Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-30 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 06-30 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OFTHE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE TO ENACT DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2005-01003, A REQUEST TO AMEND SECTION 17.32.030 OF THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL LAND USE REGULATIONS WITHIN SUBAREA 4 OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD DISTRICTS TO ADD HOTELS, MOTELS,AND MAJOR HOTEL FACILITIES AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE AND COCKTAIL LOUNGES WITHIN MAJOR HOTEL FACILTIES AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. Charles Joseph Associates filed an application for Development Code Amendment DRC2005-01003, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Code Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On April 12, 2006, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the associated General Plan Amendment and Development District Amendment applications and issued Resolution No. 06-28 and Resolution No. 06-29, respectively, recommending to the City Council that General Plan Amendment DRC2005-01006 and Development District Amendment DRC2005-01002 be approved. 3. On the 12th day of April 2006, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and recommended approval. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A,of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on April 12, 2006, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located within the City; and b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment; and C. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with the surrounding development by permitting joint development of varying uses already listed in the General Plan including, but not limited to, office, hospitality, food, and commercial land uses that will provide support uses and services for the nearby Regionally-Related Commercial Districts; and PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-30 DRC2005-01003 — CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES April 12', 2006 Page 2 d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Development Code by allowing the innovative use of existing development standards to expand the range of uses within a development project; and e. This amendment would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment, nor on the surrounding properties; conversely, the amendment will allow for office, retail, hospitality, and food uses to be integrated into a master-planned development under one land use district; and f. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan and objectives of the Development Code by continuing a policy encouraging quality development through the innovative application of existing design standards. 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. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development,within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and b: This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Development Code, and; C. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,orwelfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and d. The subject application is consistent with the objectives the Development Code; and e. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends that the Planning Commission adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further, this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. Although the Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies certain significant environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects have been reduced to an acceptable level by imposition of mitigation measures on the project that are listed in the Mitigation Monitoring Program. C. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-30 DRC2005-01003— CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES April 12, 2006 Page 3 Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits,and the information provided to the Planning Commission during the public hearing,the Planning Commission hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of Development Code Amendment DRC2005-01003 to amend Section 17.32.030 of the Community Commercial Land Use Regulations within Subarea 4 of the Foothill Boulevard Districts to add hotels, motels, and major hotel facilities as a Conditionally Permitted Use, and cocktail lounges within major hotel facilities as Conditionally Permitted Use as described in the Resolution and shown as Exhibit A of the Draft City Council Ordinance by adoption of the Draft City Council Ordinance and including the condition shown below. Planning Department 1) The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees,for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 12TH DAY OF APRIL 2006. PLANNING C MMI ION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Patart, irman A,,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 12th day of April 2006, by the following vote-to-wit: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 06-30 DRC2005-01003— CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES April 12, 2006 Page 4 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, MACIAS, McPHAIL, MUNOZ, STEWART NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2005-01003, A REQUEST TO AMEND SECTION 17.32.030 OF THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL LAND USE REGULATIONS WITHIN SUBAREA 4 OF THE FOOTHILL BOULEVARD DISTRICTS TO ADD HOTELS, MOTELS,AND MAJOR HOTEL FACILITIES AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE AND COCKTAIL LOUNGES W ITHIN MAJOR HOTEL FACILTIES AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. Charles Joseph Associates filed an application for Development Code Amendment DRC2005-01003, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Code Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On April 12, 2006, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the associated General Plan Amendment Development District Amendment and applications and issued Resolution No. 06-28 and Resolution No. 06-29, respectively, recommending to the City Council that General Plan Amendment DRC2005-01006 and Development District Amendment DRC2005-01002 be approved. 3. On the 12th day of April 2006, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on this application and recommended approval by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 06-30. 4. On May 17, 2006, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the associated General Plan Amendment and Development District Amendment applications and issued Resolution No. 06-28 and Resolution No.06-29, respectively, approving the associated General Plan Amendment DRC2005-01006 and Development District Amendment DRC2005-01002. 5. On May 17, 2006, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 6. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and ordained by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing on May 17,2006, including written and oral staff reports,together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DRC2005-01003—CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES May 17, 2006 Page 2 a. The application applies to the property located within the City; and b. The proposed amendment will not have a significant impact on the environment; and C. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development within the district in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with the surrounding development by permitting joint development of varying uses already listed in the General Plan including, but not limited to,office, hospitality,food,and commercial land uses that will provide support uses and services for the nearby Regionally-Related Commercial Districts;and d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Development Code by allowing the innovative use of existing development standards to expand the range of uses within a development project; and e. This amendment would not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor on the surrounding properties; conversely, the amendment will allow for office, retail, hospitality, and food uses to be integrated into a master planned development under one land use district; and f. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan and objectives of the Development Code by continuing a policy encouraging quality development through the innovative application of existing design standards. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and b. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Development Code, and; C. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and d. The subject application is consistent with the objectives the Development Code; and e. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DRC2005-01003— CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES May 17, 2006 Page 3 Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: b. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the City Council; and, further, this Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Mitigated Negative Declaration with regard to the application. C. Although the Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies certain significant environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects have, been reduced to an acceptable level by imposition of mitigation measures on the project that are listed in the Mitigation Monitoring Program. d. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c)of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations,the City Council finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole,the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council during the public hearing, the City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Council hereby approves Development Code Amendment DRC2005-01003 to amend Section 17.32.030 of the Community Commercial Land Use Regulations within Subarea 4 of the Foothill Boulevard Districts to add hotels, motels, and major hotel facilities as a Conditionally Permitted Use, and cocktail lounges within major hotel facilities as Conditionally Permitted Use as described in this Ordinance, as shown in attached Exhibit A of this Ordinance and including the condition shown below. Planning Department 1) The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents,officers,or employees,because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents,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. 5. If any section, subsection,sentence,clause, phrase,or word of this Ordinance is,for any reason, deemed or held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, or preempted by legislative enactment, such decision or legislation shall not affect the CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DRC2005-01003—CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES May 17, 2006 Page 4 validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or words thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, clauses, phrases, or words might subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional or preempted by subsequent legislation 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. HOTEL Subarea One Subarea Two Subarea Three Subarea Four USES JC R � C C � R RH C —IO R Rjr C CR JM Hotel/Motel ��❑���❑❑�❑�_�❑�❑❑��I�JI r ❑❑❑ Fajor)a Fj❑�F��❑❑ FEUT-10111FIT-11 Useslary E,IJE❑ll❑I_JUI_I❑❑I_'EEII]FJ❑❑I_❑IJI-I'I er Shtoy�/Barb F-11-1101IM[H❑❑❑❑❑RI❑❑�❑❑� b)Cafes ❑❑Q❑r❑I—]I]�❑�I_JI_JI-1❑❑❑QD 1_l[�❑❑❑ Servicesn9 ❑❑5F�❑LJ�❑❑❑❑❑❑❑IIII d) Cocekta" �- DFJ0FJ�E]01El�EI�11F-1- Loung Development Code Amendment DRC2005-01003 Exhibit A Ordinance City of Rancho Cucamonga in . MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: General Plan Amendment DRC2005-01000, General Plan Amendment DRC2005-01006, Development District Amendment DRC2005-01002, Development Code Amendment DRC2005-01003, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM17594, Conditional Use Permit DRC2005-00365, and Variance DRC2005-01124 This Mitigation Monitoring Program(MMP)has been prepared for use in implementing the mitigation measures identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the above-listed project. This program has been prepared in compliance with State law to ensure that adopted mitigation measures are implemented (Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code). Program Components -This MMP contains the following elements: 1. Conditions of approval that act as impact mitigation measures are recorded with the action and the procedure necessary to ensure compliance.The mitigation measure conditions of approval are contained in the adopted Resolution of Approval for the project. 2. A procedure of compliance and verification has been outlined for each action necessary. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when, and to whom and when compliance will be reported. 3. The MMP has been designed to provide focused, yet flexible guidelines. As monitoring progresses, changes to compliance procedures may be necessary based upon recommendations by those responsible for the program. Program Management - The MMP will be in-place through all phases of the project. The project planner, assigned by the City Planner, shall coordinate enforcement of the MMP. The project planner oversees the MMP and reviews the Reporting Forms to ensure they are filled out correctly and proper action is taken on each mitigation. Each City department shall ensure compliance of the conditions (mitigation) that relate to that department. Procedures - The following steps will be followed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 1. A fee covering all costs and expenses, including any consultants' fees, incurred by the City in performing monitoring or reporting programs shall be charged to the applicant. 2. A MMP Reporting Form will be prepared for each potentially significant impact and its corresponding mitigation measure identified in the Mitigation Monitoring Checklist, attached hereto. This procedure designates who will take action, what action will be taken and when,and to whom and when compliance will be reported. All monitoring and reporting documentation will be kept in the project file with the department having the original authority for processing the project. Reports will be available from the City upon request at the following address: City of Rancho Cucamonga - Lead Agency (Planning Department) 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Mitigation Monitoring Program DRC2005-01000, DRC2005-01006, DRC2005-01002, DRC205-01003, SUBTPM17594, DRC2005- 00365, AND DRC2005-01124 Page 2 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staff's is needed,as determined by the project planner or responsible City department,to monitor specific mitigation activities and provide appropriate written approvals to the project planner. 4. The project planner or responsible City department will approve, by signature and date, the completion of each action item that was identified on the MMP Reporting Form. After each measure is verified for compliance, no further action is required for the specific phase of development. 5. All MMP Reporting Forms for an impact issue requiring no further monitoring will be signed off as completed by the project planner or responsible City department at the bottom of the MMP Reporting Form. 6. Unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refinement or addition of mitigation measures.The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed bythe project planner or responsible City department and a copy provided to the appropriate design, construction, or operational personnel. 7. The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to stop the work of construction contractors if compliance with any aspects of the MMP is not occurring after written notification has been issued. The project planner or responsible City department also has the authority to hold certificates of occupancies if compliance with a mitigation measure attached hereto is not occurring.The project planner or responsible City department has the authority to hold issuance of a business license until all mitigation measures are implemented. 8. Any conditions (mitigation) that require monitoring after project completion shall be the responsibility of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division.The Division shall require the applicant to post any necessary funds (or other forms of guarantee)with the City. These funds shall be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measure for the required period of time. 9. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall conform to the City's MMP and shall be approved by the Community Development Director or City Planner prior to the issuance of building permits. MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: General Plan Amendment DRC2005-01000, General Plan Amendment DRC2005-01006, Development District Amendment DRC2005-01002, Development Code Amendment DRC2005-01003, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM17594 Conditional Use Permit DRC2005-00365. and Variance DRC2005-01124 Applicant: Charles Joseph Associates Initial Study Prepared by: Donald Granger Date: January 17, 2006 Mitigation Measures . Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method . . . Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance Aesthetics A Photometric diagram shall be submitted and approved CP B Review of Plans C 2,4 prior to Building Permit issuance demonstrating that illumination from the project is confined within the project's boundaries and meets the City's foot candle requirements. Air Quality All construction equipment shall be maintained in good CP C Review of plans A/C 2/4 operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. Prior to the issuance of any Grading Permits, the CP/BO C Review of plans C 2 developer shall submit construction plans to City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning Staff. 1 of 10 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of of Verif led Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date Anitials Non-Compliance All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed CP C Review of plans A/C 2/4 performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards BO B Review of plans A/C 2 noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 through seeding and watering. • Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in BO C Review of plans A 4 accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule established BO C During A 4 by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public construction thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., BO C During A 4 wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with construction SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils BO C During A 4 haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other Construction suitable means. 2of10 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible g of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verif ication Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During A 4 soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and construction Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce PM,o emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. Chemical soil stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and BO C During A 4 RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean BO C Review of plans A/C 4 alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. The construction contractor shall ensure that BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 construction-grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. All industrial and commercial facilities shall post signs BO C Review of plans A 4 requiring that trucks shall not be left idling for prolonged periods (i.e., in excess of 10 minutes). All industrial and commercial facilities shall designate CP C Review of plans A/C 2/3 preferential parking for vanpools. All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or CP C Review of plans D 2/3 more employees shall be required to post both bus and Metrolink schedules in conspicuous areas. All industrial and commercial site tenants with 50 or CP C Review of plans D 2/3 more employees shall be required to configure their operating schedules around the Metrolink schedule to the extent reasonably feasible. All residential and commercial structures shall be BO C/D Review of plans C 2/4 required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating,air conditioning,appliances,and water heaters. All residential and commercial structures shall be BO C/D Review of plans C 2/4 required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. 3 of 10 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible . . of Verif led Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verif ication Date/initials Non-Compliance Cultural Resources If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during grading,the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will: • Enact interim measures to protect undesignated CP/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 sites from demolition or significant modification Without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to require CP/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. Pursue educating the public about the area's CP/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 archaeological heritage. Propose mitigation measures and recommend CP/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 conditions of approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA guidelines. Prepare a technical resources management report, CP C Review of report A/D 3/4 documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report,with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. 4 of 10 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal CP B Review of report A/D 4 fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and CP B Review of report A/D 4 equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. Should fossils be found within an area being cleared BO B/C Review of report A/D 4 or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • Prepare, identify,and curate all recovered fossils for CP D Review of report D 3 documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). Submit summary report to City of Rancho CP C Review of report A/D 3/4 Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. Geology and Soils The site shall be treated with water or other soil- BO C During A 4 stabilizing agent(approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) construction daily to reduce PM,o emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 5 of 10 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a BO C During A 4 schedule established by the City to reduce PM10 construction emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. Grading operations shall be suspended when wind BO C During A 4 speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10 emissions construction from the site during such episodes. Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and BO C During A 4 RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. Hydrology and Water Quality Prior to issuance of Grading Permits, the permit BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 applicant shall submit to Building Official for approval, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 �rading?lan,and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. Thislrosion %ontrol7lan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in Southern California,and b)An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off- site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 6of10 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible . . of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance During construction, temporary berms such as BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. During construction, to remove pollutants, street BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Associated Engineers, June 9, 2005, to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. Landscaping plans shall include provisions for BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years,shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. Ponding areas on the south side of the project are CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 depressed to promote the retention and infiltration of treated runoff and irrigation water. Rooftops drain to landscaping prior to entering storm CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 drain system. Collection inlets provided with trash guard/grate. CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 Rinker Stormcepter installed to treat water before CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 entering infiltration area. 7 of 10 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verif ication Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance Prior to issuance of Building Permits,the applicant shall CE B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs)that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. Prior to issuance of qrading or Paving �ermits, BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 applicant shall obtain a Netice of Intent(NOI)to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Noise Exterior: An 8-foot high masonry wall shall be CP B/C/D Review of plans A,C 2,4 bonstructed along the north property line in order to provide a sound attenuation and privacy between the single-family dwelling units to the north and the project. JatetioL All south facing windows and glass doors in the CP B/C/D Review of plans A,C 2,4 hotel building shall have an STC rating of 32 or greater. A final acoustical report shall be submitted for City CP B Review of plans A,C 2,4 Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. The final report shall discuss the level of interior noise attenuation to below 40 dBA for the hotel rooms, the building materials and construction techniques required. The building plans will be checked for conformance with the mitigation measures contained in the final report. 8 of 10 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Implementing Action for Monitoring . .n Date/initials Non-Comp Construction or grading shall not take place between the BO C During A 2,4 hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, construction including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the BO C During A 4 standards specified in Development Code Section construction 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. The developer shall hire a donsultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. The perimeter block wall shall-be-constructed as early CP C During A 2,4 as possible in first phase. construction Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the PO/BO C During A 4/7 hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, construction including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site),then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. 9 of 10 Key to Checklist Abbreviations Responsible Person Monitoring Frequency Method of Verification Sanctions CDD-Community Development Director or designee A-With Each New Development A-On-site Inspection 1 -Withhold Recordation of Final Map CP-City Planner or designee B-Prior To Construction B-Other Agency Permit/Approval 2-Withhold Grading or Building Permit CE-City Engineer or designee C-Throughout Construction C-Plan Check 3-Withhold Certificate of Occupancy BO-Building Official or designee D-On Completion D-Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/Plans) 4-Stop Work Order PO-Police Captain or designee E-Operating 5-Retain Deposit or Bonds FC-Fire Chief or designee 6-Revoke CUP 7-Citation 10 of 10