizio of BonTerra Consulting on February 4, 2003. SURVEY RESULTS Vegetation The entire 4th Street and Milliken Avenue 24-acre sde is dominated by the fallow remnants of a former vineyard and a fairly dense cover of invasive and non-native annual plants. The remnant grape vines (Vd~s sp) are uniformly spaced and in rows, apparently in the same locations as when the site was part of an active vineyard. Hummocks of sand have collected at the base of a majority of the remnant grape plants; however, these hummocks are nearly completely covered by non- native and invasive grasses (Poa spp, Hordeum sp., and Festuca sp.) The interstitial areas • between the grapes are covered by storksbdl (Erod~um spp.). Other annual speces observed inGuded dandelion (Taraxacum offiana/e), mustard (Sysrmbruim sp. and Brassica mgra), and fiddleneck (Ams~nckra Menzresrr var rntermed~a). Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Flv Habitat Characteristics Indicator Plants None of the three indicator plants, identified in the Recovery Plan as usually present in occupied DSFLF habitat: common buckwheat, telegraph weed, and Croton were observed on the site at the time of the survey Common buckwheat and Croton are perennial plants that, if present, would have been observed. Telegraph weed is an annual, but would have been identifiable if present on the site at the time of the survey. Vegetative Cover Vegetative cover on the site was estimated to range from 20% to 80%, and averaged between 60% and 70%. The southwestern portion of the site appeared to support the least vegetative density, but also appeared to have been disturbed most recently Level of Disturbance The current state of the site is that of a disturbed and inactive grape vineyard Analysis of aenal photography (circa 1994) indicates that, at that time, the site may still have been in use as an active • vineyard The site is completely surrounded by recent residential and commercial, which was not present in the 1994 aenal photography. Active constructions was occurnng immediately to the south and the west of the site at the time of the survey. The substrates (sods) on the site also Ms Heidi W. Mather February 14, 2003 Page 3 . exhibit the effects of much disturbance as a result of previous agricultural actwities on the site and soil compaction resulting from the possible access of construction vehicles through the site to adjoining parcels Conclusions The absence of indicator plants, the overall high density of vegetative cover, and the highly disturbed condition of the site makes it highly unlikely that the habitat on the 4th Street and Milliken Avenue site, in its current condition, would support the DSFLF One speaes (fiddleneck) listed in Appendix E of the Recovery Plan was observed on the site. As mentioned previously, one of the goals of the Recovery Plan is to ~mp/ement a restoration program for lands with the highest potential for DSFLF habitat to be reston;d. Though there is some DSFLF habitat restoration potential on the site, the history of disturbance and encroaching development would preclude this potential from being considered high. BonTerra Consulting would estimate the potential for DSFLF hat;itat restoration at the site as "limited." - Recommendations Though the presence of DSFLF is unlikely and the restoration potential of the site is limited, the location of the site in the Ontano Recovery Unit of the Recovery Plan and the apparent presence of Delhi sands sods on the site, it is recommended that concurrence of these conclusions by the USFWS is obtained pnor to site development. • Please contact Jeff Galizio at (714)444-9199 if you have questions or comments. Sincerely, BONTERRA CONSULTING c~~ ~ - y~ Jeffrey Galizio Senior Project Manager, Biological Services a woxn:uanroavma~~ n:se~s~o71Ia3 wpa Attachment I• Ms Heidi W Mather February 14, 2003 Page 4 • REFERENCES California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 2003. Califomia Natural D~versrty (RareFind) Database (CNDDB). Califomia Department of Fish and Game, Natural Hentage Division, Sacramento, Califomia. Hickman, J C. Editor. 1993. The Jepson Manual Higher Plants of Cal~fomia University of California Press, Berkeley, Califomia. Ten-aServer, 2003 Digital aenal photograph of protect area (circa 1994) available overthe mtemet wa search of the TerraServer website (http.//terraserver.homeadvisor.msn.com) U.S Fish and W~idlife Service (USFWS). 1997 Delhi Sands flower-loving fly (Rhaphiomidas termmatus abdominalis) Recovery Plan. USFWS Portland, Oregon. 51 pages. • I• RANCHO CUCAMONGA IASP SUB-AREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN • City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Development Department, Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 January 1994 Revised February 2001 Revised March 11, 2003 u ~ ~r Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Spec~ic Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS • Section Paae 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1 Introduction 1-1 1 2 Planning Process and Background 1-2 1 3 Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Scope and Format 1-2 1 4 Pro/ect Descnption 1-2 1 5 Public Facilities and Services .. 1~ 1 6 Phasing Plan 1-7 1 7 Processing Cntena for the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan 1-7 18 Conclusions 1-7 2 INTRODUCTION 2 1 Regional and Local Seriing 2-1 2 2 Protect Charactenstics - 2-2 2 3 Purpose and Objectives 2-2 2 4 Issues, Constraints, and Opportunities 2-4 3 GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY 3 1 Relationship to the Industnat Area Specific Plan 3-1 3 2 Relationship to the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. 3-2 . 4 DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK 4 1 Development Concept 4-1 4 2 Land Use Plan. - 4-6 4 3 Circulation and Access 411 4 4 Infrastructure 4-12 4 5 Grading Concepts/Drainage .. - 4-15 4 6 Public Services 4-16 4 7 Economic Development 4-17 5 DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS 5 1 Introduction 5-1 5 2 Land Use Types 5-2 5 3 Design Guidelines and Standards 5-11 5 4 Development Standards 5-28 6 IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM 61 Introduction - 6-1 6 2 Regulatory Procedures/Development Regulations . - 6-1 6 3 Sources of Financing 6-8 6 4 Phasing (Land Use/Infrastructure) 6-11 6 5 Marketing Strategy 6-11 • C 10xumen6 antl SetGnpslOwneAMY DocumeMS~LJA DxurtrontslC L I E N T SUPRSpacdw Plan Sections 13-031103 doc Table Rancho Cucamonga /ASP Sub-Area 18 Specrfic Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Appendices A Fiscal Impact Report B General Plan/IASP Consistency • • C 10xumerds eM SetGipslO~meM1y DocumeMS~CJA DocumenblC L I E N T S11PhSpec~fic Plan SecYarm 13-031103 tloc II T8DIE Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan LIST OF TABLES Table Pia -e 1-1 Summary Land Use Development Program 1-4 41 Summary Land Use Development Program 4-5 42 Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Estimated Employment 4-19 5-1 Summary Land Use by Planrnng Area - 5-3 5-2 Land Use Type Definitions . . 5-5 5-3 Suggested Plant Palette by Landscape Zone 5-19 5-4 Streetscape Landscaping Theme - •• 5-22 5-5 Acceptable Plant Matenals for Low Level Screening 5-25 5-6 Development Standards Summary.. - - 5-29 5-7 Streetscape Setback Regwrements. 5-~ 5-8 PerForrnance Standards 5-42 C ~Documen6 antl Sethn9s10xneM7Y nccuments~CJA Oocumen6lC L I E N T Sl1PI~Spacfic Plan Sechons 73-031103 doc III TeWE Rancho Cucamonga IASP SubArea 18 Speafic Plan LIST OF FIGURES • Fi ure Follows Pane 1-1 Conceptual Development Plan 1-3 2-1 Regional Location Map 2-2 2-2 Relationship of Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan to IASP - 2-2 2-3 Project Vicinity Map 2-2 2-4 Area Development Context 2-2 4-1 Summary Site Analysis - 4-2 4-2 Area Transportation Network - 4-2 4-3 Conceptual Development Plan - 44 4-4 Conceptual Land Use Plan . - - 4"8 4-5 Existing Circulation Network 412 4-6 Conceptual Circulation Plan - 4-12 4-7 Water Concept Plan - - • •• 4-12 4-8 Wastewater Concept Plan - - 4-14 4-9 Reclaimed Water Concept Plan 4-14 4-10 Electncal Concept Plan. 414 4-11 Natural Gas Concept Plan - - -- 4-14 4-12 Telephone Concept Plan - 4-14 4-13 Cable Television Concept Plan . - . -... - - .. - . 416 4-14 Grading Concept Plan - - 416 4-15 Drainage Concept Plan. - 4-16 5-1 Conceptual Streetscepe Master Plan. . •• • - •- -- •5-21 5-2 Major Artenal Divided Street Classification. - - - •5-21 5-3 Secondary Street Classifiption - 5-21 5-4 Local Street Classification .. - - 5-21 5-5 City Gateway Feature 5-23 5-6 Streetscape Setback Requirement-Mayor ArtenaUSpecial Boulevard - 5-35 5-7 Streetscape Setback Requirement-Secondary Street . ... .. - .. 5-35 5-8 Streetscape Setback Requirement-Local Street 5-35 5-9 Building Setback Requirements-Rear and Side Yards .5-35 5-10 Building Height Setback . - - ... .. - .. 5-35 5-11 Building Projections . - ... - - .. .. 5-35 5-12 Industnal Loading Dock Requirements - . . .. 5-39 6-1 Proposed Infrastructure for the Golf Course-Water, Wastewater, and Reclaimed Water •• 6-12 6-2 Proposed Infrastructure for the Golf Course-Storm Drains, Electricity, and Telephone - 6-12 C 10ocumeMS and Settings\QmerUAy OocumeMS~CJA Docume~rtslC L I E N T SVPRSpecific Plan Sections 13-031103 doc N r8b/E Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan 1.2 PLANNING PROCESS AND BACKGROUND In 1993, a multitude of discussions were held with the City of Rancho Cucamonga to strategize on the regulating of the General Dynamics property with the City The pending vacancy of approximately 1,000,000 square feet of office space regwred a creative approach for encouraging future reuse of the buildings, as well as a strategy for development of 300 acres of adjacent vacant properties The discussions resulted in the preparation of a conceptual land use plan identrfying the development potential of a championship quality golf course as the central theme, v~nth a vanety of supporting land uses surrounding the golf course A Memorandum of Understanding was approved by the Rancho Cucamonga City Counal in September 1993 outlining a review process that would encourage public review by the Planning Commission and City Council The applications for a speafic plan, general plan amendment, and environmental impact report were submitted in October 1993 The draft Specific Plan for Sub-Area 18 and a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) were made available for public review on January 26, 1994 The public comment penod was concluded on March 11, 1994 Three public meetings were conducted by the Planning Commission to rewew the EIR and Specific Plan in January, February, and March 1994 The final EIR was certified and the Specific Plan approved by the Rancho Cucamonga City Counal in June 1994 Subsequent to 1994, the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan has been amended In November 2000, the Rancho Cucamonga City Counal approved an amendment to the Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan to permit multi-family residential uses as an additionally permitted use in the mixed use Planning Area IX In May 2001, the Counal approved an amendment to permit multi-family residential uses as an additionally permitted use in Planning Area VI In September 2002, the Council approved an amendment to permd market rate senior housing in Planning Area VIII as an additionally permitted use In June 2003 the Counal approved an amendment to the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan to also permit multi family residential uses as an additionally permitted use in mixed use Planning Area VII 1.3 SUB-AREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN SCOPE AND FORMAT All future development vnthin Sub-Area 18 shall occur in accordance with the Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan The Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan is consistent with the requirements of the Sections 65450- 65507 of the California Public Resources Code, Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, the Industnal Area Specific Plan, and the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan The Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan defines the development concept for the proposed mixed-use protect and applicable development regulations for the project, so that subsequent project-related subdivision maps, grading plans, and other discretionary permits can be approved All discretionary permits with the Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan will be consistent with the spurt and intent of the Speafic Plan C\D ds t \0 a\DesMO\JPIVPI052203 docP-1JW1SPealw-0IartAma~drnemWP~~.52203 doc Rancho Cucemonga IASP SubArea 18 SpeGfic Plan TABLE 1-1 SUMMARY OF LAND USE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM This table is conceptual to illustrate and summarize the maximum development potential of the project. See Section 4.2, Land Use Plan, as well as Table 5.1 and 5.2 for permitted land uses and definitions. Types of Uses m a E ~ c c ~ ~ LL ~ ~ ,g ' ~ E o ~ FAR r~ ~ @ E E ~ g ~ ~ Maximum (Floor Plannin 9 ~ ~ @ '~ e ~ ~ ~ _ s' " ,~ Development Area Planning Area Sim $ ~ 8 ~ $ = ~ ° „ Potential (sf or lli N Ratio) or dulac ParcellFaellily Area (Acres) o R ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° s ng un dwe sl t3esbng Fadlities Building 600 V' 27 O O O O O O • 308,000' 0 25° Bwldtng 601 IV° 17 • A O • • 242,000' 0 35° Bwldtng 602 II 28 O O • ® O • ® • 425,000 0 35° 72 975,000 0 31 Subtotal GoH Course I 151 • • • • O 60,000 0 01 (tndudmg Gubhouse and maintenance faGltty) Gotl Pracace IIN 22 • • • • O O O • 15,000` 0 01° Faality (lighted) Subtotal 173 75,000 0 01 CommerGal/ VII 24 • • • • • • • 729; j00035 Industnal Parcek 4_ VIII 134 • • • 173,804 035 X 24 • • • • • • 200,000 0 20° XI 18 • • • 275,000 0 35 Subtotal 71~ A~80M1 709 788 59 4 MuRiple Famty VI 23 • 567 du 14-24 du/ac Residenaal VII 20 • 499 du 2424_30 du/ac VIII 9 7 •° 264 du 24-30 dulac U( 20 5 • 521 du 24-30 du/ac Subtotal 53-2 1~52~u1 851 du 24-30 dulas 7342 Permiaed uo to 1 888 du CID i tl S tt 10 rl0eskm IJPIVPI-052203 tlocP-klP!`SpecdwP~Uw~`22~~ Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specfic Plan Total ~ I 378' f.7ss.7ea sa n 1.851 du Permitted uo to 1 888 du NOtes 1 UPomatey demolished and redeveloped as muted-use commeraal 440,000 sf 2 Could be mtensfied with parking deck and +10,000 sf adddion of retaiVrestauranUfasf food 3 Existing faUlry could be adaptrvey re-used or redeveloped as a famiy recreahon/entertainment cemer or maed-use commeraal 4 Could t>e redeveloped uttimatey to muted-use commerpal 290,000 sf 5 Attematrve hotel and conference center sde 6 MuPople famiy market rate semor housing 7 Indudes 5 apes for vacated portion of Cleveland Ave 7 Uttimatey could be 3,707,000 sf wrth overall FAR 0 23 8 FAR 035 for 13acre area exUutling the Metrolink parcel (10 saes) 9 Where a hotel us developed, the maximum allowable FAR for the Planning Ala p+n inaease to FAR 0 70 1.4.4 PLANNING AREA IV-OFFICE/COMMERCIAL USES Planning Area IV is approximately 17 acres and could Include the reuse of the 601 Building or redevelopment of the site to include a variety of uses The existing building may be renovated to provide office space for "back-office" type users The western portion of the planning area may be used for outdoor recreation facilities or for decked parking 1.4.5 PLANNING AREA V-OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL USES Similar to Planning Areas II and III, this approximately 27-acre planning area contains an existing building (Building 600) Development of Planning Area V could provide for the reuse of the building for officefindustrial uses However, due to the building design, Intenm space configuration, age, and visual gateway location, the reuse adaptability of Building 600 fs limited Planning Area V could eventually be eliminated and development of a mixed commercial nature could occur Uses Including indoor/outdoor recreation, hotel/conference center, mixed-use commercial, research and developmenUllght industrial, and restaurant are proposed 1.4.6 PLANNING AREA VI-OFFICE USES/BUSINESS PARK/MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Planning Area VI Is approximately 23 acres and Includes the greatest amount of golf course footage of any planning area within the Sub-Area 16 Specific Plan The summary land use matnx (Table 5- 1,Summary of Land Use Type by Planning Area, Included In Section 5) Identifies a vanety of uses that are compatible with the golf course including Indoor recreation/entertainment, restaurant, mixed-use commercial, hotel/conference center, office/commercial, research and development/light Industnal/business park, and multiple family residential 1.4.7 PLANNING AREA VII-MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL/MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL Planning Area VII, located at the Intersection of Milliken Avenue and Fourth Street, Is approximately 24 acres and could include mixed-use commercial, indoor recreation/entertainment, an option for hotel/conference center, office, aiad research and development/Ilght industrial/business park multiple family residential Planning Area VII Is a key entry parcel toSub-Area 18 and Is positioned C D tl511 \0 \D k \JPIIJPI-0522D3d cR1ARUSpeWic-0lan Amer+drnerNlJP-l-05220.3tlas Rancho Cucamonga IASP SubArea 18 Speafic Plan to respond to economic/market factors both within the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the City of Ontano 1.4.8 PLANNING AREA VIII-OFFICE/COMMERCIAUSENIOR HOUSING Planning Area VIII is approximately 21 acres, allowable uses wthin the planning area are office, mixed-use commeraal, and market rate senior housing This planning area has pnme artenal frontage along Milliken Avenue and Sixth Street 10 tl S 11 \0 1D k \JPI\JPI 052203 tlocP-\dPllSpec~tr RHwAmentlmerakF! 0522&"irlc~ Randro Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan 3.1 RELATIONSHIP TO THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN The goal of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan was to create astand-alone document that could be integrated into the IASP as aself-contained Speafic Plan Adoption of the Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan required minor amendments to the IASP and General Plan A listing of those amendments is provided below IASP Amendments • IASPSub-Areas-The Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan was added to the IASP as a new Sub-Area subject to a new range of permitted and conditionally permitted uses • Open Space Network-Minor revisions to the discussion on Open Space Networks were provided to include the golf course within Planning Areas IA and IB The golf course was designated in the IASP as a permitted use within the Open Space Category. • Circulation Network-The reference to Cleveland Avenue as a secondary arterial was eliminated in the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan north of Sixth Street Cleveland Avenue will function as a local mdustnal roadway and, south of Sixth Street, Cleveland Avenue will be vacated • Categories of Industrial Uses-Anew general category of use "Mixed-Use" was added to the IASP This category will be the same as that added to the General Plan (described in Section 3 2 below), and recognizes the broader range of commercial, office, retail, residential, and recreational activities permitted m the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan • Sub-Area Figures-A variety of figures wnthm the IASP were amended to reflect the boundaries of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan The figures for Sub-Area 11 and Sub-Area 12 were revised, along with the text m each section, to reflect the reduction in Sub-Area size and the changes to Cleveland Avenue • Residential Use-A new category of residential use was added to the IASP This category allows for multiple family residential development Multiple family residential uses are only permitted m Plamm~g Areas VI, VII, and IX of the Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan Multiple family market rate senior housing is only permitted m Plamm~g Area VIII 3.2 RELATIONSHIP TO THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN A thorough assessment of the relationship of the Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan to the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is provided m Appendix B Notable items contained within the discussion are summarized below General Plan Amendments • The amendments to the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan were similarto the amendments to the IASP The changes generally related to figures being modified, changes due to Cleveland Avenue being reclassified as a local mdustnal collector, and the golf course being shown as an open span; use The Open Space designation includes specfic regulations and standards as discussed throughout the Speafic Plan The Development Code C \DOCUments antl SeNnas\OxnerlDesktoo\JPPJPI-052203 tlocP VF11SpaWisi+lartAmeaAmenpdR4O5?2R39eo Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Spec~ic Plen regulations for Open Space do not apply to the golf course uses within the Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan Land Use Changes Industnal Land Uses-The General Plan previously had three categones of mdustnal land uses Industnal Park, General Industnal, and Heavy Industnal However, it was felt that these three categones could discourage the City General Plan objective of promoting planning flexibility and the mixture of different, but compatible land uses in order to expand the variety of commercial and recreational uses contemplated within Sub-Area 18, and to help better integrate this portion of the southern boundary of the IASP with anticipated regional market trends, the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan proposed a new category of land use entitled "Mixed-Use," consistent with the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The Mixed-Use category permits a wide range of commercial and Industnal actlwties, including medwm, light, and custom manufacturing, research and development, office, recreation, residential, mixed-use commercial, retail, and general commercial uses Ooen Space-The golf course within Sub-Area 18 Is designated "Open Space " "Open Space" Is defined to include golf course uses wtthm designated areas adjacent to commercal, mdustnal, or residential uses • Residential Use-Development of a multiple family residential apartment complex is permitted only m Planning Areas VI, VII. and IX of the Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan consistent with the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan designation of Mixed Use Multiple family market rate senior housing is permitted m Planning Area VIII consistent with the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan designation of Mixed Use C 1D \ tl S ^ \0 \Deskto 1JPIUPI-652203 EocP kPlkSpesrf~c-0Ian Aawa9mzn.l.fPFQ5220n tla; Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Sperrfic Plan _ SECTION 4 DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK The Sub-Area 18 SpeGflc Plan identifies a strategy for future use and development of the protect site This Specific Plan has been formulated based upon an assessmeni of existing site and environmental factors, the IASP, real estate market conditions, and commurnty context, as well as discussions wrath City staff, commurnty leaders, Metrolmk representatives, and local, regional, and national real estate development interests 4.1 DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT 4.1.1 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION As depicted in Figure 4-1, the project site is approximately 380 acres, divided into three pnmary tracts defined by existing mator artenal roadways and railroad tracks It was identified in the IASP as being month Sub-Areas 10, 11, and 12 yyest Trect: +74 acres Bound by Fourth Street, Cleveland Avenue, Sixth Street, and Utica Avenue, this tract contains three industnal/office buildings, including • Bwldinp 600-1308,432-square-foot industnal building, including one-story, high beam industnal space and two-story central core office space • Building 601-1242,028-square foot, thn:e-story office bulding with large floorplate and extensive in-floor wrong distnbution network • Budding 602-1424,968-square foot industnal budding, incorporating t 217,612 square feet of one-story, high-beam industnal space, t 190,556 square feet of two-story penmeter office space, and t 16,800 square feet in a detached structure (602A) South Tract: 1150 acres Bound by Fourth Street, Milliken Avenue, Sixth Street, and Cleveland Avenue, this tract is contains vineyards, vacant land As a part of implementation of the Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan, a pnor parcel map and onsde street improvements near Fourth Street and Cleveland Avenue were vacated North Tract: 1151 acres Bound by Sixth Street, Milliken Avenue, the AT&SF railroad tracks, and Cleveland Avenue, this tract is partially developed The tract includes vineyards, an electncal substation in the northwest comer of the tract, a Metrolmk Station, office development, and planned multiple family residential apartments A mator underground water line wnthin a 40-foot-monde easement runs through the tract on an east-west axis approximately 600 feet south of the tract's northern property line An existing • 40-foot-monde irrevocable easement along a future Seventh Street alignment well be vacated to accomplish the plan C 1Documenls end Seronga~O.meAMY Documents~GJA Documer~R1C L I E N T SVP71Specdic Plan Section G-031703 dx 47 LIBVa Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Spedfic Plan 4.1.2 ATTRIBUTES OF THE PROPERTY . The property has a number of sigrnficant attnbutes upon which the Speafic Plan is based These attnbutes are illustrated in Figures 2-4 and 4-2 The attnbutes include the following • Central location to major business/mdustnaUwarehousmg/distnbution centers and master planned residential communities • Proximity to Ontano Intemat~onal Auport (1 35 miles southwest) • Highly accessible from regional expressways including I-10, I-15 and the future I-210 expressways (0 67 mile south, 0 75 mile east, and 3 miles north, respectively) • Extensive mator artenal road frontage provided by Fourth Street, Sixth Street, and Milliken Avenue (3,900 feet, 3,900 feet, and 5,200 feet, respectively) • Proximity to Metrolmk Station location at the northeast comer of the project site • Large, readily developable land under single ownership and free of any apparent mator environmental constraints • Potential re-use of extstmg onsite buildings • Scernc mountain backdrops to the north (San Gabnel Mountains) and the south (Santa Ana Mountains) 4.1.3 DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT/STRATEGY Overall Concept The Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan envisions repositioning the property as a Mixed-Use development serving as a central amenity area forthe surrounding IASP and a transition area from the commerdaf areas to the south and the mdustnal areas of the IASP to the east, west, and north Proposed uses include recreational, hoteUconference center, retail, restaurant and entertainment, and regional transit (Metrolmk Station) uses, as well as office, research and development, light mdustnal uses, and multiple family residences onented to current and anticipated future market demand The development of this property as intended to serve as a catalyst for the further development of the surrounding IASP area as a major regional employment center Basic Strategies The pnmary strategies behind the development concept are enumerated below • Provide a Specific Plan ninth an innovative development concept that moll promote a strategic competitive advantage in today's real estate market while serving as a catalyst for the successful buildout of the sunoundmg IASP • Create a distinctive Mixed-Use environment moth numerous amenities which combines • compatible land uses ninth business services, residences, and recreation, incuding a championship golf course as its centerpiece C 1Docume~rts erid SelOnps~OwnsAMY ~ocumeMS1CJA Docvmerrts`G L 1 E N T SVPM1Spearw Phn SecOOn ba311a3 Eoe 42 OBVe Rancho Cucamonga /ASP SubArea 18 Specfic Plan • Provide flexibility needed to respond to today's changing real estate market conditions, as well as opportunities created by such major developments in the immediate area as the Ontano International Airport, Meirolink Station, Rancho Cucamonga Sports Complex, and Ontano Mills shopping center • Incorporate amarket-based development program of compatible and synergistic uses targeted to both immediate and long-term opportunities • Provide expanded employment opportunities complimented by new residential development and recreation, retail, and service amenities serving the broader IASP area that will promote a sound, diversified economic base and high quality of life for the City • Accommodate future growth and expansion of employment opportunities in the area with excellent in-place transportation infrastructure and public transit • Provide highy attractive development parcels that are appropnately sized and configured, highly accessible, and take maximum advantage of arterial roadway visibility, golf course amenity frontage, and views of scenic mountain backdrops • Creatively incorporate potential adaptive reuse of the exsting General Dynamics buildings and facilities to the extent feasible • Provide an easily phased development plan that can be implemented on an incremental, project-by-project basis while being governed by an overall plan framework and coordinated with development of related public improvements • Provide an attractive business environment that conveys a high quality of design, that compliments the design character of the site's natural setting and sun'ounding area development, and that relates compatibly with the existing IASP's design guidelines and development standards. • Provide a positive fiscal impact with substantial new revenues to the City and Redevelopment Agency in terms of additional property taxes, sales taxes, bed taxes, and redevelopment tax increment generated by the proposed development. 4.1.4 URBAN DESIGN CONTEXT Physical Form and Appearance The Sub-Area 18 Specfic Plan envisions the properly as aMixed-Use development of interrelated planning area organized as a senes of linked anchors that take advantage of the extensive arterial roadway frontage and visibility, and the amenity frontage created by the golf course to maximize value and marketability (Figure 43). Distinguishing elements of the Specfic Plan indude the 18-hole championship golf course with clubhouse and related facilities, hoteUconference facility, possible family-onented recreation/retail/entertainment facility (potential re-use of Building 602), mixed-use commercial center at Milliken Avenue/Fourth Street, Metrolink Station at Milliken Avenue, multiple family apartments, office, research and developmenUlight industrial, and supporting commercial uses, all within a planned business park environment Detailed information about these planned uses is provided in Section 4 2 and Table 4-1 Potential uses would be permitted or conditional uses, as specified in Section 5 2 of this Specific Plan (Tables 5-1 and 5-2) C \DaCVmenb entl SelCtgs\OwTeAMy DacumenbK:lA DocumenlslC l I E N i SUPhSpxtlic %an Sx9on 4-031103 Eac ~ LllVa Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub•Area 1B Spea~ie Plan The Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan integrates Itself into the community fabnc through a strong framework established by the existing artenal roadway network and proposed uses that compliment the surrounding IASP sub-areas Specific Plan access intersections are consistent with City standarcis, including 1l4mile spacing of median breaks and 1/8-mile spacing of "nght tum iNout only" access points along mator artenal roads bounding the site To facilitate the fuller integration of uses, the Specific Plan calls for modifying or vacating portions of Cleveland Avenue between Fourth and Surth Streets, while retaining these intersections as site access points Vacating Cleveland Avenue as a through route between Fourth and Sixth Streets would provide t5 acres of land to the development plan Special Bou/eva-ds Consistent with the IASP and the General Plan of Rancho Cucamonga, the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan recognizes and reinforces Milliken Avenue, Fourth Street, and Sixth Street as specal roadway comdors that convey a consistent design theme and streetscape image, as well as appropnate architectural and landscape edges facing onto these special boulevards The Specific Plan incorporates the City's established landscape design theme and character for Milliken Avenue, as exemplified currently along the northeast comer of the protect site Landscape Design Landscaping will serve as a major design component of the Specific Plan fulfilling and will fulfill several important functions • Convey the basic organization and character of development. • Distinguish special boulevards framing the area • Create special design accent features that enhance important places such as protect entnes and building entrances • Integrate buildings into the site • Provide amenities along pedestnan walkways and plazas, as well as shade/wind protection • Soften and buffer parking areas • Screen service areas TABLE 4-1 l~ C {Docummd• end SemigelOwneMAy OocumaMs\CJA Doeum•~1C L I E N T S.IPI\Spacifie Plan SacGOn 4031103 Aoc ~ ~aV6 Rancho Cucamonga IASP SubArea 18 Specfic Plan - TABLE 41 SUMMARY OF LAND USE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM This table is conceptual to illustrate and summarize the maximum development potential of the project. See Section 4.2 Land Use Plan, as well as Table 5 1 and 5.2 for permitted land uses and definitions. Types of uses W d E ~ _ ~ ~ .. ~ ~ c $ W 2 ° ~ ~ ~ 5 o ~ rc FAR $# ~~ . B ~ e e E ~ E Mazrmum (Floor PlanMng rc m '~ 8 ~ y LL Developme°R Area PWnnmg Area Size 8 ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` g ~ PoterMral (sf or M d lli Ratlo) or dWac ParceUFauldy Area (Acres) o E ~ s ~ m = ng un a) we Fxisbng FaGlrtres • Bwlding 600 V' 27 O • O O O O • 308,000' 0 25° Building 601 IV' 17 • • O • • 242,000x 0 35° Building 602 II 28 • • • • O • • • 425,000 035° Subtotal 72 975,000 0 31 GoH Course I 151 • • • • • 60,000 0 Ot Qndudmg dubhouse and maintenance taGlAy) corcPraaica III' zz • • • • o 0 0 • 15,000' 001° Faclily (lighted) Subtotal 173 75,000 0 01 CommerGaV VII ¢24 • • • • • • • 6098473000 035 (0 70 Industnal Parcels VIII 134 • • • 173,804 035 X 24 • • • • • • 200,000 0 20° XI 18 • • • 275,000 0 35 Subtotal 75-459 4 ~•~ 709.788 Muhiple Famiy VI 23 • 567 du 1424 Residential du/ac VII 20 • 499 du 2424=30 du/ac VIII 9 7 •° 264 du 2430 dulac IX 20 5 • 521 du 2430 dWac Subtotal 63-2734 2 a~`2-du1 851 24-38 du du/ac Permitted uo la 1 888 du f\D t d5 10 riD H WPIWPI-052203E P-WW\SpesJ«>PHaAmeMmenlUP!-0.52203 tloc ~~ RanGro Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan Total 378' 1.759.788 8-56 ~~ ~;:t52 du 1 lAA CA7 ~( 1.851 du Permitted unto 1.888 du holes 1 2 3 4 7 e 7 7 8 9 Ulhmatety demolished and redeveloped as muted-use commercial 440,000 sf Coukt be intens~ed with parking deck and +10,000 sf addition of retaiVrestaurenlHast food 6asbng faGidy could be adaptrvey re-used or redeveloped as a famiy recreahoNentertainment center or maed-use commercal Coub be redeveloped uwmatety to moved-use cemmeraal 290,000 si Attematrve hotel and coherence center site MuPople famiy market rate senior housing Indudes 5 acres for vacated poNOn of Cleveland Ave Urtimatey coub be 3,707,000 sf with overall FAR 0 23 FAR 035 for 13acre area exduding the Metrolink parcel (10 aces) Where a hotel ~ developed, the maximum allowable FAR for the Planning Area ten increase to FAR 0 70 fID tl5tt l0 nD kt VPIlIP1052203tl i~h'~A-AUimtlmerM41W-0.532B3OOc ~~ Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-A2a 18 Specfic Plan HoteUExecutive Conference Center/Residential (Planning Areas 11, Ill, IV, V, Vl, or Vll) Reinforcing the concept of creating an amenity core area serving the surrounding employment center that is close to Ontano International Airport, a hotel/executive conference center oriented to business meetings and executive retreats is proposed The hotel/conference center could be located in Planning Area V, VI, or VII based upon its development timing and the particular location preferences and requirements of the selected hotel operator Multiple family residential uses are also permitted in Planning Areas VI and VII 4.2.3 SOUTHEASTERN ANCHOR (Fourth Street and Milliken Avenue) Planning Area Vl: Office/CommerciaUResidential Planning Area VI has both visibility from Fourth Street and extensive golf course amenity frontage it is envisioned to be a campus-style office/business park This parcel is also a potential site for the hotel/conference facility, mixed-use commercial center, and/or multiple family residential development Planning Area Vll: Mixed-Use Commercial/Residential ('tjateway'project) This Planning Area is focused on the prime comer of the overall property at the intersection of Fourth Street and Milliken Avenue It is proposed to become amixed-use commercial center complimenting the 1 65 million-square-foot Ontario Mills regional retail mall and 2 5 million square feet ofoffice/commercial space This site is also designated by Rancho Cucamonga as a "gateway" to the City because of its strategic location entenng the City and ready access to both I-10 and I-15 Multiple family residential development is also permitted on this site Potential uses for this parcel include • Retail • Multiple Family Residential • RestauranUEntertainment • Office • Personal, Business, and Professional Services • Health Club • Hotel/Conference Center 4.2.4 EASTERN ANCHOR (Sixth Street and Milliken Avenue) Planning Area Vlll: Office /Commercial/Senior Housing Planning Area VIII is located at the southwest comer of Sixth Street and Milliken Avenue which will become a prime intersection when Sixth Street is ultimately extended to a new proposed interchange with I-15 This parcel enioys both prime artenal road frontage and golf course frontage Possible uses include office, research and development, and market rate senior housing, as well as commercial pad sites for fast food or banking adiacent to pnmary roadway entrances With the (~~ L1D t rMS t Own D k UPIUP-0522030 P-LIPI~Speulw?IawAme~Wmea~UFw522039os I /~ Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan completion of the future interchange with I-15, Planning Area VIII may also include certain types of retail uses Market rate senior housing is intended to faalitate the construction of rental housing units that will serve the current and long-term City need for senior cit¢en-onented dwelling units while maintaining a high degree of quality m project design and construction This type of development shall comply ninth all applicable state and federal laws The pnmary resident population group that is intended to be served by market rate senior housing development is senior citizens who meet the followwng cntena a For tenants, residents, or occupants who are mamed to each other, either spouse shall be 55 years of age or older b For individuals who are not mamed, each individual shall be 55 years of age or older with the following exceptions Non-seniors may live m the development if they are 45 years of age or older, or a person providing pnmary physical or economic support to the senior cd¢en, or, Anon-senior guest may stay ninth a senior for up to 60 days per year. Senior housing developments must meet the following physical requirements a Extra wide entryways, walkways, hallways, and doorways m the common areas of the . development b. Walkways and hallways m the common areas must be egwpped with railings or grab bars to assist persons who have difficulty moth walking c Walkways and hallways m the common areas must have suffiaently bright lighting to assist persons who have difficulty seeing As an incentive to developers to build senior housing protects, the parking requirements may be reduced below that requred for typical muftr-family development Reduction in the number of parking spaces shall be addressed on a case-by-case bads subject to the provision of a parking study and the establishment of a development agreement Market rate senior housing development, mcludrng reduced parkrg requirements are predicated upon the long-term availability of the units for the target population previously defined. !n order to ensure that the unrts remain available and affordable to this group, the developer will be required to enter into a development agreement with the City per Calrfomia Government Code 5 §65864 through 5869 5 C \D menis arW Seli iw510wner\DeskiooUPIUPI-052203 tlocP 1JRllSpec~fwAlan-M~enamenVkRLQ522&ltloc • ~~ 3° Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan TABLE 5-1 SUMMARY OF LAND USE TYPE BY PLANNING AREA u • Planning Area Type of Use I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI MANUFACTURING Custom P P P C P P P P Lghl P P P P P P P Medwm P P P P P W HOLESALEISTORAGEIDISTRIBUTION Public Storage (indoor) C C Light P P P P P P P P Medmm P P C C MATERIALS RECOVERY Colled\on Faalrtats C C C C C RESEARCH 8 DEVELOPMENT (RB:D) Research 8 Developmem (R&D) P P P P P P P P P P OFFICE ORce P P P P P P P P P P CIVIC Adm\mstretrve Crvie Sernces P P P P P P P P Guttural P P P P P P C P Pubbc Assembly P P P P P P P P Public Buildings (librery, post office, etc) P P P P P P P P Public Satety 8 Utdrty Semces C C C C C C C C Rehgaus Assemby C C C C C C C C PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC USES Chdd Care Faalrtres C C C C C C C C C C C Clubs/LOdges (Pnvate and Public) C C C C C C C C C C C Convalescent Faalrt~esMOSprtal C C C C C C C C C Educetional Instduhons (Pnvate and Public) C C C C C C C C C C Trensportabon Faalfies P RECREATION Gott Course P GoN Pradice/Training Faalrly P P P Reaeahonal Faalrtres pndoor/outdoor) P P P P P P P P C P C ENTERTAINMENT Accedes C C C C C C Entertainment Faalrbes (1) P P C P P P C C C C C \D 0 S It \O+m \D kt \JPI\JPId52203 tlocRllRtlSpc-c~l~s-Rlaa~aca9mu~kdP4652203'tlos ~~ Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan Planning Area Type of Use 1 II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI Family Entertainment Center (1) P P P P P EATING 8 DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS Eahng and Dunking Establishments (1) P P P P P P P P P P P Restaurant-Fast Food (inGudmg Drne-thru) C C C C C C C C C C Sporls Bar (1) P P P P P P TRANSIENT ACCOMMODATIONS/CONFERENCE CENTER HoteVMotel P P P P P P Conference Center P P P P P P P Corporate T2ining Center P P P P P P MIXED-USE COMMERCIAL Mixed-Use Commercial Center P P P P P P P P PERSONAUBUSINESS SERVICES Business Support Services P P P P P P P P P P Funeral 8 Crematory Servces C C C C C C C C C C Personal Services P P P P P P P P P P Repair Services P P P P P P P P P P AUTOMOBILENEHICLE SERVICES Automotive RentaVLeasing P P P P P P Automotive Semce Court C C C C Automotive Semce StaUOn C C C C C C C Speaaky AutolMolorcycle Sales/Semce C C C C C C C C RETAIL-BUSINESS SUPPLYISERVICES Business Services Retail & Services P P P P P P P P P P RETAIUCONVENIENCE RELATED Convenience Sales 8 Services P P P P P P P P P P RETAIL-FOOD 8 BEVERAGE RELATED Food and Beverage Sales P P P P P P P P RETAIL-GENERAL Retail-General (2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) Kiosk in Parking Lots P P P P P RETAIL-HOME IMPROVEMENT RELATED BuiMmglLighting Eqwpment Supplies & Sales P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) FumilumMome FumishmgslAntiques P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) Home ApphancelElectromcs P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) P(2) GENERALCOMMERCULL Business Supply-RetaiVServlces P P P P P P P P P P C \O t tl S It 0 \0 kl UPI\JPI-052203 d P:dR1~SPeulwPlaFl+lm~nemc+uURL0522A1doc • • ~~ Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specfic Plan • C_J Planning Area Type of Use I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI Communicetions Services P P P P P P P P P P Parking (commercial) P P RESIDENTULL. Muttrple Famiy Dwellings (3) P P P Semor Housing (3)(4) P KEY P =Permitted Uses C = Conditionaiy Permitted Use Blank Box =Not Pertndted Use (1) Where Irve entertainment is present, such uses are subject to a cdY entertainment permit (2) Permitted as part of a mixed use commercal or retail center (3) Residential permitted wMout industnal in the same planning area (4) Semor housing sublecl to a development agreement D tl5 ~0 ID ki WPIUPI-052203 tlocP-NW15pewhs Plan AAierMmeM1.M1-9:2203-9e~ ~7 1g Random Cucamonga IASP SubArea 18 Speafic Plan TABLE 5-2 (Continued) LAND USE TYPE DEFINITIONS RETAIL-CONVENIENCE RELATED Convenience Sales and Services AdiviUes typically include, but are, not limited to the retail sales from the premises of frequently needed small personal convenience items and professional services which are used frequently Uses typically include, but are not limited to toiletnes, tobacco and magazines, beauty and barber shops, apparel laundenng, and dry cleaning agencies, and film processing RETAIL-HOME IMPROVEMENT RELATED Burld~ng/Lrghting Equrpment/Supplies and Sales Activities typically include, but are not limted to the retail sale or rental from the premises of goods and egwpment, including paint, glass, hardware, fixtures, electncal supplies, cultivators, short-haul traders, lumber, and hardware, and may have outdoor storage where allowed Hardware stores are included is this use category Fumrture/Home Fumrshrngs/Anhque Stores RETAIL-FOOD 8 BEVERAGE RELATED Food and Beverage Sales Activibes typically mclude, but are not limited to the retail sale from the premises of food and beverages for off-premises consumption Uses typically mdude, but are not limited to. mini- markets, IiquorMnne/beer stores, retail bakenes and speclatty/gourmet food market; and, catenng businesses exduding chain-type grocery stores RETAIL-GENERAL Retall~eneral Retail businesses which are onented toward serving the general needs of residents, empbyees, and visitors of the community, in iadlities as part of a shopping center, mbced-use commercial center, or independent establishment, inducting, but not limited to appareVdothing accessories; art/musidphotography, bookstore, business supplies: gdts/cards/stationary, candy/confectionery, computers and software, departrnent stores, drug stores/phannacies, eyewearloptometnst, fast food courT/restaurents, I~iY, -Pinl^es: shoes: sporting goods, stamp/oaNcollectibles, televisan/rada; telephone/eledrorixx, toys; variety goods: vxfeo salestrentals, indoor wholesale/retad, and whdesale sales outlets Kiosk rn Parkng Lots A small structure, pavilan, or gazebo not exceeding 3tm square feet of eacbsed tbw area used for convenience retatl and services, and located wilhin a parbrg tit to primarily serve customers while m their automobiles A retail business which pnmanly provides furniture, home furnishings, and/or antiques for home or business use Home Appliance/Electronres Stores A retail business which pnmanly provides kitchen and laundry appliances, televisron, stereo equipment, and computer electronic goods for home use GENERAL COMMERCIAL Communrcahons Servrces Actmbes typically mdude, but are not Umrted to broadcasting, and other information relay services accomplished pnmanly through use of electronic and telephonic mechanisms Uses typically mdude, but are rat limited ib television and rada studas and telegraph offaes. Parking (Commero~aq An automobile parking facildy operated for Tee or profit, indudmg either a surface lot or a parking strurxure RESIDENTWL USES High-Residential Densrty This distrxx is intended as an area for hghderiSAy multiple-family residential use, wdh site devebprrierit regulations that assure development campatible with adlacerit uses Residential densi~s are up to 30 dwelling units per gross acre. C\D rM5 h 1Owne \D kl VPI\JPI-052203 tlocP-+dP1lSpeufwPlaa AmeutlmenWR405220.3&w C~ l8 Y4 Rencho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speafic Plan Senlor Housing Market rate senior housing shall be pennitted in Planning Area VIII, subject to the provisions set forth m the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Spec~c Plan and all applicable state and federal laws govemmg senior housing development C\D t tl5 V \Ow er\Desktao\JPI\JPI-052203 tlocR\dFNSpsc~f~c GAMAmea9rr+enWP1Ri2233 tlas /q ,3 Rancho Cucamonga IASP SufrArea 18 SpeaBc Plan 5.3.3 LANDSCAPE Overall Thematic Character The overall thematic character of landscaping vinthin Sub-Area 18 is intended to reinforce and enhance the open natural setting of the site using two basic landscape zones with natural transkions between them: Oasis Zone-This landscape zone is generally reserved for special landscape areas and features such as the golf course, major project entries and features, building entrances, and other areas associated with high visibility and pedestrian use. This zone is generally characterized by a lush green landscape incorporating turf areas, flowenng annuals and/or shrubs, evergreens, and shade trees that provide a cool, inviting character with rich colors and textures, and combined, where appropriate, with water features such as lakes, ponds, or fountains. • Native Garden Zone-This landscape zone is generally the basic palette most common throughout the development parcels of the Sub-Area 18 Spec Plan, and is composed of native plant materials rich with color and texture which combine aesthetically pleasing environments with reduced irrigation requirements. The Native Garden Zone is composed of ground covers and mounding shrubs, as well as native evergreen and dectduous trees that are drought-tolerant. This landscape zone is combined with plazas, courtyards, and water features where appropriate. Table 5-3 identrfies the suggested plant pallets for each landscape zone. Streetscape Streetscape landscaping shall provide a strong, unifying landscape theme for the overall protect and shall reflect the hierarchy of the street classification (Figures 5-1, 5-2, 5-3, and 5-4) in terms of scale and character, and exhibft design continuity in landscape treatment between the street right-of-way and adjacent landscape setback. Table 5~ describes the landscaping themes for streets • Street trees of similar species shall establish a consistent design pattern and character within the parkway of each street (Table 5-4). • Special landscape treatments should serve to demarcate pnmary entry intersections while preserving safe sight lines, in accordance with the City Engineer's policy regarding intersection lines of sight • Shrub planting and harming shall generally be used to screen transformers and switch boxes within the streetscape parkway, as well as adjacent parking and service areas. • Streetscape landscaping should serve to help frame "view windows" into the golf course where the street adjoins the course. R~Pm7•[ISUPnp07 Seam 3@0501 xpE S18 Development Guidelines end Standards Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area f8 Spetsfic Plan TABLE 5~ STREETSCAPE LANDSCAPING THEME get Tree Types/Species Planting Provisions/Treatments Median 1. Milliken StreetTrees: Avenue (Speaal Cdy • Braachychrton Populneus • Informal doffs • Ex,sUng pn-place) Gateway Btird) 70% Bottle tree ( ) ( ) • Lrqu~dambarStracrfiua (30%) • Average Spaang 25 ft on center • Plantings to be incerporated into (Palo Alto Sweet Gum) landsppe setback • Street Vee easements may be Planning Areas VII and IX required outside the nghtof--way (additionally permitted street Plamm~g Areas VII and IX ~~): (alternative penmtled prowslons): • Washmgtonra fildera (Caldomia Fan Palm) Foreground • Washrngtonra robusta (Mexfcen • Calrfomia Fan Palm or Mexicen Fan Palm) l P m Fan a • Formal placement Accent Trees . Averege Spaang 40 ft on center (double row) • Albrzia Jul~bnssen (Sdk Tree) • Lagerstroemra Ind~ca (Crape Background Myrtle) • Gnnamomumum Camphors . gottletree (70°~) (Camphor Tree) • Palo ARo Sweet Gum (30%) • Informal drdts • Average Spaang 25 ft on center • Plantings to be mcorparated into landscape setback • Street Vee easements may be requred outside the nght-af-way 2 Fourth Street" Street Trees: Foreground (Major Artenal) • Platanus Acerrfol~a London Semi-formal Per Wildan Assoc Plane Tree) Average Spaang 30 ft on center street plan • Incorporate existing mature Median landscepe Street Trees. Background General Dynamics street landscepe to the extent responsibilities between Gty of • Pmus Cananensrs (Canary possible Locete trees to mimmu:e conflict Rancho Cucamonga and Island Pme) with overhead transmission Imes Ontano to be Planning Area VII (additionaly Coordinate vnth Edison pruning determined permitted foreground street pohaes Street Vee easements may be ~): regwred outside nght-of-way . Washrngtonia fildera (Caldomra Fan Palm) PWnning Area VII (additionalty permitted background street tree): • Platanus Acenfol~a London Plane Tree) Planning Area VII (accent tree) • Lagerstroem~a Irrdica (Crape Myrtle) C\D- tlS=t 10 ~\DeskroolJPl\JPI-052203 tlocWdPAkSpes~iwYlartAmenlmenlNP1~1522939oc 2~ Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Spedfic Plan Street Tree Types/Species Planting Provisions/TreatmeMS Median 3 Sixth Street' Street Tree (Major ARenal) • Magnolia GrandAora (Majestic Semi-fonnaUregular Per City Master Plan Beauty Magnolia) Tree spacing 30 ft on center for SiMh Street Planning Area IX (additionally Planning Area IX (alternative permitted street trees) permitted provisions): • Washrngtonra fildera (Calrfomia Foreground Fan Palm) • Washrngtonra robusta (Mexicen Calrfomia Fan Palm or Mexican Fan Palm) Fan Palm • Formal placements • Average Spacing 40 ft on center (double row) Background • Majestic Beauty Magnolia • Semi-formal/regular Tree spaang 30 ft on center 4. Utica Avenue Street Tree: (basting Street) • Pmus Cananensrs (Canary Semi-formal/regular N A Island Pine) Tree spaang 25 ft on center • Incorporate existing mature General Dynamics street landscaping to the eMeM possible 5 Cleveland Street Tree: Avenue (Local Street) •Pmus Cananensrs (Canary Semi-formal N A Island Pine) Tree spaang 25 ft on center a A beautificebon Master Plan for parkways along Fourth and SiMh SVeets shall be prepared for City approval The beautification Master Plan can be inGuded in individual Master Plans for Planning Area development or processed as part of the overall design concepts for the Speafic Plan in a separate document G tpowneN> antl Setlinos`Ownerlpesk,oo~JPPJPI 952203 Eo P-WPI15pe~ fw-~laa-Aaieotlmer>r.JPF-0>£2!~' `.ioc Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Mae 78 Speclr/c Plan - Particular design attention shall be placed along special City boulevards to provide a complementary streetscepe charaGer, an enhanced building appearance, and screening of parking and service areas from public view - Development parcels adjacent to the golf course shall, when developed, provide a minimum 10.foot-wide building and parking landscape setback that complements the golf course landscaping. A minimum 6-foot-high view fence may be provided that will facildate view windows and security whsle restricting unwanted pedestrian or vehicular access into the course. - At parking lot and service area locations, landscaping (trees and shrubs) shall be intens~ed to screen them from view on the goH course - At building locations, trees should be placed to help frame views of the golf course and accent the buildings • Buildinos-Landscaping shall serve to integrate structures into their site and enhance the archdedure. - Long building elevations should be broken up by tree planting. - Foundation planting should be utilized to help settle buildings into their sde. - Special accent planting should be used to highlight building entrances and other special features. - Tree arrangements should preserve and frame scenic views of the golf course, mountain backdrops, and other aesthetic features. - Landscape design treatments should promote building energy conservation and provide wind screening of outdoor pedestrian areas. • Parking An:a-Parking lot landscaping is required for screening of large parking areas to limd their visual impact and to provide shade. - Use terming, low walls, and/or shrub landscaping to screen parking areas from public streets. - Use canopy trees within parking areas to provide shade and reduce glare. - Use landscape islands at the end of stall rows to define circulation and provide shade Service Area/Eguioment Screening-Use low level landscaping in combination with minimum &foot-high screen walls to shield outdoor service areas and equipment from public view (see Table 5-5 for appropriate landscape plant materials for screening) • Hardscaoe-Use special paving to create an attractive and unifying element of sde development in high use pedestrian areas, such as entries, plazas, and courtyards Plant Materials • Zone Aoalication-Use plant materials appropriate to their particular zone application (i.e., "oasis° or "native garden° zone) ^ ~ 2 a.wrpw•wngo~ sw,u, semsoi •ya S24 Development Guadelrnes end Sler~daids Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specrfic Plan TABLE 5-5 ACCEPTABLE PLANT MATERIALS FOR LOW LEVEL SCREENING Size at 3 Yeans Minimum Height x Width Spacing Botanical Name Common Name (feet) (feet on center) Buxus taponicum Japanese Boxwood 5 x 4 3 0 Canssa grandrflora Natal Plum 5 x 4 3 5 - - ,. ..~~.,,,,,o,..,,...... Coprosma bauen -- Copromsa 6 x 5 3 5 Echlum fastuosum Pride of Madeua 6 x 6 6 0 Elaeagnus pungens SiNerberty 6 x 6 5 0 4 0 Escalbnia fradesii Esglbnia 5 x 5 Hakea suaveolens Sweet Hakea 6 x 5 4 0 Hibiscus rosa-sinensis Chinese Hibiscus 5 x 5 5 0 3 0 Ligustrum texanum Japanese Pnvet 6 x 4 5 0 Myoporum laetum Myoporum 6 x 6 Nenum oleander Oleander 6 x 6 4 0 Phobnia frasen Photina 6 x 5 ~ 4.0 Phormium tenax New Zealand flax 7 x 6 6 0 Pittosporum tobira Tobira 3 x 4 4 0 Viburnum taponicum Viburnum 6 x 5 4 0 Xylosma congestum Xylosma 5 x 5 4 0 Note Alternative plant matenals shall be allowed that promote the obtecUves of AB 325 by encouraging water conservation • 2"[ c ~o ~ e s n ~o ~o Mi 1IP11JP1-052203 tlttP-1dPN~uer+PdPLQ`2283dos 5-1 ~ Gerre 5.4 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS The Development Standards of the Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan address eight factors which include: • General Provisions • Master Plan Requiremert<s • Minimum Parcel Size • Setback Requirerner>is • Landscape Rtquiremerrts • Parking and Loading Requirements • Interim Uses • Pertornance Standards • Planning Area IX Recreational Amen~iiss Table 5-6 summanzes the application of basic development standards on a planning area basis, including minimum parcel size, landscape area requirements, maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR), and performance standards The setbadk requirements are determined in akxordance with the street classification and particular side yard and rear yard oonditiwrs. TABLE 5-6 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SUMMARY Plannlna Area Standards) 11 III IV V VI W VIII U( X C~ • Mmimum Paroel S¢e (Acres) Mmimum Percentage of Landscape Area (% of Net Lot Area) Performance Standard (Schedule) Mawmum Floor Area Ratio (EARN Residen4al Densrly Na 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Na 15 15 15 15 15 10 10 31 10 Na A A A A A B B B B Na 035 035 035 035 0.35 0.70 035 056 035 14-24 2430 24-30 Note Where a hotel is developed, the mawmum allowable FAR for the Planning Area can m«ease to FAR 0.7 The FAR for the hotel, rf the entire plamm~g area rs not used for such use, can exceed the 0.7 FAR as long as the entire plamm~g area does not exceed 0 7 FAR as shown m the conceptual Master Plan Rancho Cucamonga /ASP Sub-Arse 18 Spedrrc Plan 5.4.4 SETBACK REQUIREMENTS Setback requirements are Intended to provide adequate open space for building separation, landscape treatment, as well as attractive architectural and sfte planning design solutions that foster variety and interest wdhin a cohesive overall character of development. The following standards shall apply In all areas of the Sub-Area 18 Specrfic Plan. Streetscape Setbacks • Sti-eetscape setbacks standards, including the minimum building setback, minimum parking setbadk, and the average depth of landscaping along public and private street frontages, are deterrntned from ultimate face of curb. Streetscepe setback requirements are established according to street cassfication and shall be as specfied to Table 5-7 and Illustrated In Figures 5-8, 5-7, and 5-8 (except when modfied as provided for below). ~ TABLE &7 STREETSCAPE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS (Determined from Ultimate Face of Curb) Street Classification Average Depfh of Landscape"` BuNding SefbaclP .=(feet) _ Parking Setback (feet) Major Arterial and Special 45 45 25 Boulevard Milliken Avenue adjacent to 35 35 25 Plannmg Area VII between Fourth Sheet and the Distnd Water Well Srte° Secondary 35 35 20 Local 25 25 15 SocNr Street adlaceM to 25 44 19 Plannmg Area IX° a The average depth shall be uninterrupted from the face of curb, except for sidewalks, pedestrian hardsppe, plazas and courtyards, monument signs and goN counse security view fences b Street frontage walls and fences over 3 feet rn height are subject to buildmg setbacks, except goN course security view fences and goN course/dnwng range/pracbce faaldy ball bamer netting (pole mounted) c Average landsppe setbadk requirements shall be averaged from the golf course (Planning Area I) to other Planning Auras, but not less than the required minunum parking setback d Applies only to the JPI project for multiple-fatuity restdenbal uses m Planning Area IX e Applies onty to Planning Area VII Building Setbacks Building setbacks shall be as follows (except when modfied as set forth below): • Front-As shown per street classification In Figures 5-6 through 5-8 and Table 5-7 • Interior Rear-None, except when rear lot area abuts a side street, the setback shall be 5 feet minimum, and where it abuts the golf course, the setback shall be 10 feet minimum (Figure 5-9). a.vigsasurnom scam sapsor via 5.34 Devebpnrent Gurdelrrres end Srendards - The minimum landscaped coverage requirement may be reduced by the City Plannerwhen d is detemuned that the project is designed to the highest aesthetic qualify consistent with ?#,~ pmn~~ lend r3~s aj,!i rnmpatibie with the surrounding area (.e., within a Master .'Miss`=f ~`..`ai }`iisr~ a~ ca, Ya±iafivri of taridscapz ~ requaerr>~t nay ~ ~O'Wed-) - A maximum of 5 percent credit toward the regwred landscape/hardscape coverage shall be penndted where appropriate public art is to be displayed in a setting which enhances pedestrian spaces and building architecture Berms - Bermed landsceping shall be incorporated wherever possible within the landscape setback and used to screen parking and loading areas Linear sidewalks and urban scale landscaping are permitted in Planning Areas Vdl and IX 2~ Rancho Cucamonga IASP SubArea 18 Specfic Plan 5.4.8 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Performance standards are intended to assure basic compatibility of adjacent uses based upon their operating charactenstics and provide for a healthy, safe, and pleasing environment consistent with the nature of surrounding activity. The performance standards contained within Table 5-8 are applied as follows: - Class A Performance Standards are the most restnctive of the performance standards fat nan-residerrtial uses. They are applicab~ to all Planning Areas south of Sixth Street, including Planning Areas IA, II, 111, !V, and V_ - Class B Performance Standards are employed for all Planning Areas north of Sixth S~~~, wiLh the exception of Planning Area 1X These standards are intended to provide for a broad range of activity while assuring a basic levee of enerroretr.~tae Cxtr:ipatfx`>'s:~E#;r The standards aPPN to Planning An:ras IB, X, and Xi. - Class C Performance Standards are employed for residential development, which applies to Planning Areas VI, VII VIII, and IX. 5.4.9 PLANNING AREA VI: MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL RECREATIONAL AND SITE AMENffiES The following list of amenities, or other similar amenities, as may be approved by the Planning Director, would be included in mulffple-family residential projects deveopment in Plannng Area VI. • 1. Spa with overhead shade structure 2. Fire pit with gas 6ne 3. Sw'unmirg pool with beach entry 4 Overhead shade stnrdure with seatrng 5 Goff course pick up with enhanced paving S_ Outdoor barbewe with carrrter space 7. Goff course adjacent pedestnan paeso 8. View areas with overheads and t:a: Q_ Groouet lawn 10 Rose garden 11 Fountain courtyard 12 Patio 13. Palm court 14. Gazebo 15. Putting green 16. Exerdse stations, walking paths throughout site 17 Turf area 18 Turf area 19. Turf area • Zv Gl0 d511 \DwnerlDesktop\JPIIJPIA52203 tlocP ~.IRI1Specif~s-War+AmeadmenN.IPW522A3doc $-5 ~ Gene Randro Cucamonga IASP Sub-Ales 18 Specific Plan . Wellness Center Amenities 20 RecepUomst and message board with mail center 21 Bdhards 22. Porches 23. MuIU-purpose classroomftheater 24 Kdchen, juice bar, and cafe 25 Wellness director serwa~ 26. HeaMhy stndes fitness room 27. Research library 28. Hobby and waft room 29. Computer stations with business center 30 Full service spa (massage, fadals, hair pre) with separate men's and women's restroom faalfies 1. Concierge 2. Business Center 3. Media Room 4. Game Room 5. Exerctse Room 6 Teaching Kitchen 7 Large Turf Area 8 Main Swimming Pool 9 Main Spa 10 Secondary Swimming Pool 11 Secondary Spa 12. Fire Pit 13. Budtan Barbecue at Mam Swimming Pool 14. Shade Structure at Main Swimming Pool 15. Gazebo at Rose Garden 16. Rose Garden 17. Shade structure at Seaxrdary Svmmming Pool 18. Barbeque at Secondary Swimming Pool 19. Barbecue Area at'paseo' arms between buildings 20. Barbecue Area at'paseo' areas between building 5.4.11 PLANNING AREA IX: MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL RECREATIONAL AND SITE AMENITIES Recreation Area/Facilities 1 Resort-style swimming pool 2 Spa 3 Fire pit 4 Three-hole putting green C\D 1 tlS ^ \0 tDe kb VPI\JPI 052203 tlocRadPNSpew(wPAaa M\undmerfiJR1~5220B doc S-G 2~ Geri Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Sperafic Plan e . 5 Lawn volleyball court 6 Horseshoe pit 7 Garden gazebo 8 Poolside barbeque pit and serving areas 9 Barbeque node with picnic tables 10 Barbeque node with picnic tables 11 Barbeque node wdh picnic tables 12 Personal garden area 13 Open space/recreational area 14.Open space/recreational area 15.Open sparxlrecreadonal area 16. Walking trail along the Empire Lakes Golf Course 17. Par course 18. Movie theater with THX Surround Sound 19. Stateof-the-art exercise faatity 20 Game room 21 Teaching kitchen 22. Community room 23. Bocce ball court O1D t tlS tt 1Owner\DesktooUPl\JPI-052203 docP~dW\SpeciHS-PIae MSer~ew\JPJ-8522B16oc 5"~ c~, L /~ ~ I L8A ASSOCIATES INC OTHBA OPPIC89 PT COLLINS J 1650 SPRllCB STREBT $TA PLOOR f09 ]B[ 9J10 T8L IRVIN6 BBARBLBY RIVRRSIDB CALIPORNIA y1$O] 909 7814x]7 PAX PT RICHMOND 0.0CBLIN May 12, 2003 Ms Heidi Mather Regional Development Manager gPA pec Zoo3 - a~2sy 5P~ D~PC?~3 -t~255 /YIInOr reV%5ioI75 ~ri~ 9~era~~n ~/cs h~hl <9hded herein. JPI Westcoast Development, L.P ^^y~,~ moo" 8910 University Center Lane, Suite 150 (Wi it /v San Diego, Cahfomia 92122 ~~~ L<1A~y r~Ap~r-~.) ~/ Subject General Dynamics Plamm~g Area VII GP SPA Deaz Ms Mather 5>rnilar ~'f/er' JPI Westcoast Development is proposing a General Plan AmendmenUSpectfic Plan Amendment to modify the land uses pernutted in Planning Area VII of the General Dynamics property Planning Area VII is located on the northwest comer of the intersection of Fourth Street and Milliken Avenue, m the City of Rancho Cucamonga LSA Associates, Inc (LSA) prepared a San Bemardrno County Congestion Management Program (CMP) Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) for the General Dynamics property to January, 1994 The TIA was subsequently approved by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the San Bemazdmo Associated Governments (SANBAG) General Dynarmcs and the Ctty of Rancho Cucamonga signed a development agreement identifying the intersection improvements that would be required m conJunchon with the development of the General Dynamics property LSA has analyzed the trap generation of the land uses perimtted m Planning Area VII under the proposed General Plan AmendmendSpecific Plan Amendment and compazed it to the trap generation assumed for the same Planning Area in the approved TIA This letter summanzes the results of our analysts The General Plan AmendmenUSpecific Plan Amendment would perimt 499 apartment units, 15,000 square feet of restaurant uses, and 30,748 square feet of general retail uses The p m peak hour and daily [tip generation for [he proposed land uses was calculated using trap generation rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (IT'E) Tnp Generation (6'" Edition) Table A summanzes the p m peak hour and daily trap generation for the proposed land uses As shown in Table A, the proposed land uses are expected to generate 6,583 daily traps, with 588 traps occumng dunng the p m peak hour Table A also summarizes the trip generation for the land uses assumed for the Planning Area in the approved General Dynamics TIA As shown in Table A, the approved land uses aze expected to generate 16,178 daily traps, with 1,755 traps occumng dunng the p m peak hour Thus, the trap generation of the proposed land uses is substantially lower than the trap generation approved for the Planning Area in the TIA, upon which the improvements identified m the General Dynarmcs development agreement were predicated 5/12/03(R VPW330UPI Tnp Gen Letter wpd) ~ ~ n PLANNING ~ ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENC83 DevcN tsw nssocrwres rNc The proposed changes to the land uses approved for Planning Area VII aze the latest in a senes of land use changes that have substantially reduced the total potential trip generation of the General Dynatmcs property Previous changes include the following • Planning Area II -Approved for retail, theater, recreational, and restaurant uses; now proposed for 285,000 squaze feet of office uses • Planning Area III -Approved for office and retazl uses, now part of the golf course • Planning Area N -Approved for office uses and a restaurant pad, built with only the office uses (Empue Lakes Corporate Center) • Planning Area V -Approved for hotellconference center, retail, and restaurant uses, now proposed for business park • Planning Area VI -Approved for office uses, under construction with 496 apartments • Planning Area VIII -Approved for office, restaurant, and business pazk uses, now approved for senior housing and office uses • Planning Area IX -Approved for restaurant and office uses, built with 521 apartments • Planning Area XI -Approved for office, restaurant, and business pazk uses, now proposed for distnbution facility. Table B presents a companson of the total daily trip generation for the General Dynamics property as approved and with [he cumulative impact of the land uses changes detailed above As shown in Table B, the protect as onginally approved was expected to generate 64,011 daily traps With the land use changes that have been implemented or aze currently proposed, the entire General Dynarmcs property would be expected to generate 25,667e 25,667®wluch represents a reduction of almost 60 percent If you have any questions regarding the analysis presented in this letter, please feel free to call me at (909) 781-9310 Sincerely, LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. [even Greene Protect Manager 5/17103(R VPW330VPI Tnp Geu t.ettcr wpd) ~/ ^ LSA ASS OCIATES INC Table A -General Dynamics Planning Area VII Trip Generation Proposed Land Uses P.M. Peak Hour Land Use Units In Out Total Daily Apaztments 499 D U Tnps/Umt' 0 42 0 20 0 62 6 63 Tnp Generauon 210 100 310 3,308 Shopping Center 30 748 TSF Tnps/UmtZ 1 80 1 94 3 74 42 92 Trtp Generauon 55 60 115 1,320 Restaurant 15 000 TSF Tnps/Umt3 6 52 4 34 10 86 130 34 Trtp Generauon 98 65 163 1,955 Total Pazcel Tnp Generation 363 225 588 6,583 Approved Land Uses P.M. Peak Hour Land Use Units In Out Total Daily Retail 130 TSF Tnps/Umt° 2 98 2 98 5 96 64 OS Trtp Generauon 388 388 776 8,327 Restaurant 20 TSF Tnps/Umt` 8 78 7 48 16 26 205 36 Tnp Generauon 175 150 325 4,107 Bank 30 TSF Tnps/[1mt° 7 63 9 72 17 35 140 61 Tnp Generauon 229 292 521 4,218 Office 450 TSF Tnps/Um[` 0 21 104 1 25 9 72 Tnp Generauon 96 467 563 4,375 Total Parcel Trtp Generauon 888 1,297 2,185 21,027 RetatURestaurant Pass-by reduction (39%a) 220 210 430 4,849 Net New Pazcel Trtp Generauon 668 1,087 1,755 16,178 I Rates based on Land Use 220 -Apartments from Insnmte of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Tnp Generauon, 6th Edltton z Rates based on Land Use 820 -Shopping Center from ITE Tnp Generauon, 6th Ed 3 Rates based on Land Use 832 - Htgh Turnover (Sn-Down) Restaurant from ITE Tnp Generauon, 6th Ed ° Rates for approved land uses aze taken from [he General Dynamics Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Impact Analyses (LSA, January 1994), wfvch retied on ITE Tnp Generauon , 5th Edition 5/17/2003 (R VPW330VnodepGP Tnp Gen Comp) ~} ~ ~ / LSA A5a0 CIATES INC Table B -General Dynamics Project Daily Trtp Generation Comparison A roved (Per General D natrucs TIA) Actual or Curtentl Pro sed/A roved and Use Stze Unrts Rate Tnps Land Use Stze Untts Rate Tnp lannmg Area I Golf Course 155 Acres 8 33 1,291 (No Chan a 1,291 lanntng Area II Retarl 130 TSF 64 OS 8,327 (Proposed for Office Use) Office 285 TSF 10 87 3,097 Theatre 12 Screens 153 33 1,840 Health Club 120 TSF 15 94 1,913 Restaurant 40 TSF 205 36 8,214 Bowling Alley 60 TSF 33 33 2,000 dlustment for retatVrestaurant pass-by (38%) 10,255 Subtotal 16,008 lanntng Area III Office 150 TSF 12 71 1,907 (Part of golf course) Golf Course 19 Acres 8 33 L58 Retail 90 TSF 73 52 6,617 Restaurant 10 TSF 205 36 2,054 dlustment for retail/restaurant pass-by (45r-a) ubtotal 4,769 6,675 lamm~g Area IV Office (w/support retarl) 240 TSF 11 33 2,720 (Office constructed without restaurant) Office 240 TSF 11 33 2,72 Restatttant 20 TSF 205 36 4,107 d3ustment for restaurant pass-by (75%) 1,027 Subtotal 3,747 lanntng Area V HoteVConf Ctr 150 Room 15 97 2,396 (Proposed for business park, as specified below) Light Indusmal 133 TSF 6 58 875 Office 150 TSF 12 71 1,907 Office 119 TSF 13 45 1,6 Retail 120 TSF 66 00 7,920 Restaurant 20 TSF 205 36 4,107 Adlus[ment for retatl/restauran[ pass-by (40%) 7,216 Subtotal 11,519 lanntng Area VI (Approved for 496 apartments) 3,288 Office 425 TSF 9 86 4,190 lanntng Area VIl Retail Restaurant Bank 130 TSF 20 TSF 30 TSF 64 OS 205 36 140 61 8,327 4,107 4,218 (Proposed for uses below) Retail Restaurant Apartments 1,32 1,955 3,308 Office 450 TSF 9 72 4,375 d3ustment for retatVrestaurantpass-by (39%) 7,585 ubtotal 16,178 lanntng Area VIII Office 150 TSF 12 71 1,907 p ved for uses below) fice 150 TSF 12 71 1,907 Restaurant 10 TSF 205 36 2,054 Senior Housing 264 DU 4 13 1,09 Business Park 160 TSF 14 37 2,299 Adjustment for restaurant pass-by (75%) Subtotal 513 4.719 ~ ~~ g 5/12/2003 (R UPW330\GD tnp genWDT) LSA ASSO CIATES INC Table B -General Dynamics Project Daily Trip Generation Comparison A roved (Per General D natmcs TIA) Actual or Cunentl Pro osed/A roved and Use Stze Units Ra[e Tnps Land Use Stze Units Rate Tnp lanntng Area D{ (Approved for 521 apartments) 3,45 Office 140 TSF 12 93 1,810 Restaurant 10 TSF 205 36 2,054 Bustness Park 140 TSF 14 37 2,012 dlustrnent for restaurant pass-by (75%) 513 Subtotal 4,335 lanntng Area X (No change) 4,12 Retatl 50 TSF 91 65 4,583 Bustness Pazk 150 TSF 14 37 2,156 Adjustment for retarl pass-by (5756) 1,971 ubtotal 4,126 lamm~g Area XI (Proposed for dtstnbunon facility) Office 115 TSF 13 56 1,560 Warehouse 412 TSF 4 59 1,893 Restaurant 10 TSF 205.36 2,054 Bustness Park 150 TSF 14 37 2,156 djustrnent for restaurant pass-by (75~,) 513 Subtotal 4,228 Metrohnk Station 3,000 Adjustment for internal TDM tnp capture (20%) 600 ubtotal 2,400 lamm~ Area Subtotal 6,628 OTAL GROSS NEW TRIPS 80,015 32,083 RNAL TRIP CAPTURE (10%) 7,702 3,208 M/TRANSTT REDUCTION 7,702 3,208 OTAL EFFECTIVE TRIP GENERATION 64,011 25,667 Note Tnp generation rates for ongmally approved development are from the ITE Tnp Generanon manual, Fifth Edmon Tnp generation m[es for subsequently approved development are from the ITE Tnp Generanon manual, Sixth Edtuon Tnp generation rates for Light Industnal and Ware house aze average of ITE rates and rates from "Truck Tnp Generanon Chazactensncs of Nonresidential Land Uses", ITE Journal, July 1994, converted to passegner caz egmvalents Tnp generation rate for Sentor Housing is based on naffic study for protect prepazed by Lmscott, Law, & Greenspan 5/12/2003 (R VPW330\GD [tip genWDT) ~ / ~ 9 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA iuPANA-r-roNl® June 6, 2003 Planning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dnve Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re Empire Lakes Center -Parcel #7 Gentlemen JUN 10 RECENED -PLANNING Last year Panattom Investments, LLC acquired 17 acres at Empire Lakes Center, at the corner of 6`h Street and Cleveland Avenue The investment m Empire Lakes Center followed our typical procedure m identifying the best development sites m Southern California General Dynamics, the master developer, has brought to our attention that a mixed use residential/retail protect by JPI on Parce] 7 of Empire Lakes Center is being considered by the Commission We believe JPI's product would be a significant and welcomed addition to Empire Lakes Center providing another high end residential opportunity to our mixed use business park We are pleased to be a part of Empire Lakes Center and ask that you support General Dynamics and JPI at Empire Lakes Sincerely, Panattom De opine Company, LLC ackson B Smith ~Q PANAITONI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC I ~960o Fairchild Road, Score z85 Irvine, CA gzb~z Tel 949474-7830 Fax 949474-7833 ! - T H E C I T Y O F RANCdO CUCAMONGA StaffR,eport DATE: June 11, 2003 TO. Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY. Mike Smith, Planning Technician SUBJECT• CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00953 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A request to expand an existing automotive technical school of 71,872 square feet into an adjacent tenant space of 31,680 square feet to completely occupy the building of 103,552 square feet located in the General Industrial Distract (Subarea 11) at 11530 6th Street - APN: 0229-262-37. BACKGROUND This application was originally scheduled for a City Planner public hearing on January 7, 2003; however, Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, aneighboring tenant, raised concerns about the available parking on-site following the proposed expansion (Exhibit °G°). Subsequently, the application was continued to a later public hearing to allow the applicant the opportunity to resolve this issue and provide a revised proposal for staffs review. Following extensive discussions with staff, changes to the proposal were made and the applicant resubmitted the application. In addition, they have requested the Planning Commission review their request. SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The project site is located at the northwest corner of Buffalo Avenue and 6th Street. The property consists of three, one-story buildings on about 4 98 acres ~~ ° that Is divided Into four parcels (Exhibit D ). The total area of these buildings is about 210,000square feet. Universal Technical Institute Is located in Building 1, the largest of the three buildings The remaining buildings are occupied by unrelated businesses, including Amphastar Pharmaceuticals (Buildings 2A and 3, about 87,000 square feet) and Light Concern (Building 26, at 26,705 square feet). There are substantial paved parking areas around each building PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a modification to Conditional Use Permit 97-28 that was approved on August 26, 1997. Under consideration is the expansion of Universal Technical Institute, an existing technical school that specializes in hands-on and classroom training for automotive and diesel emissions, transmissions, and power train repair. The school currently has a floor area of 71,872 square feet The expansion will incorporate an adjacent tenant space of 31,680 square feet that was recently vacated at the end of January 2003. Following this expansion, the faculty well occupy the entire building of 103,552 square feet. The applicant Indicates that the purpose of the expansion is to enhance the quality of the education experience and provide greater learning opportunities for their students. The applicant also states that they well continue to occupy this building only until the summer of 2004, when a new faculty located elsewhere in the City is opened. ITEM C PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00953 -CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES June 11, 2003 Page 2 ANALYSIS: A General: The purpose of a Conditional Use Permit is to create the flexibility necessary to achieve the objectives of the Development Code and General Plan, and to ensure that the proposed use is compatible with neighboring uses. Selected uses in each zone are only allowed subject to the granting of a Conditional Use Permit because of their unique site development requirements and operating characteristics, which require speaal consideration to ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. The Conditional Use Permit process is intended to afford opportunity for public review and evaluation to provide adequate mitigation of any potential adverse impacts and to ensure that all Code requirements are met Section 17.30.030 of the City's Development Code permits the operation of technicaVvocational schools in most of the industrial districts subject to a Conditional Use Permit and City Planner approval. B. Scheduling and Operating Hours: The operating hours will be 6:00 a m. to 12.00 a.m., Monday through Friday, with no classes on Saturday or Sunday In response to Amphastar Pharmaceuticals' concerns about parking availability, the applicant has revised the school schedule and allocation of students per session. Classes will be provided in three, non-overlapping sessions that will take place m the morning, afternoon, and late evening. The morning and afternoon sessions will be comprised of three, two-hour 'educational blocks' and breaks, while the late evening session will be comprised of two, two-hour blocks, a 30-minute block, and breaks. Students are required to take their classes m one continuous session and are not permitted to take classes m different sessions, (i.e., split their classes among the various sessions). As revised, there will be a peak of about 180 persons on-site per session Of this number, up to 140 will be students and 40 will be staff members, including instructors, administrators, and maintenance personnel. These changes will reduce the number of students and staff on-site at any given moment, and more evenly distribute the total enrollment throughout the day and later into the evening. Note that there will be a reduction in overall student enrollment from about 410 to 390 students following the adoption of the new schedule. This revised schedule will be m effect starting in June 2003 (Exhibit °F°). C. Compatibility with other uses. Staff believes that the proposal will pose no signrficant impacts on the surrounding tenants or properties. The operations m the expanded area will be the same as in the existing area. Furthermore, the operating characteristics that are inherent to the collision center and the automobile repair training faality, such as noise, odor, and minor storage of small parts and materials are similar. The change in tenants will not be apparent from the outside. D. Parkin The 725 parking spaces available on-site are evenly distributed throughout the site. Of that number, there are 198 parking spaces at the north and east side of the site located entirely within the parcel on which the subject bwldmg is located. Although parking is non-exclusive among the businesses on-site, these parking stalls have been, and will continue to be, primarily used by the students and staff of Universal Technical Institute. The Development Code standard for calculating the parking demand of vocational schools is one space per three students and one space per staff member. Therefore, a total of 87 parking spaces would be required under the current Code standard, theoretically leaving a surplus of 111 parking spaces. The current Code standard however, assumes that two out of three students are walking, carpooling, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00953 -CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES June 11,2003 Page 3 bicycling, or taking the bus to school. Staff believes this standard does not reflect the actual driving habits of a suburban community; therefore, for other schools staff has recommended a parking ratio of one space per student and one per staff. Applying the recommended ratio to this proiect equates to a parking regwrement of 180 spaces to serve the school's students and staff members per session following the expansion. This leaves a surplus of 18 parking spaces that could be used by visitors or students and/or staff as needed. The applicant has also responded to concerns about students and staff parking in spaces needed by the other tenants. The applicant has implemented a new parking enforcement policy that includes penalties. This policy wdl serve to signrficantly reduce or eliminate the possibility of students or staff parking in the spaces in front of the applicant's budding that are typically needed by employees and visitors of the adjacent tenants. Staff encourages the applicant and neighboring tenants to establish a coordinated parking allotment and enforcement strategy to ensure the availability of parking for their respective employees, students, and visitors. E Noise: Noise will be minimal. No outdoor activity will occur with the exception of periodic break periods of 15-30 minutes in length every two hours. Manufacturing and industrial related activity is not under consideration. . The protect site is governed by the Class B Performance Standards for General Industrial Districts. The maximum exterior noise level shall not exceed 75 dBA in any 24-hour period. A condition of approval is included in the Resolution of Approval requiring the applicant to comply with this noise criterion. CORRESPONDENCE This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Dadv Bulletan newspaper, the property was posted, neighboring tenants, and all property owners within 300 feet of the protect site were notified by mad about the proposed expansion RECOMMENDATION. Based on the above analysis, staff recommends the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit DRC2002-00953 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions. Resp ~ sub e Dra r City Planner Attachments: Exhibit "A° Exhibit °B" Exhibit °C° Exhibit "D" . Exhibit "E" Exhibit °F" Exhibit "G" Exhibit "H" Draft Resol - Summary Sheet - Vianity Map - Location Map - Site Plan - Floor Plan - Correspondence from Universal Technical Institute - Correspondence from Amphastar Pharmaceuticals - Excerpts of Conditional Use Permit 97-28 Staff Report ution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit DRC2002-00953 ~~ INFORMATION SHEET CONDITIONAL USE PERMR FILE NO: PROJECT NAME: APPLICANT: LOCATION: FLOOR AREA: LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: EXISTING ZONING: EXISTING LAND USE: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: ADJACENT ZONING/LAND USE: Conditional Use Permit DRC2002-00953 Floor area expansion (use intensification) Charles Joseph Assoaates for Unnrersal Technology Institute 11530 6'" Street Existing: 71,872 square feet New: 31,680 square feet Total: 103,552 square feet CJ Industrial General Industrial District (Subarea 11) Industrial Park General Industrial (GI) District ZONING LAND USE North: General Industrial District (Subarea 11) Industrial Complex South: General Industrial District (Subarea 11) Industnal Complex East: General Industnal District (Subarea 13) Industrial Complex West: General Industnal Distnct (Subarea 11) Industrial Complex SITE DESCRIPTION: The site consists of three single-story buildings. The primary uses in two of these buildings are light manufacturing (Building 2B), pharmaceutical manufacturing, research and development (Budding 2A and 3). SITE SIZE: The developed industrial complex is a total of 4.98 acres. PARKING CALCULATIONS: Parkins Ratio F t No of Soaces Rard. age oo Tvpe of Use So. Manufactunng 26,705 1 space / 500 sq.ft ace / 250 sq.ft 000 1 s 7 348 p , Office/R&D 8 Trade School 103,552 1 space /student 1 space /staff 40 PARKING REQUIRED FOR THIS TENANT (per session): 180 PARKING ALLOTTED FOR THIS TENANT: 198 PARKING REQUIRED FOR OTHER TENANTS: 401 PARKING REQUIRED FOR ALL TENANTS: 581 TOTAL PARKING ON-SITE: 725 EXHIBIT `A' ~`~ • CJ C~n~v~ ~ ~ LOCATION NTAP DRC2002-00953 • 6TH STREET ;. EXHIBIT `C' N Cho `' ¢' ~ is ~ ! ~ T ~_ a --- . ~ ~.; y~ ~1 ~` ~.,, _: --~ ~. _ ts' -. --'Z - __ ~~~ ~~ - L--, ~: '_ -~ ._ ., is , '_ _. s _, ,= _ ,_ ;_ EXHIBIT `D' +]. ~ ~4 _ ~ \ ~ -- ai _, . -, ~ ~ s ` '~~ \ ~ ~ ~~, -- ~` 1, ~ :' _ ~ `~ ` 1 i _ ~ ~ ; - ~ c,~ Z _- ;-- I c ' I F ~ ~ -~ N~ a ~ ! - ~ ~ ^i ~ ~ ~ . s 1 iV ' - , ' ~ ! Z _ ~~ N ~.~- _ ~ . r ; - -.___ - -- ~ - ~. 1, ~ -ry -_~ ' --- ---_ _ ~ ~ . ~ F _ ;ii;i~~r, _~ I i ~~ .~. ~ ___ ----- -'-- i _i ~ -~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~v ~ ~ ~ _ ~ I . I ~ ~ ~ _~ , '1 ~ ~ i;~' III ~ ~ r ~ i~ i 1~ ~ 1 ~ ~~ E r-~ EXHIBIT `E' `"`~ i • UN/VERBAL TECHN/CAL /NST/TUTS 11530 6'" St Suite 110 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Telep~~ne 909-484-0980 May 7, 2003 Mr. Brad Buller, City Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civ>.c Center Dnve Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 RE: Conditional Use Permit DRC2002-00953 Universal Technical Institute at 11530 Sixth Street Deaz Mr. Buller This document has been prepazed m an effort to outline and respond to those concerns raised by our tenant neighbor, Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, Iuc. regazdmg the>r current and future employee needs in relation to Universal Technical Institute (UTI) students' parking We state emphatically that rt is, and has been the des>re and intent of the UTI campus and UTI corporate management team to fully cooperate and address all matters relating to the past, present and future pazkmg issues. UTI feels that the need to physically expand our facility is necessary to continue and enhance the quality and scope of our current educational programs as well as prov>de for the best possible student educational expenence. We feel ~t must be noted that previous to the January 2003 CUP application that at no time dunng our last 5 years at this location, was any s>gnificant complaint ever voiced or presented to us with regazd to parking. Moreover, numerous attempts over tune by UTI staff to meet with or personally contact Amphastar management were seemingly ignored or essentially disregarded. We have since discussed these issues several tunes with the RC City Planners office staff and v~nth the CFO and officers of Amphastaz Based on the information presented m these discussions, as we understand it, the primary concern ties m the use of pazking spaces by UTI students cuaently that are appazently allocated to Amphastar eventually having a potential future unpact on their employee parking needs as they grow through June 2004 We feel rt ~s important to note that rt is the genuine a>m and hope of UTI Ranch Campus to build and occupy our own freestanding 150,OOOsf educarional facility m the Rancho Cucamonga azea by June 2004 also 4-1 EXHIBIT `F' Established 1965 Our feeling is that this timeframe would serve to limit, to a relatively short rime, the need for the active measures as we will indicate below. We have evaluated our current position with our own institutional regmrements and reviewed a multitude of options and possible solutions. Based on these factors, we have prepared a plan of actions and a list of policy measures that we feel are more than adequate to meet the current and future stated needs of Amphastaz. The following measures and procedures presented to you are now or soon will be implemented based: Realienment and reallocation of student schedules and start dates. We have modified or cancelled, whenever possible, several of the remaining 2003-2004 calendazed class start dates to shift students from morning and afternoon schedules to attend evening classes whereby students may start classes after 7:OOPM and thus minimally impact Amphastaz. NOTE: We feel that this effort alone will offer the most significant element of our parking reduction solution and could essentially meet the parking requirement of 150 within 30-60 days of the CUP approval. This is accomplished through the planned lessening of new student population and a regulaz montlily attrition through graduating and completed students thus resulting m a student population that falls well within our new number of allocated pazktng spaces Please see Exhibit A • New Rancho Campus Hours. .9 strop and formalized policy ofnarkinP rules enforcement While enforcement or our current pazkmg regulations and polrcres as stated m our student handbook has, to this point, been somewhat lax in it's application, we have desrgnated a member of our management team and a~i i denhfi at o and to more stringently and consistently apply our existing p pazlung enforcement polices. These measures would be immedrately responsive to any issues that may anse and provide a definitive point of contact to help resolve them as they might occur These measures would also entazl the creation of a pazking monitor position to provide constant supervisron of the student parking area. Overall supervision, monitoring and responsibility for the effectiveness of thus program would be maintained by the UTI School Director Renewed Efforts and Incentives for Rideshare and Car oo[in .The UTI Student Sernces Department has re-instituted an active effort to encourage these prograrr-s to further reduce student and employee vehicles parked on site. See Exhibit "B" Memo Re• UTI Parking Reduction 4. Reassi nment of employees to rear parkin¢ areas. We will, over the next 60-90 days, eliminate the need for an add~tronal 15 spaces of AM employee pazkrng by assigning parking wrthun or to the rear of the new building area. ~~0 • 5. The leaselrent of existing allocated oarkin~ spaces• eements from companies We have in process or will enter into preliminary agr adjacent to or proximal to UTI on a contingency basis of our intent to lease or rent from 50 -100 of their allocated unused pazking spaces if future events indicate a need. We will execute these plans if approve to expand our facility ~~ dent Em9lovee transportation. UTI is ananging for the provision of a 12 to 14 passenger van through Ford Motor Company to provide additional assistance in allowing students and employees a more effective means to utilize the San Bernazdino and Riverside Metrolink lines and "pazk and nde" opportiuuties in the Ontario and Rancho Cucamonga centers. Universal Technical Institute remains dedicated to establishing and maintaining positive business relationships and muntains a strong emphasis and commitment to corporate citizenship. UTI's adherence to these values and pnnciples has resulted in our unpazalleled growth m the Inland Empire as the premiere provider of qualitative }ugh-end automotive education in the Southland as well as nationwide. wth and success will be in the City It is the wish and sincere hope that our continued gro of Rancho Cucamonga. On behalf of the UTI Management team, we appreciate your time, continued efforts and consideration of the information we have presented to you in this communication. As always, UTI as well as myself remain at your service rf I may assist you in any way or to provide you with any additional information. Sincerely, ~~ K. Monty Jordan, MBA UTI School Director C~ ~ Exhibit "A" N_ew Ranch Hours (06/07/021: Student Population sluff reallocation and reduction through reduced class AM and Afternoon start dates. AM=6 Hours: Population: 163 123 by end ofMay after reduction 6:00 - 7:50 110 minutes = 2 hour education block 7:50 - 8.05 15 ininute break 8:05 - 9:55 110 minutes = 2 hour education block 9 55 -10:25 30 minute lunch 10.25 -12:15 110 minutes = 2 hour education block PM_ 6~ Population: 134 ]24 by mid June after reduction 12:45 - 2:35 110 minutes = 2 hour education block 2:35 - 2:50 1 S minute break 2:50 - 4:40 110 minutes = 2 hour education block 4:40 - 5:10 30 minute lunch 5 10 - 7 00 110minutes = 2 hour education block Evening = 4 5 Hours Population: 108 136 by mid June after reduction 7 15 - 9:05 110 minutes = 2 hour education block 9 OS - 9:35 30 minute lunch 9:35 -11:25 110 minutes = 2 hour educational block 11.25 -11.35 10 minute break 11:35 -12:05 30 minute education block c~a UN/VERBAL TECHN/CAL /NST/TOTE 11530 6'" St Sulte 110 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Telep~oAnXe 909-4840980 Exhibit "B" MEMO RE: UTI Pazkmg Reduction, Carpooling Incenrives Program Universal Technical Institute, Rancho Cucamonga offers the following ate in carpooling. artici t i mcenriv p o p ng es to students who aze will l Students who are carpooling participate in monthly drawing levels , for pnzes based on the amount of students per car. Movie Tickets are given regularly for those students participating 2, 3. m carpooling. Students who do carpool, are allowed to park m designated parking spaces closer to the building. We offer discounted rickets through Metro Link and Omm Trans 4. and assist in the routing and schedule information. We work vv~th students to ~denhfy the best transit schedule. 5, (, We offer the students a chance to meet each other at orientation if ~ a Ride-Share opportunity exists. We post Carpool Information and Contact signs with phone , numbers in the hallways, lounges and in Student Services. we locate and need of a ride i g. , ng m If a student is identified as be help connect with other students in their area that may be able to help out the student in need. ., C -3 ,~: °"""~" nno cuacs es ncw.aacr Established 1965 ,Ian to ~, ~~: ~.P .... • ~J , g AMF c 11570 NMapSTM a9+ VIA FACSIMILE AJ ~ Art rn'.nmr.v ~... •••. -_ -- - -909 980.8494 Fec (909) 990.9799 Streal, Rancho Cucamonga. CA 97730 Tglephona: ( ) January 9.2003 Mike Smith Planning Technician The City of Rancho Cucamonga 0500 Civic Ccntcr Dri A 91729 Rancho Cucamonga, Re: Conditional Use Permit for UTI Dear Mike 2. 3. 4. 5. As requested, Amphastar PhatmaceuticaLc, Inc. ("APT would like to express in writuig its concerns about the proposed Use Permit for the Universal Technical Institute ("UTI"), allowing its expansion into an adJacent tenant space within itg current building. Put simply, API believes that UTI may already be exceeding its permitted Parking space allotment, and even if it does not currently excced the allotment, it most certainly will exceed d as a result of the school's expan4wn. Factors ContnbutinQ ~+ API's Concerns UTI students have been observed parking in spaces that are allotted to the Lot compnsing API's headquarters and manufacturing facility. be a rohibited parking UTI students )rave been observed parking along Buffalo Avenue (which may p ~)• aces allotted to the Lot comprising LJTI's The two observations have been made at a time when the sp school have been substantially 5lled. The onginal Use Permit for UTI contemplated that h o~etltirds~ ~~ ~ ~ helul~WOt~ a parlnng space because they strived at school throuB a was deemed tolerable. API believes based t}ierefom, a ratio of three students for every parking spec upon observation that the vast malonty of UTI's students arrive in their own carsncem~irir t~tie Ciry planning Staff in its Report dated January 7, 2003 (the "Current Staff Report ? B proposed Use Permit states its "belief that the [3 to 1 student] standard does not reflect real life dnvurg habits of our suburban community: therefore, for other schools staff has consistentiv recommended that the parking ratio of one space per student andceos f U 'i~~c ~ mm is off by even one-third (i.e., a 2 to 1 ratio), then the allocated sp and even The onginal application for the UTI Use Permit stated that 500 students might be expected, if split into equal shifts, API would be concerned because of factor 4 above Further, thek taff~t70es m the owes tf»Sithffer stating,'note ethat the~actual number of students etuolled may be more'pand staff; it g au-als6 ,wM,aA~*urmm EXHIBIT `G' Ct~ Jan 10 03 06:21p RMP•HRSTRR [909]980-5728 P•2 J • h + "however, the number of students on site at any gtvcn moment wtll not be greater than 300". This is even more dtsturbmg in tight of factor 4. 6. In our review of the Report, we beheve that the pnncipal rationale for the Staffs wncluston that the Use Permit be approved is that the "Staff recently Inspected the property mtd-mommg and found ample available parking m front and behind the budding". First, it Is not appropriate for the ptupose of thts analysts for the Staff to assume Hutt all spaces In the development belong to all tenants forever, If so, none of the parlang would have been allocated onglnally, or altemahvely, all bulldln~ would have been given the same ratio of parkng. Second, while on the vtewing date, there may have appeared to be ample pazking that wlll not be the case forever. Planning by ils very definition calls for forward looking analysis and API has hired approxtmately I50 employees for this stte in the past 18 months or so and intends wlthtn 2 years (and hopefully sooner) to reach an employment level that will occupy all of the spaces designated for our Lots. API is very sensitive to the need for a business to have ample pazkmg; that is a principal reason why we bought all or part of 2 buildings in this development. Sueeestions 1. Verify and document the actual eilrollment at TJTI. 2. Verify and document how many shifts the school uses and the number of students and staff at each stun 3 Venfy and document the amount of overlap between shifts, If any. 4. Venfy and document the mode of transportation used by each student to get to LJTI. 5 Beginning Immediately, have IJTI take steps to make sure all students and staff park only in the spaces allotted to IJ1'I's Lot (so no use of Buffalo Avenue (If actually prohibited) and no use of any other tenant/user/op'ner's spaces m the development) m order to gauge the actual occupancy rate of UTI's allotted spaces. 6. Obtain the 5-yeaz plan of UTI to assess school growth on-site. The CIty may be blessed by two growing businesses but cursed by the fact that they are next door to each other. In these uncertain economrc times, the Ctty should take extra care and use extra resources to see that bout businesses can be accommodated without infiinging on each other. Please feel free to share this letter with IJTI and Hogle Ireland and to contact me with any questions. Thank you to advance for your consideration. S rely> / ~ ~ ~~w, 1 David W. Nasstf/ /v~~ Chief Firianctal Officer (900)423~i16 wow amphavar win r C t~ CITY OF RANCHO CUC~NGA - STAFF REPORT ~ DATE: August 26, 1997 TO: Brad Buller, City Planner FROM: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner BY: Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: ~c)NDITIONAL US PEA"IT 97 28 ~ ~tiwFRSAL TECHNICAL INSTITUTE - A request to establish an automotive vocational school within an existing building occupying 71,872 square feet of floor area, in the General Industrial District, Subarea 11 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 11530 Sixth Street - APN:229-262-37. - eNp~Y$IS: The applicant, Universal Technical Institute, proposes to establish a vocational A. ~~~ school that specializes in training for automotive and diesel emissions, transmissions, an power train repalr. The school will occupy 71,872 square feet of the total 103,560 square foot building. The hours of operation for the school will be between 6 a.m. and t0 p.m. and consist of three shifts. The school operates five days a week, 51 weeks a Year' The applicant estimates the school may have a total of 500 students. The students will be divided into 3 shifts, with a peak evening shift of 200. The s 80o hi~ftUof 25 50 total staff members that include instructors and administrators, with a pe B ~ .,..~+ ~ ~~p c'omoatibility: The site contains three buildings with a total gross floor area of 203,373 square feet and 769 parking spaces. Building Three is unoa:upied Presently; however, the City recently received tenant Improvement plans for the building. The tenant is a pharmaceutical manufacturing, research and development company, and will occupy the entire building. Budding Two has two exiSrdnretethnarn>~o °~i~sgof Buiding Onne9 companies. The proposed school will occupy According to the property owner, the remaining floor area of Building One will be occupied by an auto repair shop. The proposed school, with a Peak operation in the evening hours, will not be m conflict with existing businesses on site. C p~~, g; The site is divided into four parcels. Each parcel has more than enough parking spaces to accommodate the tenants. Exhibtt "D"shows the parking calculation for the site. D ~„~ ~~~mo~tal Assessment: The application is exempt per Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act C 1l0 EXHIBIT `H' ~ "" CJ RESOLUTION NO.03-83 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00953, A REQUEST TO EXPAND AN EXISTING AUTOMOTIVE TECHNICAL SCHOOL OF 71,872 SQUARE FEET INTO AN ADJACENT TENANT SPACE OF 31,680 SQUARE FEET TO COMPLETELY OCCUPY THE BUILDING OF 103,552 SQUARE FEET LOCATED IN THE GENERAL INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT (SUBAREA 11) AT 11530 6TH STREET - APN. 229-262-37 A Rentals. 1. Charles Joseph Associates, on behalf of Universal Technical Institute, fled an application for a Conditional Use Perrrnt DRC2002-00953, as described m the title of this Resolution, a modification of previously approved Conditional Use Permit 97-28. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 11th day of June 2003, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said heanng on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites poor to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1 The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Rentals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to the Planning Commission during the above-referenced public heanng on June 11, 2003, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, the Planning Commission hereby spenfically finds as follows: a. This application is a modification of an existing Conditional Use Permit 97-28, previously approved on August 26, 1997; and b. The application applies to property located at 11530 6th Street with a street frontage of over 1,695 feet and a lot depth of about 594 feet, and is improved with three buildings with a combined 203,373 square feet of space and 725 parking spaces; and c. The application contemplates the expansion of an existing automotive technical school from 71,872 square feet to 103,552 square feet by incorporating an adjacent tenant space of 31,680 square feet so as to occupy the entire floor area of Budding 1 situated along the rear of the site, and CIS PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO 03-83 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00953 . June 11, 2003 Page 2 d. The applicant is limiting bwlding modifications to the intenorwith no changes to the exterior, and e. The operating hours will be 6.00 a.m. to 12.00 a m., Monday through Friday, with no classes on Saturday or Sunday, and f. The expansion will allow the school to enhance the quality of the educational experience and provide greater learning opportunities for its students; g The applicant has responded to concerns regarding parking availability that were raised by Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, aneighboring tenant, by modifying then school enrollment and staffing, increasing the number of instruction sessions from two to three, and establishing a parking enforcement policy, and h The revisions to the applicants original proposal will result in a reduction of students and staff on-site per session; and i. There are 725 parking spaces on-site, of which 198 spaces are reserved for the applicant's use. As a trade/vocational school use, the applicant is regwred to have 180 parking spaces; and . i The properties surrounding the subiect site are zoned General Industrial and are improved with numerous industrial bwldings. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to the Planning Commission during the above-referenced public hearing, and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, the Planning Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially infurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity, and c. The application, which contemplates operation of the proposed use, complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. 4. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that the project identified in this Resolution is categorically exempt from the regwrements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Gwdelines promulgated thereunder, pursuantto Section 15301 of the State CEQA Guidelines. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, • the Planning Commission hereby approves the application, subiect to each and every condition set forth below and in the attached Standard Conditions. ~~~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0.03-83 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00953 June 11, 2003 Page 3 Planning Division: Approval is for the expansion of Universal Technical Institute, an existing automotive technical school located at 11530 6th Street, from 71,782 square feet to 103,552 square feet. 2. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Budding Code, or any other City Ordinances. 3. The faality shall be operated in conformance with the performance standards as defined in the Development Code including, but not limited to, noise levels as stated m Section 17 02 120 and Section 17.030.050 of the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Development Code. 4. Any signs proposed for the facility shall be designed m conformance with the City's Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to installation. 5. On-street parking shall be prohibited. i 6. The hours of operation shall be 6:00 a m. to 12 00 a.m., Monday through Fnday, with no classes on Saturday or Sunday. If operation of the faality causes adverse effects upon adjacent businesses, the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the Planning Commission for review 8. Any intensification or change of use, change in hours of operation, or further expansion of the budding shall regwre a modification to this application and consideration by the Planning Commission 9. All of the Conditions of Approval and Standard Conditions of Conditional Use Permit 97-28 shall apply. Engineering Division: Protect existing curb and gutter, sidewalk, street trees, driveway approach(s), and R26(s) signs, or replace and/or repau as regwred. 2. Suffiaent off-street parking shall be provided for this facility within the proposed and existing industrial complex(s). 6. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2003. C~~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 03-83 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-00953 ~ • June 11, 2003 Page 4 BY: Larry T. McNiel, Chairman ATTEST: Dan Coleman, Acting Secretary I, Dan Coleman, Acting Secretary, of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planrnng Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting held on the 11th day of June 2003, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES. COMMISSIONERS: NOES• COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ~~ • C ~o ~J k COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: DRC2002-00953 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANT: CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES FOR UNIVERSAL TECHNICAL INSTITUTE LOCATION: 11530 6TH STREET ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: A. General Requirements The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 03-83, Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading actwities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. B. Time Limits Conditional Use Permit approval shall expire if bwldmg permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced wdhin 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. C. Site Development The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Drnsion, the conditions contained harem, and Development Code regulations Prior to any use of the protect site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner SC-03-03 i~I Comolation Date ~~- ~~- ~~- _J-/. ~~_ Protect No DRC2002-00953 Completion Date 3. Occupancy of the faculties shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Budding Code ___/~~ and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Satety Division to show compliance The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy 4 Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development _J-/- Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans In effect at the time of building permd issuance 5 All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc , shall ~~_. be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. For single-family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. 6 All bulding numbers and individual units shall be identified In a clear and concise manner, ~~- including proper illumination D. Building Design 1 All roof appurtenances, including air Conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or ~~- protections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adtacent properties and streets as requved by the Planning Division Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the budding design and constructed to the satisfaction of the Cdy Planner. Details shall be included in bulding plans E. Trip Reduction 1 Bicycle storage spaces shall be provided in all commeraal, office, industrial, and multifamily _J-J- residential protects of more than 10 units Minimum spaces equal to five percent of the requred automobile parking spaces or three bicycle storage spaces, whichever is greater. After the first 50 bicycle storage spaces are provided, additional storage spaces required are 2 5 percent of the required automobile parking spaces Warehouse distribution uses shall provide bicycle storage spaces at a rate of 2 5 percent of the regwred automobile parking spaces with a minimum of a 3-bike rack In no case shall the total number of bicycle parking spaces regwred exceed 100. Where this results in a fraction of 0 5 or greater, the number shall be rounded off to the higher whole number 2 For industrial protects with at least 40 car parking spaces, bicyclist-changing facilities shall be ~~- provided to encourage bicycle commuting. Accessible restrooms with storage lockers for clothing and equpment shall be sufficient F. Signs 1 The signs Indicated on the submitted plans are conceptual only and not a part of this ~~_. approval Any signs proposed for this development shall comply with the Slgn Ordinance and shall require separate application and approval by the Planning Division prior to Installahon of any signs APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: NOTE ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S) G. General Requirements 1 Submit flue complete sets of plans including the following. -JJ- SC-03-03 2 l^ A a Project No DRC2002-00953 Completion Date a. Site/Plot Plan; b Foundation Plan, c. Floor Plan, d Ceding and Roof Framing Plan, e. Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached) including the size of the main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single Ime diagrams, f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams, water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, facture unds, gas piping, and heating and air condtttornng, and g. Planning Dmsion Protect Number (i e., TT #, CUP #, DR #, etc.) clearly identified on the outside of all plans. 2 Submti two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a sods report. Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet° signature are required prior to plan check submittal. 3 Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers' Compensation coverage to the City prior to permit issuance. 4 Business shall not open for operation pnor to posting the Certificate of Occupancy issued by the Bwlding and Safety Division H. Site Development . 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction All plans shall be marked with the protect fde number (t e , DRC2002-00953) The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted California Codes, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application Contact the Bwiding and Safety Drvtston for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. Prior to issuance of bwlding permits for a new commercial or industrial development protect or mator addition, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Check Fees, and School Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to the Bwidmg and Safety Division prior to permits issuance Construction actmty shall not occur between the hours of 8 00 p m. and 6 30 a m Monday through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays I. New Structures Exterior walls shall be constructed of the required fire rating m accordance with CBC Table 5-A Opernngs in exterior walls shall be protected m accordance with CBC Table 5-A J. Existing Structures 1 Provide compliance with the Caltfomia Bwlding Code (CBC) for the property line clearances . considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness of existing buildings. ~~- ~~- -J-/_ _/~_ ~~. ~~. ~~- _J~- -J-/_ SC-03-03 3 ~~ Protect No DRC2002-00953 Comolehon Date 2 Due to the scope of the protect, an Occupancy Change review is required Submit plans to ~~ the Bwlding and Safety Division to determine compliance for the proposed use. ~ 3 Upon tenant improvement plan check submittal, additional requirements maybe regwred ~-J- K. Additional Requirements/Comments 1. Integrity of existing Area Separation Wall and openings must comply with CBC ~_/_ Section 504 6. 2. Provide complete calculation for area and mixed occupancy ratio per CBC Chapters 3 and 5. ~~_ APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: L. Security Lighting 1 All parking, common, and storage areas shall have minimum maintained 1-foot candle power ~~_ These areas should be lighted from sunset to sunrise and on photo sensored cell. 2 All buldings shall have minimal security lighting to eliminate dark areas around the buildings, ~~_ with direct lighting to be provided by all entryways Lighting shall be consistent around the entire development 3 Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures. J~_ M. Building Numbering • 1 Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for ~~ nighmme wsibdtty. 2 Developer shall paint roof top numbers on one or more roofs of this development. They shall ~___J- be aminimum of three feet in length and two feet in width and of contrasting color to background The stencils for this purpose are on loan at the Rancho Cucamonga Police Department APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DIVISION, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: SEE ATTACHED SC-03-03 4 ca ~# FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FIRE SAFETY DIVISION STANDARD CONDITIONS • FD PLAN REVIEW#: PROJECT #: PROJECT NAME: DATE: PLAN TYPE: APPLICANT NAME: OCCUPANCY CLASS: FLOOR AREA (S): TYPE CONSTRUCTION: FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM REQUIRED: LOCATION: 1=n_n~_nR~~ DRC2002-00953 UTI Mav 3. 2003 CUP expansion UTI Group B S3 S nnklers - existm and add to news ace 1 1 SAn R Street FD REVIEW BY: Tlm Feleran Fire Inspector PLANNER: Mlke Smlth ALL OF THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2770, TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING: C J RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE DISTRICT- STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS - General, Procedural, Technical, or Operational Information that shall be Included, Corrected, or Completed as noted below. The following is applicable to the above project. FSC-3 Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems- Technical Comments 1. Remodels and Changes: Any modification or remodel to a fire sprinkler system regwres Fire Distnct approval, and a permit. NO WORK is permitted without a permit issued by Fire Construction Services Contact Bwiding and Safety/Fire Construction Services (909) 477-2713 FSC-10 Hazard Control Permits- Technical Comments The below indicated permit regwrements are based on those permits commonly associated with the protects operations or bwlding construction As noted below Special Permits maybe required, dependent upon approved use(s) the applicant must contact the Fve Safety Division for specific information. Note: Carefully review the items below. There may be significant impact on the proposed project. Italicized text indicates a Rancho Cucamonga Fire District amendment. t Operate a repair garage (Motor Vehicle H-4) 2 Flammable finishes ~5 3 Spraying or dipping operations, spray booths, dip tanks, electrostatic apparatus, automobile undercoating, powder coating, and organic peroxides and dual component coatings (per booth fee) 4 Flammable and combustible liquid (storage, handling, and/or use) Storage of flammable and combustible Irqurds m outside aboveground storage tanks rs prohrbrted by Rancho Cucamonga Fire Code. FSC-12 Plan Submittal Required Notice Required plans shall be submitted and approved prior to construction in accordance with 2000/2001 Bwldmg, Fue, Mechanical, and Plumbing Codes, 1999 Electrical Code; Health and Safety Code, Public Resources Code; and RCFPD Ordinances FD15 and FD39, Guidelines and Standards NOTE. In addition to the fees due at this time please note that separate plan check fees for tenant improvements, fire protection systems and/or any consultant rewews will be assessed at time of submittal of plans. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION- Complete the following: 1 Fire Sprinkler System- Plans and Permit: Plans for the requred automatic fire sprinkler system shall be submitted to Fire Construction Services for review and approval No work is allowed without a Fire Construction Services permit. Contact Budding and Safety/Fve Construction Services (909) 477-2713 2. Fire Sprinkler System- Final Inspection: Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the fire sprinkler system(s) shall be tested and accepted by Fire Construction Services. Contact Building and Safety/Fire Construction Services (909) 477-2713 3 Fire Lanes: Prior to the issuance of any Certficate of Occupancy, the fire lanes shall be installed in accordance with the approved fire lane plan The CC&R's or other approved documents shall contain an approved fire lane map and prowsions that prohibit parking in the fve lanes The method of enforcement shall be documented The CC&R's shall also identdy who is responsible for not less than annual inspection and maintenance of ali required fire lanes Contact Bwldmg and Safety/Fire Construction Services (909) 477-2713. 4 Address- Other Than Single-family: New bwldmgs other than single-family dwellings shall post the address with minimum 8-inch numbers on contrasting background, visible from the street and electricalty illuminated during periods of darkness When the bulding setback exceeds 200 feet from the public street an additional non-illuminated 6-inch minimum number address shall be provided at the property entrance. Contact Bwldmg and Safety/Fire Construction Services (909) 477-2713 5 MuttFund Complexes: In mutts-unit complexes approved address numbers, and/or building identrfication letters shall be provided on the front and back of all units, suites, or bwldmgs. The Fire District shall review and approve the numbering plan in coordination wRh the City of Rancho Cucamonga Contact Building and Safety/Fire Construction Services (909) 477-2713 6 Fire District Confidential Business Occupancy Information: The applicant shall complete the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District "Confidential Business Occupancy Information" Form and submit to the Fire Safety Division This form provides contact information for Fire District use in the event of an emergency at the subject bulding or property. Contact Fire Safety Division (909) 477-2770 Fire District Forms and Letters Note: I} these conditions are part of the final Standard Conditions Issued by the Planning Division referenced Fire District forms and letters are not included. Contact the Fire Safety Division for copies of forms or letters. The forms and letter are also found in previously Issued Fire District comments. Fire District Review Letter (P&E)- Template SL 10/31/02 Revision r ~ LJ • i r~~ 06/10/2003 10:16 19099806139 G '~ ~ AMPHASTAR PHARMACEUTIC 11570 6"' Street. Ranoho Cucamonga, CA 91730 AMRIASTAq fM4 VIA FACSIMILE June 10, 2003 Mtke Smtth Planning Techmctan The City of Rancho Cucamonga 0500 Ctvic Center Dnve Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re. Conditional Use Permit for UTI Dear Mike: Fax (B09) 900-8139 PAGE 01 Cn1'OFRE1NCNp CUCq~O N8q JUN 1 p 2003 RECENEp . p~ Thanks again for talking with me today about the UTT Issue. Thts is to confirm that anal we mere faxe:l the Notice of Meeting a week or so ago, we knew nothing about the proposed changes tc UTI't amended plan. In addthon, until that receipt of that Notice, we had never heard of the firm Charles Joseph Associates and no one from that firm has contacted me. Since our last meettng, we have had several meetings/telephone calls wtth the owner of 11 i I's building. UTI managemrnt, and a real estate broker far UTi. All of those interactions concerned ei Cher z Fotent~a I sublease of the UT! space to Amphastar or a potential sale of the budding to Amphagtar Tl,e ?1t'y reference to the parktng issue in any of these interactions was a ststctnent to the effect the d UTi had leased some parklttg space off site. Yesterday, Monty Jordan called me and asked whether I had seen thetr new plans and I :+ud n ~ =ie replied that he would be happy to drop a copy off for me and dtd so yesterday afternoon l~'r, <-•e in thf: process of reviewing the plans and polte,es. I would also like all concerned parties to be aware of the fact that to the extent any of the propasrd changes m UTI policies and procedures have been Implemented, their effect remains to b~. sae-:. As ycu know, since our last meeting, Amphastar instituted a sticker policy; all Amphastar emple_•ees '• acre a brigktt blue sticker on the rear wmdshtcld of their vehicles. Th1s morning, I drove around i he n-,aut parking lot and Buffalo Avenue, my approximate count Is that there are 100 vehicles in those 2 location.: without Amphastar stickers. At this point, given that the Collision Center has moved out, :he sot>rce of those vehicles must be UTI, unless an unknown party who is not a tenant nn the devalopm.ut is using these locations for then employees. Sjstcere , Aav1d W. Nassif Chief Financtal Officer 7{2021 (R00)4274135 wwW amnhsSrJr ccm C UN/VERBAL TECHN/CAL /NST/TOTE 11530 6`6 St Suite 110 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Telephone 909-484-1929 ® FAX 909-484-0980 BILL POLICH (888) 692-7800 ext. 116 UTI began m 1965... Campuses now m Phoenix, Houston, Florida, Illinois, California and Mooresville, N.C. CALIFORNIA CAMPUS: ASE Master Certified Automotive Technology 17 "Phases" of training m bumper to bumper auto CLASS SCHEDULES: 13 Months Monday thru Fnday, 6 00 a m to 12 15 p m Each subject is a'`Phase' of training of 3 weeks 13 Months Monday thru Fnday. 12 45 p m to 7 00 p m Each subject is a `'Phase' of training of 3 weeks 17 Months Monday thru Fnday, 7 15 p m to 12 OS a m Each subject ~s a °Phase° of training of 4 weeks No charge to retake classes Tutoring and counseling available GRADING: '`A" 90-100% / "B" 80-90% / "C" 70-80% Attendance Maximum 10% absences =OVER THE ENTIRE COURSE, including tardiness Appearance/Haircut/Umforms 50% classroom theory and 50% shop/lab TUITION INCLUDES: ~,: Course-books and workbooks 1 uniform shirt and 2 UT] T-shirts. safety glasses cars. parts and tools $1 100 Snap-On tools and top discounts. Lifetime Employment Service, Free Refresher Courses ASE Certification Trammg and EPA Certificat~on~ Established 1965 uNivERSAL 1ECHN/CAL - /NSTlTUTE Manufacturer Programs At-A-Glance custom tra " ~ -_ int„y g roup ~ , Audt BMW International J , ' aguar Mercedes Benz Porsche Volkswagen Volvo ;v;:~ r~~; Academy STEP Tech-Ed Program pgCE ELITE TAP Academ -TRP y SAFE cPn 3 00 3 00 3 00 3 00 3 OD 3 50 3 00 3 00 3 5 Preferred 3 4 Preferred Attendance 97°l° 98% 95°/ 97 E t E - 98% 97 5D% 98 00% 95% ° 95 n rance xam YES YES Yes YES YES YES /° Dnvmg Record No DUI's, No DUI's, Ability to obtain No DUI's, no more No DUI's, no more No DUI's, YES No DU's YES No DUI's Not more than Not more than CDL , no more 2 moving violations on c t d 3 moving violations Not more than than 2 moving than 2 moving no more than 1 movng Not more than than 3 moving urren recor on current record 3 moving violations violations in the violations in the violation in the last 3 moving violations on current on current record last 3 years last three years 2 years violations on record Employment Minimum of Minimum of Minimum of Minimum of Minimum of M current record contract 12 th inimum of Minimum of Minimum of Trammg mon s Anzona 6 months A 12 months 12 months 12 months 12 months 6 months hs 12 Locations , nzona, 116nois Flonda California, Georgia California 11 nois Calforrna, Flonda Illinois Flonda, , Illinos, Illinois Anzona New Jerse Penns lvania , Pennsylvania Texas y Texas Pennsylvania Industry Expenence preferred Strongly Preferred Preferred Strongly Preferred Preferred Strongly Preferred Preferred 5tamn9 $1500 $13-$18 $13-$18 $13-$18 513-$18 Preferred $13 18 Salary Range uaranteed St rt H c -$ $1500 $13 - $18 starting Relocation Y a er our startin an hour an hour an hour an hour uaranteed an hour es, b Yes, b Yes, by Yes by Yes b Y Assistance some dealers some dealers some dealers , some dealers , y some d l es, by Yes, by Yes, by Length of Training 13 weeks 27 Weeks 16 weeks 20 weeks ea ers 16 w ek some dealers some dealers some dealers Parisi Training paid by d l Training paid by Training paid by Trairnng paid by e s Trammg paid b y 19 weeks Trarnin g paid by 11 weeks Training paid by 16 weeks Trairnng paid b ea er BMWNA-All dealer dealer dealer dealer dealer y dealer $1,500 Snap-On certifications for Tool Voucher Master Technician 51,500 Snap-On $500 Sign-on Tool Voucher b TRIP to $7 000 Tnp ne otiable T ti bl onus , g np nego a e with Tnp negotiable Tnp negotiable vmth Tnp negotiable TRIP to 57,000 Tnp Negotiable with with dealers dealers with dealers dealers with dealers dealers Training Level 12 Credentials Certified 20 Factory All core Jaguar 40 MB Factory All core Porsche 12 credentials All core Volvo Diagnostic Credentials courses training creditr courses Technician courses Available seats 270 195 90 60 384 36 390 'Requirements. Pm iertarl Grarlnatac ~., a in~a.,t,,,~,~ „v-.u,. ...a„_i,. _-_---_- -- -_~.. . , , 162 ....... ....... y, u..~~,~ r,,,,y, a,,,~ oro auu~eci io change At-A-Glance 2003 xis UNIVERSAL TECHNICAL INSTITUTE REFERENCES I PERSONAL DATA & AUTHORIZATION TO RELEASE INFORMATION STUDENT START DATE SSN: MARITAL STATUS. If marred, S Ouse's Single Marred Separated Name SS# Divorced _ -_ Home Phone # _ Cell Phone # _ ----- Pa er~# --- _ - E-I~~lall Address- -- ---- --------- Employer __-- _ \Nork Phone #a __ _ _ __ Authorization to receive rnformatlon ___ --- ~- -- -- - Please list the references requested below FILL IN ALL THE IIJFORIv141 IOIJ COtv1PLETELI' AWD ACCURATELI' Only list those people with vahom you will have continued contact This in(om~alion may be venfied I( you wish to have all Information pertaining to your Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) and your Financial Aid Plan(s) made available (o a second party, please place a check mark in the box next (o "AuNionza(ion to receive info" YOUR LOAIJ AND PAYMEIJT(s) PLAN CANNOT B[ APPROVED l4~ITHOUT THIS INFORr~AATION MAlJDATORY REC)U(REh4ENT Minrmurn 5 of the 6 adults mull be al drf(erent atldresses o/ which a( least 3 must be emplo~~ed toll time I IFgTHER / STEPF~ITHER I LEGAL G,UARDIA~ Name Address City, State, Zlp Home Phone # Work Phone # Cell Phone # E-Mall Address Authorization to receive Information , ~'=~A'~J'ULT~f2~LA71VE atadiffereiit,adclress Relatlonshlp Name Address City, State, Zlp Home Phone # Work Phone # Cell Phone # E-Marl Address Authonzatlon to receive Information o ±7>.pUL°•T,~FRIEND,br,REL~AT'11~E -Yat,'ailrff~~rit'~ii8res`s)' Relatlonshlp Name Address City, State, Zip Home Phone #1 Work Pf~one ## Cell Phone # E-Mall Address _ Authonzatlon to receive information ~~ MOTHER !STEPMOTHER /LEGAL GUAF2DIAI Name Address City, State, Zip Home Phone # Work Phone # Cell Phone # E-Mall Address Authonzatlon to receroe Information ADULT 12~LA""TINE (at a drffe"'reh't~add~ess Relatlonshlp Name Address City, State, ZIp Home Phone # Work Phone # Cell Phone # E-Mall Address Authonzatlon to receive Information ~~'~ 'ADULT~FRIEND~,or:~_REL'~~fIVEr{~afa"cliffe}c~nt'3'a&ri7e~s)'~~ Relationship Name Address City, State, ZIp Home Phone ## Work Phone ## Cell Phone # E-~4all Atldress AuQionzation to receive informa4on ~- I hereby authorize UTI to release any Information pertaining to my financial aid to the Individual(s) designated by my checkmark afore FA 39 0?/08/02 UNIVERSAL TECHNICAL INSTITUTE RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA CAMPUS 11530 6'" Street, Suite 110, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 484-1929 1-888-692-7800 CATALOG TUITION ADDENDUM 2003-2004 Addendum to School Catalog Published September, 2002 EFFECTIVE February 15, 2003 Semester Pro ram Credit Hours Clock Hours No. 1Viceks Tmhon Cost * Reg Fee Total Graduatimi Document IIS/121 Automouve~'echnology 730 1,530 51/6R $22,050 $75 $22,125 Dglloma 117 Automotive Technology w/FACT** 8S 0 1,800 60 $26,800 $75 $26,875 Diploma `Tuition Cost Includes course books (texUworkbooks), 1 workshirt, 2 t-shirts, and safety glasses In addition to the Tuition Cost and Reglstratlon Fee, a $95 00 lab fee and the cost of the Automotive meter ($105 00) are due prior to the first day of class "FACT represents Ford Accelerated Credential Tralning OurPtedge to You Universal Techn/cal Institute unconditionally guarantees that if will provide a Financial Assistance Plan to cover the cost of tuition This plan may consist of either one of the Federal Aid Programs (depending on students' eligibility), a private financing program, or a combination of both There is a possibility that payments maybe regwred while the student is in school In such cases, parental support (parental loans, cash payments, etcJ may be required If Universal Technical Institute Is unable to provide a Financial Assistance Pian, it well refund all monies paid by the student as a down payment for tuition, Including housing deposits Tuition reimbursement Incentive Partnership (T.R.1 P) Program Because the demand for our graduates is so great, many companies offer to pay back students' loans through UTI's T R.I.P. program This program has been implemented to help companies attract and retain top technicians while at the same time, offer our graduates tuition reimbursement Summary Refund Poltcy Automotive Technology #115/121 Attend 6 hours per day, 5 days per week Total Program $22,050 Reoistratlon Fee 75 Total Tuition $22,125 Automotive Technology w/FACT #117 Attend 6 0 hours per day, 5 days per week Total Proyram $26,800 Registration Fee 75 Total Tuition $26,875 Tuition Obligation Refund Amount Number of Weeks Attended Number of Hours Attended Percent of Total Program Com leled Max amount of tuition the Institute may kee TuRlon mshl cannot keep assuming all tuition is aid 45 1530 10% $2,21250 $19,91250 11 25 306 0 25% $5,531 25 $16,593 75 22 50 765 0 50% $11,062 50 $11 062 50 27 00 918 0 60°/ $13,275 00 $8,850 00 33 75 1147 5 75 % $16,593 75 $5,531 25 Tmtron Obligation Refund Amount Number of Weeks Attended Number of Hours Attended Percent or Total Program Gom leted iviax amount of twtion (he Inshlute may kee Twtlon msbl cannot keep assuming all tmhon is aid 6 0 180 0 10% $2,687 50 $24,167 50 15 0 450 0 25 % $6,716 75 $20,156 25 30 0 900 0 50°/ $13,437 50 $13,437 50 36 0 1080 0 60% $16,125 00 $10,750 00 45 0 1350 0 75°/ $20,156 25 $6,718 75 (see reverse for important tax/scholarship information) SA-6T-CA rav 1/n9 EXCITING NEWS Tax Breaks for Education! HOPE SCHOLARSHIP: Students may receive up to a 100% tax credit for the first $1,000 of tuition and required fees and 50% credit on the second $1,000 depending on income level This is good for the first two years of education, i e , a student attending UTI's 72 week Auto/Diesel & Indush~ial program could potentially cut then family's taxes by as much as $3,000. LIFETIME LEARNING TAX CREDIT: This law is targeted at adults going back to school who have previously attended for two~or more years. A family may receive a 20% tax credit for the first $5,000 of tuition and required fees paid through the year 2002, and $10,000 thereafter, depending on income level, i e , an automobile mechanic after 20 years in the industry decides to attend UTI to catch up with today's technology (Example) His tuition is approximately $16,000 -has family's income taxes could be cut by as much as $1,000 each year. STUDENT LOAN INTEREST DEDUCTION: This law reduces the burden of the repayment obligation by allowing students and' their families to take a tax deduction for interest paid in the first 60 months of repayment. The maximum deduction is $1,000 in 1998, $1,500 in 1999, $2,000 in 2000, and $2,500 in 2001 and beyond depending on income level. NOTE: 13egannang in 2002, the requn~ement that you can only deduct student loan anterest paid dw~mg the first 60 months that anterest payments are required is ehmmated. The Institute makes no clama regarding the tax benefit opportunities stated above Students taking advaiztage of this tax benefit are advised to review the new rules m IRS Publication 553 for more uzformation and to consult a tax advisor For rleinrled iax mfar minion and uwr uclions, plense consul! your LK,S rm for ins and puhhcahona of nix pr epar er (o see rf you qualify The abnie infonrinhon was nbinuzerafrom the mlernei inebsrle ivrnmus.erl ion/fount puts/utdei.hhtd Refer to Publrcahon 970 -Tax 8enefds for Higher Education T H E C I T V O F R A N G M O C U C A M O N G A Staff Report DATE June 11, 2003 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, Clty Planner BY• Nancy Fong, Senior Planner SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY REVIEW DRC2003-00477 - ETIWANDA SCHOOL DISTRICT - Review of the proposed site acquisition of approximately 9.39 acres of land for an elementary school located in the Mixed Use District of the Victoria Arbors Village on the west side of Victoria Park Lane, south of Base Llne Road - APN. 0227-171-29 and 30. ABSTRACT: Under State law, the Office of the State Architect has the authority to review and approve school facilities. In order "to promote the safety of pupils and comprehensive ~~ community planning, the school districts are required to solicit a written report from the Planning Commission, prior to acquiring the land for a school. The Planning Commission is required to investigate the site and detail its recommendations, in writing, to the school district. SITE DESCRIPTION A. Surroundino Land Use and Zonino. North - Park/Wetlands Preserve (rough grading in progress), Mixed Use South - Single-family residential (rough grading in progress); Mixed Use East - Etiwanda Gardens Wedding Chapel and Vacant; Mixed Use West - Single-family residential (rough grading in progress); Mixed Use B General Plan Designations. Protect Slte - Mixed Use North - Mixed Use South - Mixed Use East - Mixed Use West - Mixed Use C Site Characteristics The site Is vacant land that has been rough graded. The site adjoins federally protected wetlands to the northwest and a planned Clty park to the west There is no vegetation on-site PROJECT DESCRIPTION• The Etiwanda School District is proposing to purchase the property to develop an elementary school that will primarily serve students generated by the surrounding Victoria Arbors Village, that is the fourth and final village within the Victoria Planned Community ITEM D PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2003-00477 - ETIWANDA SCHOOL DISTRICT . June 11, 2003 Page 2 One of the primary land use organization concepts of the Victoria Community Plan is a schooVpark as the center of each village The Victoria Arbors Village is arranged around this elementary school and the adfoining City neighborhood park, with extensive pedestrian trails linking to each neighborhood Attached is a Conceptual Site Plan of this school facility. ANALYSIS A. Land Use: The Victoria Arbors Final Environmental Impact Report indicated that a total of 597 elementary age students would be generated by the development of the Victoria Arbors Village. Since all existing elementary schools in the area are at or beyond capacity, the developer of the Victoria Arbors Village set aside land within their master plan for a new elementary school. The proposed school site location is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan Exhibit III-1. Further, the proposed school site is consistent with the following General Plan policies• °Educational, cultural, and recreational uses should be placed in close proximity to their potential users and should be clustered together wherever possible.° °Schools and parks should be used as focal points for residential neighborhoods." B. Investioation: Although public schools are not subject to the City's zoning regulations, we would encourage the District to follow the spent of these regulations wherever possible. The proposed property acgwsition does not require Design Review Committee or Technical Review Committee review; however, the Planning Division staff investigated it The following comments are offered for the Planning Commission's consideration• The Distract should provide on-site "hard court" playgrounds, or acgwre additional property in order to provide same, in order to not be dependent upon the adfoining City park for recreational needs. The City policy for public parks is that they should not be committed for school use in a manner that would exclude the general public's use, hence, the City will not allow point-use unless the school Site Plan is revised to include on-site °hard court° playgrounds 2. The architectural design should reflect the winery theme established by the Victoria Arbors Master Plan. 3. Decorative tubular steel fencing, rather than chain link, should be used to secure the site. 4. Street frontages should be improved to City standards and the standards of the Victoria Arbors Master Plan. 5. The District should coordinate street improvements and access locations with the City Traffic Engineer. PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2003-00477 - ETIWANDA SCHOOL DISTRICT June 11, 2003 Page 3 6. A Development Review application including, but not limited to, Site Plans, Bwlding Elevations, and Landscape Plans should be submitted to the City for courtesy review. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission provide comments, which wdl be forwarded in wntmg to the school distract for their consideration. submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB•NF:mlg Attachments• Exhibit °A° - Location Map Exhibit °B° - Victoria Arbors Conceptual School and Park Plan p3 _., i -~ ~~ ' off - I _ _ _ 1 RhafF _ - - _ . __ _ _ _ _ _ _ MDNms - ' =.T I r • _._ __ _ _ _ _ _ t i awl -.YSI+uoY..in.i ~ ulrm ~ ~mlii-Y unii'1mi er ~~ _-._ ~!n !AI -" ` • . _ . _ pia, erT wm _-.- OIYC~ehalrwln ~ - - ra~weul~lere~ _ ..~ - ate ~ - n!~ .~^i-_ • , , r • CMS M YM , eV•^_ _ _ eT K_ _ - _ _ 1~gltl j•• Yl•Jrj_ -~-__ ' • • • • _ YR Y'e Mel _.~_~. T~iN3.___w _ Tom (1374 • 1 L . wMT~~ _~ - .;_ • l --- -t-~- -- • • ® • s ~ _ - - - _ 6 rcemiuou.r/ra firm. '~ eui T •a.ow im __ __ _ _ ; T l l ` _ fia _ -- ~ iTC: • r ~.Y ° a ¢suna llAi-_~p•~-_~1C_ ~welwia . • . ~ i Y ~ l .._,. '`^: ` . __ ` ~_ _ _ yM~ _ __i iO_ ---- lam' •O~IF~_ ~- ~ l i - _. _ ~ ` l ic M ___ hlb. :'PAit~-~% y YtlL.Y __ __.._ mom. _ 4 ~ l _ lv}- - - ~~" ` CHOOL 1 _ ybL.._..__ .-___wvl~__.-J-M°-F=- y ' ~' •p•~•IY•tlYWIiMMw~wYY•ItryY1M1+•lllr w l , s`„^i ~ o _ __._______._ e•u tllMltl ^2° £ -j '.s t _ 'edC•MflVlldtr~fel^Yl af.algeld Yr met •M _ l .. _ ,•;v,~u<• ~ I nvlfafTd lB4•br•!/•tl YbYYY.l Y•1'rMbtYddrlfoC•Y l __ ~i-=Y'x~~^. _ •••B!m•OY1M~/rs•Itl IC~O11 YYl0Ym111_ ._ t{. _. l ~ °sa?..a- a_~ `° "' y ~ _ i ~ _•_! 111t1`1I111L I `I I II1I ~rO % ~ +1111111I1~1~11 1~11~1~IIIr •""" ~1 - - - 11111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111111111 1 • • • • • • • • • ^ • ^ ^ ^ • f f A • • • • • • • • • 1 1 • • t l • r • • r • • • • I ~ • Y • • I • • • M ^ • • • • • • • • • • ® ~ + f Y • ~ • • O 1 1 ~ • • • • . . • • • • • • Y • • • • ^ • • • • • • o • tl l l l • • • • • o • • • • • r _ • • l1~// ~ D4 ~ ~ ~a! i} ~ l~~ ~r~ ~ ~ ~~,a ~~ ~~o® ~ j ~ it ~ ; ~ ~ ~; ~ it~~ ~{ ~. ~ alp ~ ~; ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s f ~ 5 ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~}~~i~i~ Oc~O®®DD~o1,~il :=-Is ~ _ "s~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ i , i® ~ f 1 1~ r;{ ~~e1~ tI ~ii t~~~i~j{e~A}~~{}3}~i]1]'((~ttji~ ~d~~~~~ld]~~~~~~~a~ld3~~~1 • f_ q O q! C f! q f f e f f ~~~ ~~\ i ~~ ~. ~~~^ `~~~--~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ g~ i `6 • V ~. ~ ~~ ~~ a ~- ~~ '~1 1 1 \ill I ~.. \\ ,/ ~~ oG O 2 y. 11 ~ 0 r ---_-----•-xvmaoeav-•-'-'---'-- D5 I i ~' I ~~ o x `~ ~~ ~~~ T H E C I T Y O F RANCHO C U C A M O N G A Memorandum DATE June 10, 2003 TO: Nancy Fong, Senior Planner a'~~ FROM: Dan James, Senlor Civil Engineer ~q.~. SUBJC-CT: PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA JUNE 11, 2003, ITEM D, PRELIMINARY REVIEW DRC2003-00477, ETIWANDA SCHOOL DISTRICT -VICTORIA ARBORS The staff report seems to Indicate that a joint use of facilities could occur If the Dlstrict Includes some on-site "hard-court" playgrounds. I am referring to staff report paragraph Analysis 6.1. While the General Plan does encourage toint use agreements, It has always been staff's position that Park/School site be Initially designed to be stand alone facilities. Joint use agreements may then be processed without pressure that It needs to be done to make it work. Any comments from the Clty to the Dlstrict should Indlcate their site should be designed to function without the use of the park site. DJ:dlw