Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012/06/13 - Agenda Packet - PC j THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION Lt; J AGENDA NCHO CR MONGA JUNE 13, 2012 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Council Chambers 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL To ORDER Roll Call Chairman Munoz_ Vice Chairman Howdyshell _ Fletcher_ Wimberly _ Oaxaca _ • I II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 23, 2012 Regular Meeting Minutes III. PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items are public hearings in which concerned individuals may voice their opinion of the related project. Please wait to be recognized by the Chairman and address the Commission by stating your name and address. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 - K.U. & ASSOCIATES: A proposal to subdivide a vacant parcel of about 146,000 square feet(3.4 acres) into five (5) lots in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Development Review DRC2009-00010, Variance DRC2010-00963, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00964. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010- K.U. &ASSOCIATES -A review of five (5) single-family residences that will be constructed in conjunction with a proposed • 1 of 5 1��1 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA JUNE 13, 2012 RANCr1O CUCAhfONGA subdivision in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place -APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Variance DRC2010-00963, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00964. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2010-00963 - K.U. &ASSOCIATES-A request for a Variance to allow a reduction in the lot depth (from the required 200 foot minimum to about 135 feet) for two (2) lots of a proposed 5-lot subdivision in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00964. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT • DRC2010-00964 - K.U. & ASSOCIATES - A request to remove one (1) tree in conjunction with a 5-lot subdivision and construction of five (5) single-family residences on a property located in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225- 181-73. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010, and Variance DRC2010-00963. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826-RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. -A request to subdivide a vacant parcel of about 83,000 square feet (1.91-acre) into eight (8) lots in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of Interstate 15 - APN: 0227-012-24. Related file: Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927 and Variance DRC2012-00127. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2012-00127 - RBF ASSOCIATES - A request to allow walls in excess of 6 feet, the maximum wall height permitted in residential districts,for noise attenuation and soil retaining purposes along the perimeter of a proposed subdivision • 2 of 5 • r- PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Ls JUNE 13, 2012 RANCHO CUCAMONGA of a property of about 83,000 square feet (1.91-acre) into eight (8) lots in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of Interstate 15 -APN: 0227-012- 24.Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826, Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927, and Stockpile Permit PMT2011-02122. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2011-00927 - RBF ASSOCIATES -A request to remove six (6) or more trees in conjunction with a proposed subdivision o a parcel of 83,000 square feet(1.91 acre) in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of Interstate 15 - APN: 0227-012-24. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826, Variance DRC2012-00127, and Stockpile Permit PMT2011-02122. Staff • has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. IV. PUBLIC COMMENTS This is the time and place for the general public to address the commission. Items to be discussed here are those that do not already appear on this agenda. V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/COMMENTS VI. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission has adopted Administrative Regulations that set an 11:00 p.m. adjournment time. If items go beyond that time, they shall be heard only with the consent of the Commission. I, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 7, 2012, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. • 3 of 5 l 0 ' PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA L JUNE 13, 2012 RANCHO CUCAMONGA 0 If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position,you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. • Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under"Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. The deadline for submitting these items is 6:00 p.m. Tuesday, one week prior to the meeting. The Planning Commission Secretary receives all such items. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of$2,216 for maps and$2,328 for all other decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). • 4 of 5 bon PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA L-; JUNE 13, 2012 RANCHO CUCAMONGA Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us • • 5 of 5 , Vicinity Map Planning Commission Meeting June 13 , 2012 E, F, and G A, B, C, and D r. rnj .i c c 0 w c mss.._. i - — E o > a I a i C E d u x i m 0 t! S___1S ,�l1 Ilt giaN 19th St ■ el MI SE I Base Line tc —!- Base Line AI C,urch '4USI 1P IMIS Church ti ` � l ,-� �t=oothill- , Foothill S c r� 1 m m w Arrow 2 E d = e Arrow m Jersey -E 3 i 8th o m w _ i > T ( " M c9 6th • — d ! 8t W N L > 4th < x x rL 4th A 0 * Meeting Location: • City Hall 10500 Civic Center Drive I . . CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Regular Meeting May 23 2012 Chairman Munoz called the Regular Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission to order at 7:35 p.m. The meeting was held in the Council Chambers at Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. ROLL CALL COMMISSIONERS: PRESENT: Richard Fletcher, Frances Howdyshell, Lou Munoz, Francisco Oaxaca ABSENT: Ray Wimberly STAFF PRESENT: Candyce Burnett, Senior Planner; Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer; Jerry Dyer, Senior Civil Engineer;Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner; Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary; Jeffrey Bloom, Interim Planning Director * * * * * ANNOUNCEMENTS • None APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion: Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 4-0-1 (Wimberly absent),to approve the minutes of May 9, 2012. * * * * * PUBLIC HEARINGS A. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT DRC2010-00571 AND ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL PLAN PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT(FPEIR) (SCH#2000061027)-CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA—A comprehensive update to the Development Code including a request to replace Title 17 (Development Code), modify Chapter 2.24 (Historic Preservation), modify Chapter 1.12 (Penalties, Administrative and Civil Remedies and General Provisions), delete Chapter 5.12 (Regulation of Entertainment), delete Title 14(Signs), delete Chapter 19.08 (Tree Preservation) and other clarifying amendments of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code as well as a proposed addendum to the General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR). This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. B. DEVELOPMENT FEE SCHEDULE 2012-CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA-Consideration • of a proposal to establish new development fees for Planning services as a result of the creation of new application types in the comprehensive update to the Development Code (DRC2010-00571). This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. F . . p Jennifer Nakamura, Associate Planner, presented the staff report and a PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). In response to Commissioner Fletcher, Steven Flower,Assistant City Attorney said that the definition i for an assembly use applies to both religious and non-religious groups and treats them equally. (Definitions found on Page 113 of the agenda packet). In response to Commissioner Oaxaca, Ms. Nakamura said that the implementation of the new Code gives the opportunity for large retail property owners to amend their current signage package. She said commercial centers with a Uniform Sign Program would need to pay the modification fee and apply for the requested changes. In response to Vice Chairman Howdyshell, Ms. Nakamura said wind turbines are one of those uses that are on the horizon but are not specifically designated as a land use. She said staff wants to address this but we are not ready to provide recommendations. She said it will be included on the annual work plan that will include such items. She said the existing wind turbine is located in what has been deemed a utility facility. In response to Commissioner Fletcher, Ms. Nakamura said, if a use is similar to one found in the code, the Planning Director can review it and make a determination. Some uses may be totally unlike any other use and then it would be not allowed. It would require the passage of an amendment for the use to be allowed. She said new types of uses are always surfacing. In response to Chairman Munoz, Ms. Nakamura indicated that because of feedback received,future wind turbines may have to be brought forward to the Commission for review. She said with respect to the issue of medical care versus extended care, staff continues to work with applicants to help them work though the layers of zoning in the Haven Overlay. She said general medical care has been reinstated to the Haven Overlay. • In response to Commissioner Fletcher, Ms. Nakamura said some changes in the Land Use Table may create some non-conforming uses. She said there will be unintended consequences and we may have to come back and make changes; it will take time for all the issues to shake out. In response to Commissioner Fletcher, the decision to only allow hot food trucks with a permit for special events was to protect the brick and mortar restaurants/businesses. She said pre-packaged food trucks will still be allowed to operate as before. Chairman Munoz opened the public hearing. Luana Hernandez asked if staff deleted the Tree Preservation section. She mentioned a parking lot issue at Bank of the West adjacent to the JC Penny outlet store. Ms. Nakamura said Tree Preservation has been moved to be incorporated into Title 17 - the Development Code. Ed Dietl asked what a stakeholder is and how are they determined. He asked for clarification regarding the modification to Chapter 2.24 of the Municipal Code (Historic Preservation). Chairman Munoz closed the public hearing. Ms. Nakamura said the existing Historic Preservation Ordinance is being incorporated into the Development Code so that all requirements are there in one place. She said this is also true with signs and tree preservation. She said no changes were made to the Historic Ordinance; only the numbers changed. With respect to stakeholders, they are people from the community that have a • voice and provide great input such as real estate agents/brokers, sign companies, Chamber of Planning Commission Minutes -2- May 23, 2012 Commerce representatives, and the business community. She said the historic groups were also invited and PMC held the interviews and they talked about what they felt was important in the Code • towards goals and objectives. She said they were asked for comment at the beginning and at the end of the process. Chairman Munoz pointed out that we are all stakeholders and the City had many public meetings and invited the public to comment several times on the Code update. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney said that all the law requires is two public hearings here and again before the City Council. He said everything else was extra effort to go above and well beyond the requirement and still one more public hearing remains. Pam Johns, PMC stated that once they heard from the stakeholders, then vetted their comments with scorecards given to the general public; it was a thoughtful process. Chairman Munoz stated that the information was shared broadly. Vice Chairman Howdyshell said it was a great report and thanked staff and the consultant. Commissioner Oaxaca agreed and said he is glad to see that the City is taking a look at the fee schedule particularly a fee based on time and modified permitting fees. He complimented the efforts. Commissioner Fletcher agreed and said staff did an excellent job; there was an extra effort to get input. He commented on who stakeholders are and their function in the process. He said he supports the idea that the document will be reviewed on an ongoing basis as this is a big improvement to our current process. • Chairman Munoz said that they regularly use the drawings at the DRC. He thanked staff for all that was done in only a year and noted that such a short timeframe is very unusual. He offered kudos to all. Motion: Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Oaxaca, to adopt the Resolution Recommending approval of DRC2010-00571 and the associated Addendum to the EIR to be sent to the City Council for final action carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, OAXACA NOES: NONE ABSENT: WIMBERLY - carried DIRECTOR'S REPORTS C. CONSIDERATION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012/2013 Jerry Dyer, Senior Civil Engineer presented the staff report and noted that several informational sheets have been placed before the Commissioners for their review and consideration. In response to Vice Chairman Howdyshell, Mr. Dyer said the trail priorities recommended by the Trails Advisory Committee are located in the Beautification section. In response to Commissioner Oaxaca, Mr. Dyer said the Base Line interchange has been in process a long time. He said it was slated for funding by the RDA but now those funds have been taken away and we are unsure if we will have • funds. In response to Commissioner Fletcher, Mr. Dyer said 47 million is a little less than average Planning Commission Minutes -3- May 23, 2012 . , • funding and beautification projects suffered the most. He said the City is still seeking grant funding to move forward with these projects. Commissioner Fletcher said it is good to see the continued effort to keep the high quality of streets. • Chairman Munoz offered kudos for the good staff report. Chairman Munoz opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no comment, closed the public hearing. Mr. Flower clarified that the Commission is being asked to determine if the findings of the CIP is consistent with the General Plan. Motion: Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Oaxaca, 4-0-1 (Wimberly absent)to find the Capital Improvement Program to be consistent with the General Plan by minute action. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: FLETCHER, HOWDYSHELL, MUNOZ, OAXACA, NOES: NONE ABSENT: WIMBERLY - carried PUBLIC COMMENTS None COMMISSION BUSINESS AND COMMENTS • Chairman Munoz asked staff to look into the parking lot situation mentioned by Luana Hernandez. Vice Chairman Howdyshell said she attended the Local History Night at the Library last Friday. She said it was a very nice, well attended event. She noted the Maloof exhibit. Commissioner Fletcher said he too attended and the exhibits were really nice. . . . , , ADJOURNMENT Motion: Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 4-0-1 (Wimberly absent),to adjourn. The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Approved: • Planning Commission Minutes -4- May 23, 2012 STAFF REPORT liii' PLANNING DEPARTMENT L% Date: June 13, 2012 RANCHO To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA From: Jeffrey A. Bloom, Interim Planning Director By: Mike Smith, Associate Planner Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 - K.U. & ASSOCIATES - A proposal to subdivide a vacant parcel of approximately 146,000 square feet (3.4 acres) into five (5) lots in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Development Review DRC2009-00010, Variance DRC2010-00963, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00964. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 - K.U. & ASSOCIATES: A review of five (5) single-family residences that will be constructed in conjunction with a proposed subdivision in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda • Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Variance DRC2010-00963, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00964. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2010-00963 - K.U. & ASSOCIATES - A request for a Variance to allow a reduction in the lot depth (from the required 200-foot minimum to approximately 135 feet) for two (2) lots of a proposed 5-lot subdivision in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00964. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2010-00964 - K.U. & ASSOCIATES - A request to remove one (1) tree in conjunction with a 5-lot subdivision and construction of five (5) single-family residences on a property located in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010, and Variance DRC2010-00963. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. • RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010, Variance DRC2009-00963, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2009-00964 by adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with Conditions and issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. Items A, B, C, & D PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18747, DRC2009-00010, DRC2010-00963, AND DRC2010-00964 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 2 • PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Single-Family Residences; Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan South - Single-Family Residences; Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan East - Single-Family Residence and Telephone Company Facility; Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan West - Single-Family Residences; Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan B. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Very Low Residential North - Very-Low Residential South - Very Low Residential • East - Very Low Residential West - Very Low Residential • C. Site Characteristics: The project site is a vacant parcel with an area of approximately 146,000 square feet (3.4 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 442 feet (east to west) by approximately 331 feet (north to south) (Exhibit B). There is one tree within the project site and several others off-site along the south property line. To the north, west, and south of the project site are single-family residences. To the east there is a single-family residence and a telephone company facility. The only street access to the property is via Arapaho Road, which terminates at the midpoint of the west property line of the site. Adjacent and parallel to the north • property line is a Community Trail of approximately 20 feet in width, while adjacent and parallel to the west property line is a local equestrian trail 15 feet in width. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. The subject property is generally level with a southeasterly slope; the elevations at the northwest and southeast corners are approximately 1,462 feet and 1,448 feet, respectively. ANALYSIS: • A. General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into five (5) lots for single-family residential development and construct five (5) single-family residences (Exhibit C). With the exception of the lot depths of two (2) of the proposed lots, all lots will comply with the development standards applicable to this zoning district as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Individual lot areas will range between 20,494 square feet and 30,051 square feet, which are in excess of the minimum of 20,000 square feet that is required. The minimum average lot area is 25,835 square feet which is in excess of the minimum 25,000 that is required. The depth (measured east to west) of Lots 2 through 4 will be at least 200 feet, as required, while the depth (measured north to south) of Lots 1 and 5 will be approximately 135 feet. As Lots 1 and 5 will not comply with the required minimum lot depth, the applicant has submitted a Variance to allow a reduction in this dimension (Related file: Variance DRC2011-00963). The width of each lot will meet the required 90-foot dimension. All lots will be generally conventional, i.e. rectangular in shape, which will allow conventional house plotting. Included in the proposal is the extension of Arapaho Road that will terminate in a cul-de-sac. As the subject property is located within the Equestrian Overlay, each lot will have a dedicated • corral area of 24 feet by 24 feet for horse-keeping, and equestrian trails will be provided along the rear of each lot. A 15-foot wide local equestrian trail will be constructed. This trail will be aligned A,B,C & D- 2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18747, DRC2009-00010, DRC2010-00963, AND DRC2010-00964 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 3 along the east side, and part of the south side, of the project site to provide a connection to the existing Community Trail for Lots 2 through 5. Access to the Community Trail from Lot 1 will be direct as the rear of that lot is contiguous with it (Exhibit I). In conjunction with the tentative tract map, the applicant proposes to construct a single-family residence on each lot for a total of five (5) single-family residences (Exhibits E, F, and G). The houses on Lots 1 and 5 will be single-story, while the houses on Lots 2, 3, and 4 will be two-story. This mix of single and two-story homes is consistent with the policy adopted by the Planning Commission requiring that 25 percent (minimum) of the proposed houses must be single-story. The architecture of each house will be consistent with the general design requirements outlined in the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Each house will incorporate traditional materials to varying degrees. A combination of stone veneer and wood siding (or stucco) will be applied to the houses. Stone veneer will be applied on all elevations of each house. It will also be applied extensively on the chimneys, at the main entrances, and on vertical elements such as patio posts. Wood siding, on the houses that will have it, will also be applied to all elevations of each house. The roofing will be concrete tile. Each house will have a well articulated footprint/floor plan and profile, i.e. neither the footprints nor profiles will be square or boxlike. Because the footprints and profiles of each house are varied, there is a substantial amount of movement in the wall planes and roof lines. Projections such as prominent chimneys and dormers and a mix of hip and gable roofs will provide additional interest in • the profile of each house. Each house will also have large solid or lattice patios and balconies on the two-story houses. There will also be details such as wood brackets at the roof eaves, wall-mounted light fixtures, decorative trim around the windows, molding along the top of the stone veneer wainscots, and decorative wood garage and entry doors. B. Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was conducted to gather input and comments from the owners of the surrounding properties within 660 feet of the project site. This meeting was held at the Goldy S. Lewis Community Center (Central Park), Cucamonga Room on February 28, 2012, (Exhibit J). Several individuals from the surrounding community attended. Although none of them had any specific objections to the project, there were questions relating to the height of the homes on Lots 1 and 5, construction-related fugitive dust and dirt, storm water drainage, and equestrian trail maintenance. The applicant confirmed that the house on Lots 1 and 5 will be single-story. Staff added that the project complies with the City policy, applicable to new residential subdivisions, requiring a minimum of 25 percent of the housing stock to be single-story. To control construction-related fugitive dust and dirt, staff stated that there are mitigation measures that must be followed by the developers such as the use of a water truck to stabilize soil and prevent it from becoming airborne, the cessation of construction during strong winds, and a variety of barriers to prevent water runoff. The principal means for preventing dirt from entering the street is to require construction vehicles to drive over corrugated steel panels and gravel that will shake the dirt off of the tires of these vehicles. Storm water drainage from the project site would be directed to either a catch basin at the end of the cul-de-sac or directed to drainage facilities that would connect to East Avenue (via an existing drainage easement). Maintenance of the local equestrian trail that will be constructed with this project will be the responsibility of the new property owners as this type of trail is a private easement across their property. C. Grading and Technical Review Committees: The Grading Review (Addington and Miller) and Technical Review Committees reviewed the application on March 6, 2012. The Committees A,B,C & D- 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18747, DRC2009-00010, DRC2010-00963, AND DRC2010-00964 - K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 4 • accepted the proposal and recommend approval. Their conditions have been incorporated into the Resolution of Approval. D. Design Review Committees: The Design Review Committee (Howdyshell, Wimberly, and Granger) reviewed the application on March 6, 2012 (Exhibit K). They noted that the configuration of the subdivision was the result of the site being surrounded by existing development, i.e. it is an "in-fill" project site. Nevertheless, they recognized that it was well designed for the location as the lots were larger than required, and that the proposed setbacks of the houses will be in excess of the minimum setbacks applicable to the zoning district of the project site. Staff explained the circumstances for why Lots 1 and 5 do not comply with the minimum lot depth; the Committee recognized that physical limitations on the site preclude practical alternatives. The architecture of the houses was praised for incorporating the design features that-convey-the-characteristics-of--- • - Etiwanda. They also praised them for being consistent with the design goals and policies of the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission including "360-degree architecture" and extensive use of high-quality materials, and for its general consistency with the surrounding community. The Committee accepted the proposal and recommends approval. The Committee's conditions have been incorporated into the Resolution of Approval. E. Trails Advisory Committee: The Trails Advisory Committee reviewed the application on March 14, 2012 (Exhibit L). In general, the Committee reviewed the proposed subdivision and accepted it as submitted subject to the addition of doublewide access gates at Lots 2 through 5 and a slight shift in the placement of the vehicle access gate that will be located where the equestrian • trail between Lots 4 and 5 terminates at Arapaho Road. The Committee's conditions have been incorporated into the Resolution of Approval. F. Variance DRC2009-00963: The applicant submitted a Variance to allow the lot depth of two (2) of the proposed lots, Lots 1 and 5, to be less than the minimum lot depth of 200 feet as required per the Etiwanda Specific Plan, Figure 5-2 (Exhibit M). Lots 1 and 5 will be at the north and south sides, respectively, of the proposed extension of Arapaho Road. The applicant proposes a lot depth of approximately 135 feet for these two lots. Both of these lots will be approximately 180 feet wide and approximately 200 feet at their respective front and rear property lines; both of these dimensions exceed the minimum required lot width of 90 feet. The lot areas for Lots 1 and 5 will be 25,910 and 24,309 square feet, respectively. The required minimum lot area is 20,000 square feet. Although the proposed lots will have a greater width relative to depth, no changes in the minimum setbacks are requested nor required. Also, the proposed setbacks for each of the subject lots will be defined normally, i.e. the location of the required front, rear, and side yards will be similar to that of conventional lots. Facts for Findings: The purpose of a Variance is to provide flexibility from the strict application of development standards. In order to grant a request for a Variance, the Planning Commission must make a series of findings. Generally, these findings focus on unique or special circumstances applicable to a specific property. The following are facts to support the necessary findings: 1. Finding: That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objective of this Code. Facts: The proposed residential subdivision is an in-fill project with limited reasonable lot • configuration options. The overall north to south dimension of the project site is A,B,C & D- 4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18747, DRC2009-00010, DRC2010-00963, AND DRC2010-00964— K.U. &ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 5 approximately 331 feet. If it was possible to not have a public street serve the subdivision, Lots 1 and 5 would still be only approximately 165 feet in depth and an associated result would be that Lots 2 through 4 would have no direct access to a public street, which is not a permissible condition. The project site is bound on all sides by existing development. Therefore, there is no opportunity to acquire additional land, specifically to the north or the south, which would allow Lots 1 and 5 to be greater in depth. Reducing the number of lots to allow for greater lot size is not reasonable as most of the proposed lots are already significantly larger than the minimum required for this development district. 2. Finding : That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or the intended use of the property that -do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. Fact/s: The project site is located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road approximately 200 feet east of the intersection of that street with Choctaw Place. The project site is bound to the north, south, and west by existing residential development and associated improvements. The extension of Arapaho Road will generally bisect the project site. Alternate alignments of the proposed extension such as shifting it further south or north are not possible because of the limits imposed by technical standards for street design including minimum dimensions for street width, curve radii, and cul-de-sacs. The project site was part of a larger parcel that was partially • developed with a telephone switching facility on the east side. In May 2006, the larger parcel was subdivided into two (2) parcels. The part of the property that was developed with the telephone switching facility became a separate parcel, while the larger, undeveloped part of the property was sold to the current owner (the applicant). As the telephone facility occupies the entire smaller parcel, it was not possible at the time of the subdivision, nor is it possible now, to consider the option of a street connecting the project site with East Avenue that, in turn, could have provided the applicant the opportunity to propose an alternate subdivision design. 3. Finding: That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same zone. Facts: The overall dimensions of the project site are approximately 442 feet (east to west) by approximately 331 feet (north to south). Requiring that all lots be 200 feet in depth would necessitate a re-design of the subdivision. This would cause a different set of challenges. All lots must have public street access and the extension of Arapaho Road will be an east to west direction. In order for the depth of each lot to be 200 feet, the long axis of all lots, i.e. the axis along where the lot depth is measured, also would have to be in an.east to west direction. The only way to reasonably accomplish this would be to eliminate one of the lots. However, the result would be excessively large lots relative to the existing properties in the neighborhood and the development district in general. Furthermore, the orientation of the long axis would not match the long axis of the other properties within the • existing residential development to the west that have primary frontage along Arapaho Road. This will affect the location of, or preclude altogether, A,B,C & D- 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18747, DRC2009-00010, DRC2010-00963, AND DRC2010-00964— K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 6 • improvements such as room additions and accessory structures as the setbacks would be oriented differently as well. 4. Finding: That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone. Fact/s: The principal purpose of the minimum lot depth standard is to allow horse keeping, while still maintaining a minimum separation of 70 feet between horse corrals (or similar equestrian facilities) and dwellings on neighboring properties per Section 17.08.030(E)(2)(b) of the Development Code. The reduction in the depth of the subject lots from 200 feet to 135 feet will not be in conflict with this requirement as it will be off-set by the width of each lot. Each, lot will be an average of approximately 190 feet wide; the minimum lot width in this development district is 90 feet. Also, the potential homes on the subject lots will be required to comply, and will comply as proposed by the applicant, with all applicable minimum setbacks. Similarly, the opportunity to have horse keeping will continue to be available. Horse corral locations are proposed at the northeast and southeast quadrants of Lots 1 and 5, respectively, and will be at least 70 feet from the nearest existing neighboring dwellings and the proposed dwellings on Lots 2 through 4. Lastly, Lots 1 and 5 will be 25,910 and 24,309 square feet in area, respectively, which will exceed the minimum lot area of 20,000 square feet applicable to the development district of the site. 5. Finding: The granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or • welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. Fact/s: The reduced depth of the subject lots will not affect the neighboring properties and/or property owners. Practical differences in the physical attributes/characteristics between the lots in the surrounding area and the subject lots will be limited. All proposed structures on each lot will comply with the applicable setbacks; the applicant is not requesting any modifications to the rear or front setbacks. Although the subject lots will be approximately 135 feet in depth, they will be approximately 190 feet in width. Therefore, the separation between structures and common property lines will be consistent with existing residential development within this development district. The floor area (including the garage) of each of the proposed single-story homes on the subject lots will be generally equal to the floor areas of the surrounding homes. The overall floor area of the homes on Lots 1 and 5 will be 5,198 and 3,870 square feet, respectively. Similarly, the overall area of Lots 1 and 5 will be 25,910 and 24,309 square feet, respectively; the lot areas of the neighboring properties to the west at 13186 Arapaho Road and at 6323 Choctaw Place are 22,165 and 21,168 square feet, respectively. G. Tree Removal Permit DRC2009-00964: The proposed project includes the removal of one (1) Blue Gum Eucalyptus tree that is located in the general area where the house on Lot 1 is proposed to be constructed. This tree is the only tree within the property. The applicant has submitted a Tree Removal Permit for the removal of this tree. A replacement tree, of the same species or similar • and of a minimum size of 15 gallons, will be required to be planted elsewhere within Lot 1. • A,B,C & D- 6 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18747, DRC2009-00010, DRC2010-00963, AND DRC2010-00964 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 7 • H. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, Staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to, for example, air quality (including greenhouse gases), biological resources, and hydrology/water quality there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the mitigation measures for the project. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. No correspondence has been received. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010, Variance DRC2009-00963, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2009-00964 by adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with conditions and issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. Respectfully submitted, • Jeffrey A. B oom Interim Planning Director JAB:MS/ge Attachments: Exhibit A - Location Map Exhibit B - Aerial Photo Exhibit C - Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747 Exhibit D - Grading Plan and Sections Exhibit E - Site Plan Exhibit F - Floor and Roof Plans Exhibit G - Elevations Exhibit H - Landscape Plans Exhibit I - Site Plan - Horse Corrals and Trails Exhibit J - Neighborhood Meeting Sign-In Sheet and Summary Exhibit K - Design Review Committee Action Comments, dated March 6, 2012 Exhibit L - Trails Advisory Committee Action Comments, dated March 14, 2012 Exhibit M - Figure 5-2 (Etiwanda Specific Plan) Exhibit N - Site Plan for Variance DRC2011-00963 Exhibit 0 - Initial Study Parts I and II Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747 Draft Resolution of Approval for Development Review DRC2009-00010 • Draft Resolution of Approval for Variance DRC2009-00963 Draft Resolution of Approval for Tree Removal Permit DRC2009-00964 A,B,C & D- 7 ,f 1 ° `'„. a !I aj° g •• q <Rff.e 'Y • q 9 ,;.a. pe � 4 ° � . ' t °° j FIRE STATION i € q � � PROJECT SITE .. a �i4t� - 4 N06 4EYyv3_, M I JI "C 3;-4 j �•,; I Mr S 1 _ r .s ,. 6 I , c. :¢ 1 4 p7� £ -v--�,L,e. S-- I °3 1 1 k�n^ .�. a-,' ! 6 3 P ..f Lim,� :I� .— .�' °°. ` �W..I 3 am C 1 'Tart p f1lMLM P ,W.. 3ne..4TY'k,�.' _.' ,� 5 MR 1 �� 9 e PT ,w„{ -I . 5 ° ••• -i CHAFFEY-ISLE pp F Rev exrA M 6 j rs R 3 c wMU it E 1 +T }f ✓✓' E r--;-.,'p n' > i {p . () ] NRER.Ed R HOUSE ,,� , , fj 6 ' '. ,. ' Q{{��I yn, '� ., 5 I k 9 E , L { C �•: f 'F4;4> 15 , ',m 4� 1' � 4,aU 1{Ii i [ r l .. l , �°a S t ` i d F '"R '`e,l - FIRE STATION eaf E i n 'I i 1 1 p SOT.✓ ' q l'‘‘.! '8 u.9 1fl 'rr:r! ./I”'X;1�� i p s 2 (F a OH USE ,;yye- t I 4 a 1 ' i woo EUNERD I r • R F HISiORIL y J• .. °I.^....wn WINER; 5{ 1 y {, ��-YYY I }} , sex ET. r A 't.• N`'.. Vx Sd° * ^ e ''''.1 ' � \ ` q q .,., '▪ ea r 1..- ,.,.nom i .r..�4 f i F s ,: C. �' .r.., P � Fi ° ` "' g 0•IPR1A GARDEN E, f . I r S q ! 'tiulWl� I ; I. CENTEp NY 4NEI. 4 -• ,F. Eltau �Z f ..-' I s.-° „ 71. t7 IT PRO ' l 1 w.:75" ei de a....e.. 1 y yp�l..l j 1 HOP Tr=y a _ I---, i ,;.---- i tar 1 4 HOTELd a 1II'''�P $1)j. ]..- i ! CI ¢k • MI EXHIBIT A I f �v A,B,C & D— 8 i ARROW PT IliX Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010 Variance DRC2011 -00963, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011 -00964 ��t.M C :: _ 6p 5'1 r. k•'," I' v J- j^Jl o.-T:T. +a� f •1.' Sri^ 5 VP.' �,. • E �I a i v�r F 7 � E Pr 1.• t \9� T' t { i � .t ( +. � rf�t. :. irk M � ' 1', 4' x' .. I{M14J' '.� a C y t6• irtF - - - - wnA.+- i +,,:ice P- ' p_' ., �3 Jit� - - - axi6.vRt J! v: ' LL r r ' 17,. f ' 1 J.'r1n� Proji t - o'ff. '[+X :fir f!'{y , ' 7'.,;'::.1' .. y - Sift- y�� -..�qa(c Y,— . AS.. _ 4• ' '•:. { rSS £. W.r_"::::_j_ ' , et:411; ii.3/4 1 . .., , ±"c T . Y L s :� 9 f l �" �t?': iA- r ,�,q L Al LP ti JF tit 11 ap r ya Wes'., 1 c +.1 j'f- . A` c p .r .y4 1i� ._. R - : _ � r4 vt�� � . �` . 44 \J-. Y rF = EXHIBIT B 0+.\ arat dVN lOtltll 31N1Vocay — .+e E^ aw'�wmpau»t t 3 a I-_ M8M lie ' wumns s sum a f P s i l$ .9. lf�ly �OV �q� 0�9 r-212 8gi i € P `.', ,PC� f g.,i c ' fa In f9 a 1e I °^RJI$I a g °-c ° se @ei9€ t5 5 ".:.`.:"eat K �� 4f'� fl e 1 w °—' �:- as ppSE:° e5� i t yO giE 1^ PQ. @ e e 47 m 's gFa xRC.a° -lei 64 e, ill r ..awl rtggP� 9fl g f f f c QQa §�� ep'4tpi ��3t; 1 1jgptlp2l2g e 3 2211 p pF tttt}} : I §p�25$2121 �33,i0 I IPI fSf$ LI II : ; - , ®e5 Z§§ 9910 Pq�' :�1-'. tlo36 P § I 'ni` 9 11 'ItIasiat 9I It \ 1 i .� J 5 ".. Z°.--• ?P :' 1I pf pf g1 o. Fi a �, 01 - �_�-� a � .�III v�A �' � i II- p I 3 r III_,, \\�\�\\ \,V.t&c' IWL �\\_\e �I\ S k p'q^ jr1 ' JIL.\, 1111 -,t r. A' I w fi I -+ ! k '`F v I Pp r �It III � ! �� :,.,15 i . _ - s. 1, 1 1 1 ilk p.--- 6[ ! ' d ` v - ' lil I� ! -J,a ' \\, Z 1 y \\ ._ 17i., V 1 , i i I . Iyv zo C1 L QCI i , r 4r. pz \_\ l 55. Q G + � fj.. S � _ __ i p8 E3 `.\ al'_ et, e CS? i `1 I i vj' __�' J k‘.1:411..w I, r:� 4 \�\,, v. a v z /(Q,/) !� 1 �I V: 7s ,� ;f tidy ii p� �Y\ J A ®�t ��" �� 3Vv 1 __ g H •BVP +C JAS l _ ..� ��`��At1{° 1 i VII Ti� '1, ilk Z ytiYA4ly ( , I �� \t' II •W ti sr ,. . ^ Y A , �`ih r� 'I I . I, m..c: a y 1 •1% 1 F o \•Lbi0.9 m. O '11 \t •• • ti ' _P-. Q 10.0.0.'6 _p, F t iiIII et Pr im w lI "'u c ,$4 'asa qb 1 PE i f f e t a 5q A iba TTp ftp 'it. L'dl 1 p°r, I , , I -C3 gie App PZ i� ?{i �� �f -/ r.... 'r ffd @SSS8a5a --'' kxti 11 ilk i�lti -. _ `. : 11 ap c IC EXHIBITC Iona 317019110 r OIClt Tnu�Fno — e+ � :2 .w r v m r r a o aw.IoT !9 a €t "... nm anwmv Jo oe ova .7 0 5 „an .50PULP.i MQM 1911 39 9101 a i / 9 s 7,71 • Alt . ti i' p t. e � h i - � § a y: / 'v I1 1.' 21i {qf AA I I II Y $ OIi :iill Z 1 9 .� l 2 i 1 1 :I N1 •ay9 �; �. 1,3 9999 a i.1 9 1 ft E a qZ s _ �I ' \ l9z• p's py �� c Q i. � Ei 11 !f i 111 h 1 0 • _ 1 s i i ?It V y 1 da di �S a z ~ p + 5 <- 1 :L o~. ,_Jl `5! I� Ii V o f� ! 8 i 1 . , 3a 9 9 e `.'' Z i i e 1 3 PAS ,.... + a !I i 11:51 A a gLO o °11 �� s a' �p l' 3 ILO � j a pi eeede h big ! _ � t7 €g j_ h 9 ':F k !I , !121, h§r! 1 x =l �M 9 4z `' 1'� h C ! 111 :a 9 4-"'✓ ` ii Fri r . +/) ai C e?y�� xaa El i£� c cl ji lil 3 + ' slit E� y 3 •a i—'. �- ��� .ii • }�j I Ye e" lib ss ✓ h s- g spa a'i Y�g�s c +` _y am :s . �' �l 6a� I'p a €" S €6 E%z h 3f� r3 ? (! 3jq PPPF[ E a `- 0 ' 11 EXHIBITD A,B,C & D- 11 ..In 1 r...,u�,�l I .'v rand 99van o V mann l■ILL8Ja100...._.. n slim 'a•,� w.. 1 1{, { seat.a vmnao Dana a `& 1 f, GYM avvmn O ne aam adoi .(acrim. mem ,m mI 0..'...' ltlWB09ID1 9101 9 1:011 e$ S q gg �8 S =sz t. iigb a gasey�:fftEAEas`a:@ iE ItIIi Ec I ! �:- m --.z= g -1 ; I I I I I : — a leers-----eaa 7 :. I 1 T• 1 I h / I I II 'allwwwwawsaw`.d I ' R. �wwiw tl .' / d I 1 I\ j'''" - �n=e..e I / - I k — I `? Et. �� _ F E I p n. n. h h I, �li;A, 1 1 II �Ix. I t$ dt . j° eg !/1\:".!I 1 J ¢ a g � y 1 �! E r 1 A ilil� a a.3. I it x v� :. e wvms`� �iy i1 14� °� - ' " , : v �� E �v � _It V/ � 1 s P'Ill _ E•t - i t 'I I I�'� { � �ti A�{ p 9 a� K / � a- •�jl 1. I- I 1111 I {II L' 1 J� t y/�e s -.^, 1 1A1, ■ �,.._' �1 gill I `` ,15 1 't !3,,,, r �! , ':'}, 9a` ` , .' to iiI y'� w t.'>-; i _:,,, s 1, gYgel _ e At pp r 1p g@@!'� } 1111; Il l l ii� , 2k1 'd 1 !{E6 -:1 ,j {rJ E � ;I FI'IL i urn A:ir �` =, • '111 �1 F �I , - I I 1L s+ 11. e I 1 I..,` ° I1 l i" I IN $i N ., 1. 1111 i 1 I. ° f 1 i� t I F I � I 11 t \ 8^ 11 14411 s _ Y St • 1 V ►g- (' � 1 i 1 i �� t! - 11 AEI t"J ` I n� I; 1 �. + a I _ 1II yyip I 1 i; 1 F 1-. j i d '' ,� I L f P' }f Iu • 11 1 I 11 \ fyh• 019,1 1/ ' I 1 411 1.1 1* L� :� � \ ^ !fit,. ` Lia s - s1 ��' i., �'_-/ -A - KK r@':". IA Ra' vQ k'Sri.__ AA`! . n /itk y, o kp ___ -^A33,--k.' ITT S Ci V 1 J_k_th f.I - A 2 1m_ I�P I a �[.• ` IL �- ; ' '\ A s 1 -_ - r j1 / ey ye I'i∎� 1t\ - . -�-�� �a,wzta ��� i DES � - 'v� � °� � I I } � � � s III,- 1 I� Imo, .1� II $ t, I� H. 11��. , v . ,,^sasaA:• PPP k' < 1 ICI ' I .I 1''` .,, 11 I 1 I IJ 1,%c• 1 V �I k � I 3 1 a pp , { 1 ..�a, � . . • J f- 4..e.a, I I III w.+mc„ „avocn w t°zusa.+n c-n..m.-;a Area. A,B,C & D- 12 ak r w Ld as m,..„,,,„.3„..,„,D 1 IA . o gi�y�ii���pgf € 1110 a s O ¢ w E '¢n soNloloN 7I E� p iRe Z _ y 3LINWONtlNtltlrvMtlO S VIVO VO3fOtld V X3ONI133H5 Il f8 IW voNomonoo«o,..n dVWALNIOIA•NV1d 311s 14iii'ppdg�:l ¢pgg'�' C ,� 5 ®0 { 3 A 59yg • , g 9yg oNIll3M0 AlIWtl+.3l`JNIS'SIMS n°. .n.:n yMir��I;YF1ia{ Eri P g p�o E55 p d i, � N �Y o:bm5o;xooxr,ru:uem '8ii 411 b9{1i1 9 A a a o[g A E��4 - ¢nn F aE1A bb �� 6 s m �i^• !O_$fl3 L .. _ Y Y b-g) e_ 3eflgg t5t5 z — aa.aA e 2 r5) uu:3 :3E y_ EEEE ill': S/ 1 E e : i s n Ckd4- 4 A a * Ie_ •� i,. • }L i 1' E ;ii!. [ pd 3 •5 �9! • RBeA g aaq �€EE6a a4 ; g.PE';"=,I 5156;¢ A;=a.ig F O§ A fl[ 11111 E F ,gl . F y 1 a . < 9e' _ aEAe Ae!!ga Edf 693: P-.p y A�3!iE� "g ose>-a Q 5 �eee�e poe !lje_>_g yi eoo'a \''''''''''' l''', aaaceaaevaae E' {S{ ga E g $$g ¢��Is 4. 11 � +a i = . ga i u .i. fi :r �::::: .............H::,., 5•:c . ,/ 5555 r,....5555 ..e•.-.....:.:.� D.x.. :'•' 1:;qg i ego■ b g 6 �l 14 .:i::i:i:S :::.a::::: f H < ::: a1 :w\I :..:, . .f ,g I � f a I a„ I I . � �. aI al: „ ait. I �! - :,i ' �a. a W 1 I� \ $ • 1 "1.s oo .'+bQI a.. u... .. �! "E -. 3 \\�..,. r yA_ S �° _ ® iji Ate._ r) JJJJ ���I 0 I� a��S B 0:115:5`: S$y3iS J:..i,.:.: `' $ J � P.\ tab AAAA n ., ®g i \ r : :—% Zi £ 1 I� I a\\ — nil a 1'� .... 41.:•::-:•:::::.. \ - 4 �'I� I. \ ;5 I A5 $aga ,0{ -a ... ...non to ,r" �re:.coN 'i j I ra 75^.5,5) ' b. w e ... - b.: - ..., t s_, EXHIBITE A,B,C & D- 13 a a� dau wne'e'm."Ainz" ?elpoips6�lg°F�e �`Q Wes I W 'an'SDNI% i P 9IQF �6 �Z r w 7 3N10WOIPVN.... ono p 3P9° N �' .V.3dA1 ' 1 910; pl��ei 9 �O L §S �W moo91CL ISI p Nn awo SMIld d008 B 8OOld p2 1pgpg @FpygieS#111 ' t" i i w 9� �.�.. ��i� �{d4eP �FFO �p a 5! �. m • oN nama Al1Mi MONIS'SIM s .-1,a., o. 4 BF Ff Y 4 s e¢W'-W f a 0,0;04.0,nuivarrs e e P∎; g %[g9 CadO444 "+I O�$ p p• r 3$.1'I II'. III©,1 / l Sr 0 , . .. sal ran 4 , 1 s r 'v ® ;se - . C r ` rill 1 L _J 1 ® ; 41 6666 • , ( a • "IJ L J i e r -� �_J - , Jr. L I ii J� • a 2 g EXHIBIT F A,B,C & D- 14 • FW _ 9 " . ob mus-uie�.'m.�.m� iFp ppiP°�1 1y9Pe! TW ®y�{I aI yy Nee w I 'JTS'JrvIPI� .� iP Yit731p1']��1$ I a;l 1 1 O z w g"_ y nLLOW0ilivs2 xro (0tlotlHIW).✓9.3dA1 l eY 4 hib :. " r .8.3dA1 MONO: L' x5 aW a $NV d dootl a 8001d gteBl��eg9! L EI{� W N w �� o<+mama Annra 3l'JNIS SAOls ,.�.. '9P P(��P BP£ P Y P j °p W Q Q o 80 . ..,...ans -....a. 11 f j I�e �a! ! 1 W 1 W 4 i Qp m • _ 1 ��e— e , IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII! g;d ,aA� IWO 1 i Y = = � �� csa I 11.-..-sa ;7. _ -iit via. g m al. 41 ii _ i vitgot _ _ir . I aJ 1 i � l . : lea- / ��� A I r L _ [ _ z isMITS s II 1.11r E E • re 2 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII , p,..... till. 1 � i ! ihip” c 6a tl 9 m m A,B,C & D- 15 P.§ d 53 nms atm."iv'.wt'�,3 SC Q° s @' N _- w f II r' < Z �r £or pe Q� 3131.3031010H,a,, P4;111140101 11e.Fe1V a Z a g CO ' w tl 3A110rvOlOtl Q t� .�.3dA1 1-1 Ilk SNtlld d001:1 8 UOOld liq pq$ N w tW tt 0',190'."4„ 6a£. € £e£tyr, 9i[[. I 9NIll3M0 AlIN0331JNIS'S101S Q• 3 [ Qi£i '£RR L p a F 0 • r a0 e&eraosoow ieluens -iu+ra 3yiim( Spill Q s a a K e i tCC�4*C i N < 1 z( . g .. bfit, 1 --co in .. 4 r ii .,__Lt_411. 4) m‘..• I a 0 ri . , 1 1 ±,49,,,a, ri. A 1.,g1 ai. ii F o �'1':y�t J e — 1 ID IP , 0 L‘ 0 f i 7 4- i i L— N L J \ i \ I f i fi _ �pr,1 . a` \L J • N_ C A,B,C & D- 16 Ea s 9 7• 5 Y I w z. 3' m3<s-o^:e�'nn3'"°^�'3 Y€ rl 7QS$,€Q 3�.9 y N -x w F 'OT'SON�OIOH Q ,fyb { $-L° JI Z d% i w W'^ y 3AI1piO1fltlWWWWMSO y 6 @gy m 0 956� b O N � O.3dA1SgfQ7Qbfii !9 i O o: SNVId dOOEI S tlOOld ` fi Q'QQl t� yyb[ N w tl� awcwranadlarm {b Q, `Y bbe1" , = y °66-frwial.n0'flan 66166. Ya 3®y ONIT3ma AIWA TIONIS'slol s 'va C4v 19100 pQ Ybtl i 5 N W < • aF vonnmrcxwarv<41U-Lis KU.m ?2 .7 QQ j[ sail i $s`as s ;p444444 i m 0 0 3 1al� ; = T 11 ) 11I /;��1 1 /„ 11 I T.,., T I a. Ili RI 1 7 01 s z 1 fi-g -7 1 _. . ? .4,Ityclir,„Tii timi a . 1 T IT 3 1 i i ice: o L I I a” 1 I I_ Q� , 1 s-z, - 2 ® go QQ g g III 4 A,B,C & D— 17 S' N S Sfi mats-Em p pp F p @P a8'IS 2 e e w 1 L.' W "Jll'$ONIpIOH A p @$ gp I k Z a® 1 m w r 3� 3nI10WOlnv xtivwtiv0 •wn ,OUVA3 Ip{fil IO61a�i411�}� i Ili I Q SSe 2W a n SNOI1tlA313 0111111111111111 l�11 EEE1 t N dap�! w O! 2tl5 vnou.,l,�o'�wv vm. Y S p '11e CO` J ONI113m0 el'NNd 310N15'S101S �W ed p N 4 OS--Id Q O • 8� o1 a 1,u1„ens .n,uM 'f�11 t11f'�1111 Q 1 A 25 i 1 L�<mac« X N ii il x e 7 _ .= i3 S 'D 4 y' 1 g1 5" n p i z a zg !I! di6i ; 6 P !3$ af91I ;, ; 9s i akaisiu' 14 'I2l?$aai°u1'uEam : X3 a a 0 a a aeee a B to m a© mom a N M C m P 104N "IllaiN It Ai_ joii ° CM 01 �mmmmup I 11111111 Y v 1 111 El! 1111 , I � IIIIIIC W Illlm,l;° IIw°,,.I m1 II III °iul, I L' P , 1u1111IlI LE ° ,u�ull I m� v 4 L:ch gip 471 I � 01� -- ��Ili till:__ I�' 1 L I J c 1.;��1: 1 II I_iL-141:9'..i.l 1�:�1': OP lids I-ink., 00h m1 ,Imm'IIII IImIIII I I Q 1 t 1111111 1 I 1 nriiffenctipw I IIWII I. ITI IIIIIII11 t:::�11I1L - IrgE FE i Ina ill; 1pp�II m I ' _ Ian Et I I���III�IIIII: MO;; w = i IL IWIID 1001 111 IWIW I; N !se mlmw I \.11 , w , Ill ml II 1 l 1. v1. .. .lI : I 1 y 1 • :,, li, I unolm I w•1 I-- 1 ;l I 1� iII; III i_ P l l . st 1 w I • pxn-a dl i EXHIBIT G A,B,C & D- 18 I �' "JT's11NIQlg1 I 2 tle! I (1.1 Z °G N x WK' 2 3Al1gYOil ONI010O 4 '/� SW - .9.3dA1 111115167211101111 10 .9 O w ' is g11 mnu Glom. SNOLLvA3 i3 11101,110/01211 11 �' w ;. II O.,�,w. ��. w.. .9 31l! !€ 1`�'" " a �° m Q 9 MIIT3MO AlI1Wf 3l'JNIS'S101S '+�^� g 0 !ll° ; $II! 1 4aBg eCCCX/«<< w • 4 ii II 1 ! ig! vah jiigg, & Pi 1 1 ! L '! •'9 :1 P. Y viq'A� 1° F!e S eetlii !d ii@ 84 i' qa z 7i. il I ,1 i = A 318 1 If i 4 ! i, ea 3•re 9 8 9 9 BBB El © 0 0 ©© ©®89 ®® ® ® to 3 6 3 w t INYF .>�, n' d n l 3i =1X .rlllm 11 IIIIIIIII'1�1a• 9 e I IIIIINII $I I : III a :Milt I I - .�—\.,n:,A^ vill III _ ii kpYV v o 11111111 11111111 I'll rm 111 IIIIIII I,I I m to IIJ, , j;S' :11:1" Iii IIIIIII +;I Fmuilvi IJnu�A Illlllmll I I I III vlil gqim`4,pI: _ Ill r IiiC!iliil� • i�vl S r:-= ©y IIInIII. I ,'Jn I C! II p' _ MI L 11!b 1 I!1 11:91„W s le rwi' 1 1�F1®.7.3 EitLE m1n1111> 11111111 lli S 11' 114/ ,al SI Er'PV:: 911 = - IN �1,, �a.I>,fl1„„ acAlutrin g i IIIui 'IA ll p`,Il• t„t I'�1' 'I't,l'� - 3: j1oril I1l .:111 �II111111IP; . 9 sl IIIIIIII��11II IIIIN I , o ^llll11 a III II'a� J NI 1 'll 01111 - IIIII `ll lal 11. ri y 1 uu ul:11 �i ni an It.6 AI 191' 11111111111 !t!&111M1 u01111111111 amla�dll 1j11 I ' 1 a! IIG JII`IIIOIIII II"I 1111 0 Y IIIIII f ltd :E gin 1111,k1111,1;!!Yirt211 INIIIII III LI{II Iii 11__ �fai 11111111 ,1 .ill _ m II 1 111111,Lar., 2 ... a IIII e o " d 3 ■ i Illlllll I IIIIIIII il. a 1 I . .>a, >FI I hr4111 . IL O _ ;airI m. —� IM; ''•1itI(°:<-III IllraoIii s R5 9 p X, N n_ 8 M1'3ss''9nle� n„i,,,, it ti4lgiig]Ia•.i N 816 F I C' x E oil sJNI4)ON uan r @y1 E11 tletlll y{3E Y d y12 il4 0 CO T w uV 11 3A110110lntl NtlVMR/0 .l'9.3dA1 61iyY1111111 °I �� IO O N F us .11 SNOLLVA3l3 iY Pl3 11,: 1 �• w y y Y e e 6 1 11 ONI113MO AIIWbf 3lONIS'S101S '01^ �I' 1/1191/111hiY§ °[Y 1!32 MW 11• ¢ < 0 • 0I! n:�®aoeuownnluene Th.... igil9 ! 131£x118 § 6$ 2 2 2 2 2 444444 S Dip, i Z i• !3 1 3 1 8 3 li% E 1g l g §R g le @® 0 3 i AO 111 i Le is 11101 :I qg w m au _ 5 i2 -�a:na. t gash ;111 € 11g.?ii111111 ;1z 1 :1i1mg1l CC C 9CC000 O o ® o ®® ©©®© ®® ® ® Ni m __ m Ill-i- ;., Irma. s 1 ® „_„ .5 W 1 o-[ 111 q I 1 1— II;7 1- 11 .1 1_ o 1111111111111111111111111 l '(IIAII : i� I I i 11P �IIIIIIII MI III : I 1 I IIIIII� LEI----,----�I�I 117 n III ;, 1 111111111101111111010 flfl r t D m • nn Ili 1110 III II 1 111 ,! I I . 1111 _ I I p.igEr; IpUlp I�� 1771 ,hI; ill 11191111U Inn IIIIIIIIIIIII II `h�1I I ,: =1N @II J 111111:■ illy 1 l m IINI- v ° '' I°J t I to OVEN w 911II� 1 111 noon! v I� g o1u _ LU119 d ■IIIIIIII Ill�lull i i; 3 111111 I I I I e 1. li�llll a ziii Ian r ' i; n i 31} ilflE 1.11111 nl ill 'i i° CIO ;II�IIIIII 1111111 , 1 ' - A s 1 � IIIIlvly 1WIt I .nn1WIll I.t, ®© F tlnu a t "lI Ill°° . m I J. A _ 4 y1IIIIt- CIS N 91® Fa .'ice IIIIL=11 �OVii e1 / II . 1 T!N ® I I 5 y Illl p nlllllllll i t II. a a 11111111 lIlm iiiit 0 Ilol. 4 O1[4 111111 [5[n°ni:['y °° u niii mn 4- .174;', a ag m IIu I;,: V . • 1°101-. dicamoiil A,B,C & D— 20 @� ® a a m a w a„on,.e'rn',°i"za" PF[[[[Qpp ��aQpIg�°9'3�B r s E w @ on'soNlmoN AFP�aSQgeYQ:e .�I� a Z '1 a 1 L.' •: Y anuowoind revwrdo +� @@ ( Q EyII VIII `VIII m I bk OIJVA.L 7igpg 'vegBge���•��gFy� I��� Q g3ed m ouu ,s',....°N.w"r SNOLLtlA3'13 1iM �grs"!Y lo N t Fg ;1111111101110 e° y`C ) P ONIn3MO AIIV(d Toms'Sim S 'i' a a£ 6 iWW 0 • x y on.clownne;usns ..�... I IH'ISIn #I�€4°il 9 4 it 1"s i t p444444 m n c Ei .! as 2 ae '}' P. I ! it i i E;pi.! 4 1ili gy, ii Pa11i ; li9Iigi !A 11 4 b € ga •zsi11 ggof1 . ± dit .51g It o 000000 ® o ® o ®°°® III ° ® 1 4. o-y qi u A 2 `I j ill s L-I ,�1 ll'tihl o X11 m 1n II iL, :E.22 rR -411 III 1e1n3W: 't Oki"l II dj 1N Im 41!,p. - 1101011 IU IIIIII'o dill loil' 111gm VI mll.•- 41 iIII!'ryollll :Ilen 11! 1 IIi .1i!x 111 N Will,X11. "Q61. I Y4. E® ®Y 10 �1111111111:111111,1! n £hll°Jdl'InPr1ilPiimiii?IIIlllLIIt1oll�1i IIIIVI ®- Iow I ii! ° o I m a INE ®' J � ® 611° o r!lil !j' ill _ InII I 1 b P J9. �I II In' jl�;, I u o Ili w 2I ` E ® w 1 w I l ° ! - © di `d ei © g 8 111111 - III _ _I^�➢i.11wlndW M1II II°e IiJ1 I AN lie III p III = -® (jj FL LID111dAddlE!. IQ r. ;EL 1 E Cr J li re v gie �© I IIIIIc 7 ©111011 II�N IiNPI I1�hlil'lll�h !illl, 1 A o L1r II n I1 v N�+13!11. 111011, IijtVll5i - I• � I— IIQII p+l „If 11. ! '��4 —\∎I -=-1".110,11111, , 1A Im, Jllgll j Fzii_ �Iliii IIII Qr1IIIIIIIPIIII 11p 11101 Mill ' 1^l Et 14 - 1 w III I t A,B,C & D- 21 mR B " nei 0!110 save,n„,..„, P FFpI{F661F @. rp '' 10 e d w F a '.I11 MN101aN i C,S1�F"°I€ g8;' e e 'IZ I,() x A r s� b wscroinv NtivWMYO I.. .o.3dnt eaii lkii� &p 1i 10 a 3 " " �' a S moo.et= vie. x.� SNOLLyA3'13 1S1' illlie si tl� E � C w 1 5! p10 @�Lll • It s>�. yyi i1, 4 F eo g n >jj�5$� u x [• 31 Drvin3MO AlIIWd 3F0Uls'51015 : g11/1r11 '13:p1�! °{4c 26'Wf1 4 Q • W m000 0©6100Nv°..v,uens T.1 ins 'i16F i '1111a k s`i i e.91 Q44444 S _=':11.1 II „ 1 ~', ' mil f 1 @ i �9 If 1J II 1111 II ffil g . ,x 1 E _=I II�JU"� .,,,,„:,,i, CILIA 1 if it l9 L 1 l'I� �i�no is aA la 1 da : ! d °� l Et._ tea I'Li 1 ,1 LE A + 0 I 4 m 1� .1 � 2 15y � z 3 w ¢ 4,6 •le 3a IS g € 1a 14M o o o 0 000 0 A 8 s e 6 g = I 18 :: y G al :3 . II Il' q II! liYill'! µ \ '�1ji a 1111111 : 3 • :4;a 19'I!il a §� 111P1111 ' I� '� lull, 111111111 n ].,Ill.i. I:mtI ; 1111,111 d c liE I 1111 u J1!0 cal 11111:1:1 I {!I I 111111111 47: 11 i l! dill `II .40 i :oil! i.:,:., lr o 1 III ill 6 g I d Ili nn 11111111n, V1'll c _ III�1''L lull�111� o'I!^II Ilsid� —1 a �t1z 1 Uiili® I�ii�i�!tilI�I1a' m17.1 rI111i11�1 41,1 1iIf'. :ea 9 3 rl, € :Ir qql m I1 P'1 !II„,,,rgliWill,illo141 1 Ij1111 M!i11S17�i11MR m Ilf Ill,ltil 111111 !I I�F b 11! 1 le 1 �1 0 g®ilI,I lalllll 1191 Cli 1 vv 0 I 11^1 ''to i I I 0 - !Ifl1ui111n II 1 �I Y3 I 1, 111: I I =1131 —kw r 1 mlii l G w w A,B,C & D- 22 ! '!± YYYYi�����I �S 5 e r. • t 5 {{.._r...is... e 1 [iiII e t h11'1IllhLlllrdJII IEI ` dig ii 1E 1j id a EEI 8 z.sE al: w Ejy'Ee E 1e1; I i iIe1\v yL _E �Y 67676 7P97z s's a ltl� le �zt j Y E Y�Y �°n,., €� s 66 E a7 gg c E� �y;d"g : s 'ia e667 67 g IHJ ES 1 1.=91.; 1 it; I : € ig2 a li w §21°11`! 7iiIitilllllitillIUIiIii.II!iliuI 1 {t1" 1;111$11.- u.g .EIS I €,tI EB 9913; Y a IE i as 7 :a 9 gill.°1 -,?IE1=4_ r €6 V E 7§§22"9;Y_ __.4r ...- V E 17 2 P °ei6l11 O p 915 !e! S yyS qq SSSSS Eg7g rypp it: O 0 YZ E1 .O 3l77i E 7et6 ?l 1 m 4 e8 W3 13 >N ■ • I A.R'N3040C 1 . ipp e \ �� �\��� ��������������� 6 g " ^@l9 ♦�� Jai d.ra.x rr.:,.,:'_..3r .,r v*. ..;u:.'^ -Va emit;ikt mss, - -i t 1♦�►∎ ♦!AL i�, �♦tea.'ii♦p ► �►E���i O��t+♦01.44 ■ 44 it ♦♦o voi Na 4` ♦ G 4n '�f I l ♦ ' 0∎-e ■ �. . u, 01,40 A.' a' ♦♦ ♦� ►mss .1 IV. 40k>r l' A St rat 40194rap 44 • ♦ _►4....... o " rsMSssi . I EXHIBIT H A,B,C & D- 23 I I I „e t l`-: a? ,.,...,.., iz R a 13 A€ q;, d ..4, NV-Id IJNIlNb'ld m'oa oNVdvavi aua is 3 3�/'.82 Rir i g ? d d '_ i S 63 11 i ,I , 1N3WdOl3A3O M3N _ e s.�—�.—...--.--rte.._.-- "�yaQp�.�.�.y+pp..P.L�.......�.�....��.._e..r._,_......_. �....5 du. - a 22 I I6it:mama= O _ f ' VP V is 1:. T l 4 3 ggYY 929 r` 36 1141 r x� $ _ . 4p L 1 $\i I tl tv� Y ��44� o sl a ,,Y 3TT3 i i [[i 3@a 3: ,.\ ; w e i � -9\` 1 • d r IS .t.r; it`d c � l . ,M L IM ]yxg cp r • d/ f � �3 - j,� E 1 g 1m.-<C 1 Q '' r t g a tall . 3 $ E t ' I • ), '� 1 �' a ;x\s p ''J @( F iii.. � � �7∎ �� �` ' � ..w�� �'d9 S % , P,.►4 .] yI . r _ 6 oOAOO x ,o OO°n.Kw +a*I g. a q ���� .way . a FF }} s! �.'6w: �� il8kp 0 °31+ ,. l ` ii 3 3 B l I k 0 of F d Li S x: o a�� is ° a 8 p.: 3 's 10 ° © 03. X91 �� LO ° e o i \I � . . 1� :: ::::::'. :'.: :: . ur. .'. l �'a . ��....- M 6 f € jr'` E t � OCOOOOO000NCOOOOp, .. =m u,m3 ea W,.,mtiL/ �� a d,S'� z d .h ° ° 1 II?d I. i Ig ;it iv 7 h "a 0r1.. W ° ,,,JJJ dd 101 z l,ijl l a ldl d � �d� f hi] z d IIn r. IIE�IIIII lilt ° I; — °-1-0 ° I .fill I;I z ,�1 �, iii a :Ps ES .III IIII� = a c> es 0 0 = m iyI r€ 0 cc I.It v,4 g iii I 1 A,B,C & D- 24 o V. 0,11V - u w, 1?PP1411 :S;; SE ] p N I I w r' <W . o.a,soil sown,. �.��r d .�z nr3:cp: r g Z e w w 111 Lip 3nuowoinv HavwNtlo ih: =e:§7'iE , i 8 1 ' 110 e e N N's � a 3vneoo 3stlOH-n�v�a ails ai€ 3C'4.8,3._ i P O as oteoc]•] -c io". . ..,.,o. i _ c� �oea a�.<..c�,.ns ��4fr �67 Sfl-a s- )P 1 r w x • r §k owmima nvwvi319Nis'slols a .,u.„ss 111111111 Vie, .! xsFAAsi-:W7a p Q o 36 53�SS �6dtit87Qd4444 i N — ��V a r iI i '6 I'i y �\'" N`� \\�k\��\\�__� ,``, _ __� _.; �.� J ;�� v the 4 : 4 11... a 1 ;, - , Iii 1.Ilk e / ' Jr'L � - ' ` i ° Z •I o • N L' s yd =L� ®e iii1 _ $ i� L_r 1 _10, i. : • ,..k, , cp.: . ,\ i - _ ,\ :t �_J J -- 1 — — — I j I I 1 j I I I � i • j EXHIBIT I A,B,C & D- 25 I • C L� y N . ,- Y r C;� J (3 o �°> Cl) V , 0 1 N ` Z Q �k r t L31- \' L. r...)! \ L l CO Ca'E . S U T a.74NA H t ,. o (174 2 -3.- NI °o N Cip 7 $ - 4 ✓ v 0 vsi C LL' - Q. LU e. \� A ) Da w _ o W 4 -e v Q LU : s c x c za a . ( c • EXHIBIT J . . A,B,C & D- 26 ®. rfiKust ASSOCIATES, INC. . To: Mike Smith(City Associate Planner),Richard Macias(Owner), Carolyn Seitz(Zoning Consultant) From: Tom Lau(KU) Attendee: Referred to the attached sign-in sheet Subject: Project SUBTT18747,DRC2009-00010 and DRC2010-00963 - Meeting Minutes for the Neighborhood Meeting at Goldy S. Lewis Community Center, Cucamonga Room, 1-1=200 Base Line Rd.,Rancho Cucamonga,CA,on 02/28/12,6:00 to 8:00p.m. Items of discussion: 1. Carolyn stated that it was the developer/owner of the property to facilitate the Neighborhood Meeting to obtain inputs or address any concerns from the neighbor about the project. 2. Carolyn presented to the neighbor that the project consisted of 6 parcels: 5 residential lots plus a street parcel. All residential lots were above the min. lot size and the lot average per City's Planning requirements. Lot 1 and 5 were proposed to have single story residential houses which were to preserve the views for the house on the south side of the property. These single story houses were also required by the City's Planning code(25%of the development shall remain single story residence)as per Mike. 3. The existing eucalyptus on Lot 1 will be removed. • 4. Both sides of the equestrian trial (private) of the project should be constructed of CMU walls at approx. 6 feet height. A trailer turnaround(hammer head type) is proposed on Lot 2 for vehicle maneuvering. 5. Lot 2, 3,4 and 5 site drainages will be used of the on-site swale gutters which connected to the public storm drain system at the southeast corner of the property. Lot 1 will be drained off to Arapaho Road. 6. One of the neighbors concerned that the existing water run-off at the southwest corner of the property where the existing-Co ity equestrian trail located. The rain water would drain off to the-Gemmunity- trail when it rained due to the street elevation was leveled with the trail. Mike of the City will discuss this with the City's 11,1,1;c Wmk Dept. 13U1tRW S 4 CArelY 7. The project equestrian trail will be maintained by the individual property owners. The surrounded Community trial is maintained by the city. 8. Neighbor also brought up the issue of dust and dirt control during the construction. Mike stated that the developer ought to comply with the SWPPP and BMPs during the construction. Any concerns in this regard shall be brought to his attention so that he will respond accordingly. 9. Per Mike that the project is tentatively scheduled for May 2012 Planning Commissioner hearing if all things go well as planned.The technical and design reviews are on March 6, and the equestrian trail review is on March 14. AQMD issue may delay the Planning Commissioner hearing as per Mike if their comments come in late or require time to address. He will email all project related info. to the attendee as stated above. 10. There will be natural gas for the project. Sewerage is of septic tank system, and the water pressure is sufficient for the development per water flow test. 1 I. Per Mike that city requires the developer to install all front yard landscape only. Since the site is located at High Fire Hazardous zone, all landscape shall comply with Fire Dept. requirements. The street trees are as per City's Public Work Dept. requirements. • 12. The developer should construct the houses as presented once they are approved by the Planning Commissioners during the hearing. Any changes shall be approved either by the administrative level or 1 650 Camino De Gloda,Walnut,CA 91789,Tel:(909)869-5828, Fax: (909)869-5827, Email:architectekuassociates.com • A,B,C & D- 27 • • Planning Commissioner prior to any construction is commenced. • 13. In general the neighbor was pleased with the project design and addressed of their concerns. • • • 2 • 650 Camino De Gloria,Walnut,CA 91789,Tel:(909)869-5828, Fax: (909)869-5827,Email:architect@kuassociates.com A,B,C & D- 28 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Mike Smith March 6, 2012 • ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 - K.U. & ASSOCIATES - A proposal to subdivide a vacant parcel of approximately 146,000 square feet (3.4 acres) into five (5) lots in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Development Review DRC2009-00010, Variance DRC2010-00963, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00964. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts . for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 - K.U. & ASSOCIATES - A review of five (5) single-family residences that will be constructed in conjunction with a proposed subdivision in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Variance DRC2010-00963, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00964. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Site Characteristics: The project area is a parcel of approximately 146,000 square feet (3.4 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 442 feet (east to west) by approximately 331 feet (north to south). The site is vacant. There are several trees at the west and south sides of the project site; low vegetation otherwise dominates the site. To the north, south, and west of the project site are single-family residences. To the east, are a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company. The zoning of the property and all of the surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) • Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. The subject property is generally level with a southeasterly slope; the elevations at the northwest and southeast corners are approximately 1,462 feet and 1,448 feet, respectively. An east to west Community Trail bounds the north perimeter of the project site. A north to south Local Feeder Trail bounds the west perimeter of the project site. Both trails were constructed with the corresponding residential subdivisions to the north (Tract 16116) and west (Tract 12870). The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into five (5) lots. All lots will comply with the development standards applicable to this zoning district as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan except the minimum lot depth. Individual lot areas will range between 20,494 square feet to 30,051 square feet, which are in excess of the minimum of 20,000 square feet that is required. The minimum average lot area is 25,835 square feet, which is in excess of the minimum 25,000 that is required. The minimum lot depth in this development district is 200 feet. The depth of Lots 2, 3, and 4 will be slightly greater than this; the depth of Lots 1 and 5 will be approximately 110 feet to 148 feet (dependent on which points from where the measurement is taken). As Lots 1 and 5 will not comply with the required minimum lot depth, the applicant has submitted a Variance application for consideration by the Planning Commission (Related file: Variance DRC2010-00963). The minimum lot width in this development district is 90 feet. The width of Lots 2, 3, and 4 will be slightly more than this; the width of Lots 1 and 5 will be significantly wider than required with both being about 200 feet wide. All lots will generally be conventional, i.e. rectangular in shape, which will allow conventional house plotting. Included in the proposal is an extension of Arapaho Road by 220 feet which terminate in a cul-de-sac. As the subject property is located within the Equestrian Overlay, a 15-foot wide Local Feeder equestrian trail loop, designed per City standards, will be provided to link the subdivision to the equestrian network. Also, within each lot there will be a corral area of • 24 feet by 24 feet for horse-keeping purposes. Each corral area will be a minimum of 70 feet from the dwelling units on the adjacent properties. EXHIBIT K A,B,C & D- 29 DRC ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18748 AND DRC2009-00010— K.U. & ASSOCIATES March 6, 2012 Page 2 • In conjunction with the tentative tract map, the applicant proposes to construct a.single-family residence on each lot for a total of five (5) single-family residences. The houses on Lots 1 and 5 will be one-story, while the houses on Lots 2, 3, and 4 will be two-story. The mix of one- and two-story homes is consistent with the policy adopted by the Planning Commission requiring that 25 percent (minimum) of the proposed houses must be single-story. All of the houses will have "side-on" garages, i.e. garages that do not face the street, in compliance with Section 5.42.606 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan (which only requires that 50 percent of the garages to be oriented or situated in a manner that minimizes its visual presence). Lots 1 and 5 will have 2-car garages, while Lots 2, 3, and 4 will have 3-car garages. The architecture of each house will be consistent with the general design requirements outlined in Section 5.42.600 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Each house will incorporate traditional materials to varying degrees. A combination of stone veneer and wood siding will be applied to the houses on Lots 1, 2, and 4, while a combination of stone veneer and stucco finish will be applied to the houses on Lots 3 and 5. A combination of stucco and stone veneer will be applied to the walls that enclose parts of the front yard area of Lots 2, 3, and 4, and the property line walls. Stone veneer will be applied on all elevations of each house. It will also be applied extensively on the chimneys, at the main entrances, and on vertical elements such as patio posts. Houses with wood siding will have wood siding applied to all elevations of each house. The roofing will be concrete tile. Each house will have a well articulated footprint/floor plan and profile, i.e. neither the footprints nor profiles will be square or boxlike. Because the footprints and profiles of each house are varied, there is a substantial amount of movement in the wall planes and roof lines. Projections such as prominent • chimneys and dormers and a mix of hip and gable roofs will provide additional interest in the profile of each house. Each house will also have large solid or lattice patios and, on the two-story houses, balconies. There will also be details such as wood brackets at the roof eaves, wall-mounted light fixtures, decorative trim around the windows, molding along the top of the stone veneer wainscots, and decorative wood garage and entry doors. The architecture of each house will be consistent with the design goals and policies of the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission including 360-degree architecture and extensive use of high-quality materials. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Major Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. None. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. • 1. The decorative trim around the windows and doors shall be constructed of real wood, not foam. 2. The molding along the top of the stone veneer wainscots shall be stone, not foam. 3. Walls along the property line that exceed 6 feet in height (but are less than 8 feet in height) shall require the submittal of a Minor Exception application for review and action by the Planning • Director. A,B,C & D- 30 • DRC AGENDA SUBTT18748 AND DRC2009-00010 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES March 6, 2012 • Page 3 Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The project was approved as presented. Members Present: Howdyshell, Wimberly, Granger Staff Planner: Mike Smith • • A,B,C & D- 31 TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENT SHEET March 14, 2012 • A. A REVIEW OF TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS RELATED TO A PROPOSAL TO SUBDIVIDE A VACANT PARCEL OF ABOUT 146,000 SQUARE FEET(3.4 ACRES)INTO FIVE(5)LOTS IN THE VERY LOW(VL)RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE EAST TERMINUS OF ARAPAHO ROAD BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND CHOCTAW PLACE; APN: 0225-181-73. RELATED FILES: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747; DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010, VARIANCE DRC2010-00963, AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2010-00964. SITE CHARACTERISTICS: The project area is a parcel of about 146,000 square feet(3.4 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 442 feet (east to west) by approximately 331 feet(north to south). The site is vacant. There are several trees at the west and south sides of the project site; low vegetation otherwise dominates the site. To the north, south, and west of the project site are single-family residences. To the east are a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company. The zoning of the property and all surrounding • properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. The subject property is generally level with a southeasterly slope; the elevations at the northwest and southeast corners are approximately 1,462 feet and 1,448 feet, respectively. An east-west Community Trail bounds the north perimeter of the project site. A north-south Local Feeder Trail bounds the west perimeter of the project site. Both trails were constructed with the corresponding residential subdivisions to the north (Tract 16116) and west(Tract 12870). BACKGROUND: The applicant proposes to construct a standard Local Feeder Trail 'loop' to • connect to the trail system which will provide the future homeowners access to the City's trail network (Exhibit B). Starting clockwise at the northeast corner of the project site, the loop will connect directly to the aforementioned Community Trail that is located along the north perimeter of the project site. The alignment of the loop will be north-south along the east perimeter of the project site (east sides of Lots 2, 3, and 4). At the southeast corner of the project site the loop will 'turn' west and continue along the south perimeter of the of the project site(south side of Lot 4). The loop will then 'turn' northward at the common property line between Lots 4 and 5 and terminate at the proposed extension of Arapaho Drive. All lots will have direct access to the feeder trail except Lot 1 • which will have direct access to the Community Trail. At the southeast corner of Lot 2 a'turnaround' will be provided to allow equestrian-related vehicles to enter and exit the feeder trail in a forward direction. ANALYSIS: The proposed subdivision is located in the Very Low(VL)Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, within the Equestrian Overlay District, which requires the development of Local Feeder Trails (private equestrian easements). The average lot size for the proposed project is 25,835 square feet, which exceeds the Development Code's requirement of 20,000 square feet to keep horses. Horse corral areas with the minimum 24 feet by 24 feet dimensions have been provided and are shown on Sheet A1.02. Each corral is provides a minimum 70'buffer between the nearest dwelling unit on adjacent properties as required by the Development Code. The proposed feeder trail will comply with the minimum technical and construction standards. To control access, at the intersection of the trail with Arapaho Road a widened entry, a gate, and a walk-through will be constructed per City standard. Similarly, at the intersection of the trail with the Community Trail a walk-through will be constructed per City standard (vehicle access onto the Community Trail is not permitted). The horse corral locations are immediately adjacent to the • proposed trail that serves each. Along the side of, and parallel to, the trails will be a concrete swale for drainage purposes; these swales will not be within the trail itself and will be within a separate 5' EXHIBIT L A,B,C & D- 32 TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747— K.U. & ASSOCIATES, INC. March 14, 2012 • Page 2 wide easement(Exhibit C). Consistent with prior Trails Advisory Committee direction,a 6-foot high block wall will be provided on both sides of the trail (instead of white PVC trail fencing). Major/Secondary Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. NONE Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. 1. The depth of the concrete swales shall not exceed 6-inches. 2. A culvert shall be provided where water must be conveyed from one side of the trail to the other side, i.e. at the concrete swale/trail intersections located at the southwest and southeast corners of Lot 4. 3. The slope along the west side of the trail on the west side of Lot 4 shall be landscaped with ground cover for erosion control; the use of decomposed granite on the slope is not permitted. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff requests that the Trails Advisory Committee review the proposed trail layout and provide input and direction. • Staff Planner Mike Smith, Associate Planner Attachments: A— Copy of Plans B — Site Plan (with Existing and Proposed Trail Highlighted) C—Trail Section • A,B,C & D- 33 • • THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA MARCH 14, 2012 - 6:00 PM RANCHO _CUCAMONGA Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I , • I. CALL Td ORnER I Roll Call 6:00 PM Lou Munoz A Frances Howdyshell X Janet Ryerson X Larry Henderson X Bill Pallotto A Carol Douglass (Equestrian) X Tom Tisler (Bicycle) A Francisco Oaxaca (Alternate) X Kelly Matheny (Alternate) • ( ;."ANNOUNCEMENTS: I• None I LII: NEW BUSINESS; .: Approved as A. A REVIEW OF TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS RELATED TO A recommended and PROPOSAL TO SUBDIVIDE A VACANT PARCEL OF ABOUT 146,000 added conditions for SQUARE FEET (3.4 ACRES) INTO FIVE (5) LOTS IN THE VERY LOW doublewide access (VL) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED gates on Lots 2-5. recommended the AVENUE AND CHOCTAW PLACE; APN: 0225-181-73. RELATED realignment of the FILES: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747; DEVELOPMENT vehicle access gate REVIEW DRC2009-00010, VARIANCE DRC2010-00963, AND TREE on the cul de sac REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2010-00964. street. ' IV. PUBLIC'COMMENTS' • None This is the time and place for the general public to address the committee. Items to be discussed here are those that do not already appear on this agenda. • 1 of 2 A,B,C & D- 34 1416 TRAILS ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDA SANCHO C[ICAMONGA March 14, 2012 IV. ADJOURNMENT I 6:38 PM • • • • 2 of 2 A,B,C & D- 35 • Etiwanda Specific Plan Part II Chapter 5 0 BASIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Fig 5-2 - : VL r- LM 9 LM** �M, * tin, ef .�'" s. ?°Y3`i'feu a Yr ::.-$'141,i):41-, L • ot Area: �t±-z°rsie ,4P.may*t s, it minimum average ';'11 fdC((1t 25,000 l ;0 D, 10,000 f 9fl 11AD; 6 000 „t B4ODD (in square feet) "a " r . ^fix ( - p+ gy,`' , ;�"s �...A., a, vita, kittlitatict,S,4 minimum " e eao 20,000 1; afeaa 72f�0 ` 09 5,000 apps (in square feet) y H , /,.� Number ofDU's d,aa. 1/20,000 r° , a`e,,; 1/7,200 e��J.ra .0 1/5,000 ' °D .� (per lot area in square y'2 °Aa ,° 2 max/lot ._ ° �" ,maa ,• :::imensions 3 � ' ` 4 m ax/lot: 7 � at Kam' minimum depth <, o a e 200' ; a© 100 e a'4 90 a • tr t Y a "� a '� a/ 5 .�.Y 5 1+ T'�j�. +t minimum width a 90' u,. °: 60 t' 5D mm5D.mm y , • (at required _ a � ' 50%of ' °.,%recta{ front setback) II lots 55 o s �, ' minimum frontage a, rr 40' e;4 ,; 40' c"°+ aS+ 30' s el (at front p.l.) f•, -:tj ,• V. ' Setbacks: t�, ' t : ka ' re"Sr cs w y'° • a 4.1 k r ' 1 +' ,:ice- ' v c+� front 30' 25 `�' 5' y, f + �,I, u�, 41 20'av9 ate ,• "n �� , tom'' vary +5 4z $ ..R k to p qC� side(street) " . 25' *y ' " ± 25' f $i ' is' .Wit•3 '�A• • side ll i 2a yam. 10/20 r x o- 720e 0'/15 ' 3 0"/15 �wD h �r Use�Er a. '7:0 #2O'r'' Total 15' "+'TOta c1.6��"'a Total 15 ". T"'talygb",$ Y*.„` .M rurx ' E� 3. lfli +'i ",4,µ^: �' t"�k� building separation !k" *7-' •. F rq 15'mm x,+fi v�+faaip t` „ F . s Y-GS' : few � p; ; zr x "` �� re' k� exceptxoetzS: .T , 1.-41. Nti,,,' €�`v,li �gi f s. where �iiN/Rkr $+. 3 a 'r '' _ adjacent ad�aoent a J.kwI 2 stories 2ttones -20 min 2O 'n in M" s 2D 15 '15r -rear '�„l 0 ' 60' +r25' 20 Lot Coverage 204/r c 25% 3©% 40% 4D°1° 50% `5D% (maximum %) 'x • 2 . M 5-9 11/01 EXHIBIT MI . A,B,C & D— 36 — -- - ,...., nal dVVI .1.0Val. 3ALLILLNIL .-........, — - 01-3-N\ nue vo MNIONV3110 COM .5 1 i i. tc„-tot(sac m. aw-aaa me)nss 0 _ 'we ea.onn•ivw nen a., 1r — 0A1 MOO%NSW 40 WEI 1.8V3 " !1."- P 11/11.1130Pal 21.01 St oursolZoloulPel MIRM I • ..1 g 'az "--;:r17,0-T pli '1_ s 3 W ii ,g ',(.@ 1 .1; ! 4 e, . .iqr.a. 1 a W ; : li ' . i i ig gpn.n... • • - ......z _...,• 104 i. , !.° ii,',' ,..,4„ 1 IlLich , ic , F 1, & iiiMiLlmi ..1 I 91 i ;,,,9E•H;In. ;5 lint!: .I; & ,, 1 V i ^ • ; 4^ •‘:,r,,....:17.:tC,, ---, 2 , eg ..; iii; 1 i lag Ili i Pa 3 1 illif e -— - - -1 1! 1. ; •I !ek1},;;;;;Set g .1- I 1 . ka! • ti` I ; ......e ; ; I ..;1 • ; i I p I, .3.i ‘a.,, I 1\ ;\ li '!"&:,,, LI il; A \ 1, ! ! i..-,hi - '7—t! ;i 144 \ Iji.ift! 11 L. i \ . J l• 1 :g0 jib ,,. .. • - 4 ', ,-'' " - 4 11 1 1 i ..,„ .--, g. 1 - ..I''' -. i! .a.i . ..4. ‘,. ... ■\::. i. rtaa ...we. . . 'L 11'4-tk.fiN. *,1:;'t ;,,: :. ',-,,}:f:',';•• •:•7'.'..-hrl'' ''-':: ''-'-'• . ii,--- t: :.- -•,9 !II --9--p-:-\-- ,s 1------;•,: =',,,,.; '-..?...:;:±E::::::Vir,-:-&ai,:it:.:ti,5fiz-J-•\-•••••-,---J, •--- -- -It';a7c'“ -, • 'St , I , ) t,.-,,,' 1 J 11 2 :!... ,,,, t ; ; ,' '-. .. ic■''',%:- ''', 'it. .' -':V• ‘, % j t r \ ., .• N- 1 . ,__-----2,-‘..<.; . ‘ 1 , ; ,______ r irc.: 1 = ' mr Ili i ‘ I ■ \: ,,. \ i .; -, k* -. ,,, t, ' \ \ ,,,,,,,, ,. ,-.. , \ : .t \ , :4::;:k !,A i -• 1-/-‘I , • - ! I q I r" i . ), ; h r \ 4,,, T.,-,.. — 1 I , ; : i 0,1 4,i . i I/ ,„ A \ „, F.:t::-1 t ,k,:', ! ,,, 4:-.1.,,,,, r a -; ‘, \ fik li,;,,, , ,,i H. r ; it 1,,,A% t. i • 0- -_-_:-."-- il ' :i'', t.,---"i i ' / 1i -*. ,,,,-,.: 1.4 . .., 1, I " 0 8 ',P+ . d PI 1 1 / i - / i a / \ / - < Z . I 1 ■. ''\. a —:, z a_ .... ..,s, • ,,, , 1 -,-, ,---- , , , .- Ls - 4 s3,-.;,,,,,,y, • 1 3-±.:1 I M 'CL, • S'r'y!c' ,4" 3 -, i 1 , 1 , \ 8 i 11 ks:•,,,•:). ),,i_t _ i .,•;;-)A ) • cc 2 a .1/4. 1/4 , b ,,,Jc, 1/4, ,) • 4 ,,, -\ I: "I, ....,,,f, a l' IF ',I .'; /1 ( 1 I L.-1 % i I 11 ,... ‘ ■,, \ i ' ! 1 4 .1;i! 1 ''i\ i'' ei, %, / 1/4, \ ith 1/4)),1/4,1)':e i• 't• lk3. e.,7 f ••.= 4 ,;a: \ i../.4.1._-).4 IA. C n ', ,Tri.t.\1■NI, r 1 q tir! 0 UJ a i; • 1/4 , ) ,,,,,, 1. ,,,)y, ,A 1 ' ,!•$;-'' } ' Iii; ' "--„! -, "....A/7 11 > >1. ; V fu-74 --..±:•": 1 a . - \ 1.•x - /,',. !,i1 C9tr-r: , 110% I \ i 7 - , i \ I \ 1 , -, 1',01:trili ' I 5 \ / / . \ O.!" 1‘ \ , , .-- 1, I \ 111\ - / 1 ' \ ' I ..:LL-.. =:,:.:22:117.11/7. i 1 ■ 1 , . # 1 ; 1 ; — k; C '; ;; " ik' PA. 1 4 ; L.: \ ,, i-\\ 1 \ i I , \ .' , it , — LIJ : .):}..,:•), - \ \ § I : 1 j 2,,,i, ,,m, , i -_,•-:_)--• .; -,, i .1 % 1 It 1 , %... \ ‘, •,, a < 1 , , I I— • :)3 , i a \ \ \ w , \---' c!---9, , , 1 1 -•,:, >11 -) '-',. ' , ' _ *DE i,. - \ ---.; - , , ---- !I ‘ 0 R . 4J 1 I In .-:, 14 ' ik-,- 't4 t 1. t '1! ;i I, i r,:l !Iknli ' • I , ..: .,,, ',i; 7.....,aL...; Cr 1;1„kir ra-)1 ; \ , t i . :- ;; I . It " - ; . ; - ,, 1. -' !EFIF l'''' r ' ' ' '. ..''; .1,:z e. r--: • •-,,, 11 . i ) \ . . , ... 1.11 •„13•.:. „c_, ' , 1(: N • ., __ ! ' • 1 .1, a • : _ I r , ,, 7.—• • - 1 ) [_ .. 2r,„,.,...,.. , 1,..i., sp- 1, , ,i .i!gg 7l; - - il,..vvi .-. .. 3..,_.46. .. :.... fy,. f liy:[I if 1!r ti„.i.,,.p,.; r . !g:: I1 vi ,, 9 9—, • - ., "., .; 1 t'-,'Li 1." i ¢ y : 1 1.... E ''..-- „.'.-") '/■„' i 1 \ t ,A7';' 'e '-g I isi 40 2,1;li.lilt ,n. gi rt0 n it,t1 2T" H'Ili 1 !: ,11i , _,,,,:i ;.: - :7:„ .. 7,\.-,1 :„h il,: 7i ... , ,. , , . ,,..____ , 1 1: , : „, „... ,.., ,.,.,,—.:--3....... EXHIBIT N A,B,C & D- 37 CITY 0. .A14010 CUCAMMONGA r Nov 3 20t0 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM 'flaw°' RECEIVED - ��..A �IN� (Part I - Initial Study) City of Rancho Cucamonga (Please type or print clearly using ink. Use the tab key to move from one line to the next line.) Planning Department (909)477-2750 qq , ' .rcw: irewi "4' t'S t'alt\t ,Ia.4ef es 's*'x x 2�'.7er. -tf^`v_ -sxicr't' tsi i-I-IP xtiN.°sgaj p{',Ni x''. nTThe^puurpose ofithielform�is toi nform,the City oofithethasic components of the tproposedm nuproectsolthat.the,Ct tma revtewthel roects ursuanttoCr 'Poltctes'aOr,dtnancestan,g4k ..z. ir..+, yi < -'7`r% rv'i'�5_.._ay9 �r`IL=W^ �'eEiL� P.t../ per.°"..: .`L`..aJ'`2, 1 �, �k °CS"_t x rear.a w5. �3.+w Gwdelmes,'x the3tCaliforn a E_nvtrronmental Qualrty-AAct;rands.rthe Clty s Rules T,ippi s un -c. ._ -ta IL. ..7'L tr7'7� +'i .s -0 S - 'A- ^»?. s a cg re-li ','j' .ti. c 3 : P,roc dunes to ImplementCEQA 'It carg portant that .,..sformationarequt)-- m this-s -app icabon be prrovtdedntMmil pi, ° t7z1, — t� "n b -41 at ' ,y :,.f4Vq .. a Sk. 'w4, pL L.r :4;k K.rr ' ° -- ryt le X' ..s-.,M.tii7 tri "C 4 : 3i Upon review .S9.. c rnpl!!-X7 r.IStudy:'Par,title,aneitth develop$ `applwcatton,-t Ixaddit�onaljtnformatio nsueh asE b`utnot l�mtted to;traffic,:noise,bog--lo al,drainage, and&' geology icacal,r-e...t.. n ,,::sequined .iTsheaprolectiappltcattotwtlllinotlbedeemegmempylete L analess the ideptt4 t e,cast.s dtes.7.,. s T aubmttted for re= r andxt,acceptaftl completeond_adequafe:'s,Theior ject applicatbion nnl not be scheduled fos.,committees I rrevieW- nless, IiI required reportsraare sub$tttie and deemedltcom�pie a,ffor st toy prepare„,_ . e m la,;StuN'yt Pare. asrregni edfby CEQ,A. Iii addittion4to hehiftltng fee,,,,..„,. f app cantiwtll betsresponsthe to pay, r,�reimburse the City ts,agents,officers,tand/or, consultants�py�.for«all costsi fore th preparatton,z review,st analysis, recommendations, . �'rgt,.. nc� r34.a,tm @4S' " w ,cF ' 'nl4,44.4.pa 'ra x'tt .l R .,3d- ( . P 44 '£N.. 6mitigationsketc , ofzany�spectal studies,orreports i 4 r , 4, , a YG nnik .n2 8R; s�S.' infatisrwa". cairoaYYtte,,"isatrai nt.,....,.. : .. s �1_. �, la,t; ,P,_,.....- �.stisra-.$ ET...a. .«..,n.• . • GENERAL INFORMATION: INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at the time of submittal; City staff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing information. Application Number for the project to which this form pertains: 012.G VO09 - 000I o IT wiLi (274-7 . Project Title: C SINat C FA"IL'I DM/6L-L-lwCr DEV5'1,oPPKtIV Name&Address of project owner(s): O Ark wir'RK k'4To m 67)1/9 M-v LP IN erS, LA-C- (2-2-2-7 VA-L-5'1 BLVD. SMITE a L % L vmeNTE/ CA- eil732_ Name &Address of developer or-pcojeetsponsor- S f'Yv1 E its /110 V E • Contact Person &Address: RJ WZI) w\fFLI/VS , ANPRE55 S/rpm s At 413o 11E4 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage 1 of 10 Rev.3/17/04 EXHIBIT 0 A,B,C & D- 38 Name&Address of person preparing this form(if different from above): )U NE QmE7G • ICu A-cSOUfr7Ec, I/iC • • (,SD (1044 I N 0 Of OrtufZlft uNu% CA 9IiS°I • Telephone Number 10" 9.69 S8 24 A 1a-1 • PROJECT INFORMATION & DESCRIPTION: Information indicated by an asterisk(*)is not required of non-construction CUP's unless otherwise requested by staff. *1) Provide a full scale (8-1/2 x 11)copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s)which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundaries. 2) Provide a set of color photographs that show representative views into the site from the north, south, east, and west; views into and from the site from the primary access points that serve the site;and representative views of significant features from the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph. 3) Project Location(describe): £kS I END 6r a.L4 polar $ . • • 4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers(attach additional sheet if necessary): p 225 — 1,8-1 - ? 3 • *5) Gross Site Area (adsq. ft.): 3 • 3‘. Acct. L icHot q-ut S F. *6) Net Site Area(total site size minus area of public streets&proposed dedications): 2-•a7 /}-G. L f 2-9, 1 - SP) 7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary): N•ft. 8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and other governmental • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage 2 of 10 Rev.3/17/04 A,B,C & D- 39 agencies in order to fully implement the project: Fiull.CiNCr ( (q-ttrnlrf - Pt4-141ITS . • ?en- kv<o&(ES eSkeNg7-t or itj rilt.5 1.1E1'1 • , 1ptlt-s IS As Pei S-03 1L11; 19 R Qp g k.-t(L PERwtir• 9) Describe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the project including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, mature trees, trails and roads, drainage courses, and scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on site(including age and condition)and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of significant features described. In addition, cite all sources of information(i.e.,geological and/or hydrologic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, traffic studies): 7H; 511E IS RE (,4TltfeLt1 Ctekt *PPft-oM.( mk75v( 33 °( o SLvp'• (T (S 6(ePTg; ratR.E is .No S7wt..(1u(t-F 14-5-0. I S oh)t• Ex.i S?t ktitw 71ce- I 1 i" 84444 14- . So , (s 51-PI'3u:7 - 1LIMr1 1-113N 11+612-e No 'TRIO I.5 em SITE kl 11t-n- 1S- N t' • C l cr N l F c-4-N 7 5c4 An c views . 11•-e kf3ovt I&FtTC 4 7i vN S #HL C 71{-a;V/-Ep F3-0-Pin fore- oB S-u'vwA71 oru t, cola-vEV( NLAT/ • 10) Describe the known cultural and/or historical aspects of the site. Cite all sources of information(books,published reports and oral history): IS No (GIJpwN LlaL(uR./j-lam / .l.hS70(U Cir. Jk(-u5 • bW 7* cl17g • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage 3 of 10 Rev.3/17/04 A,B,C & D- 40 11) Describe any noise sources and their levels that now affect the site(aircraft,roadway noise,etc.)and how they will affect proposed uses: (4-ERE IS No c/CrNll=lcti-wr No/CE SiitacE% tx i r-oit Do* vG1tt2-on/ Bu(LO(NCT • al 71t& 5o g 7 u -cf-S i, 'tin Sri T. IS I3t u rn>E12 I ' R,E S'1 P6^l 1.t-t- 1>GVELoPMENT vile ot-i' el,l5 Fl-cc-g5 (2,424-D . 12) Describe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms of ultimate use that will result from the proposed project. Indicate if there are proposed phases for development, the extent of development to occur with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional sheet(s)if necessary: 7e1t S116 IS PRAPoc'Ep ?-o2 5 uNtTt o!a Rqc(DBUri4-t-- SlNLv(6 rich .Y fvVG LAP w.p.17. A-RA-PA-{9 ItO . IC P2oPar p 7o VXWiJ wit; 7Ht SITE. (dt7q- 4 c-t.tc- l?1 - S1I-z, 7v fe1LV6 '(tl-6 Y IA TS . 70'5 fl owr Iwo UcUi WtLiL 136 SINCr1.E STot'; t.■ 711-6 INN6t 7H 'E tATS, 2-- ST Li • 711-6 PP-DIET-y WILL. BE p2-+ewPED rW oNE- flM-c ' • 13) Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use(residential,commercial,etc.),intensity of land use(one-family,apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.) and scale of development(height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.): 1 Ife S lT& IS Bo /4nfflb f3Y S1YJtrt.E , I%q'M (i71 Dve-impMEN7, or s Iw t Uht -yowl WTf , VL , trotnEt h7 1H.E NoRTI{ t u-E t - .ST' . tf-t6cf3 - $, kite -tom 0 63 ne'JCc A7t4P rj-o Iw . kT T1J croft- PALS V STY. FtovtA&3 .tt 4-T nie • Sou9N - 5h'ST, ') k (4(L-(7Y Btite,u,v(c O"N© St vat z-0N. 14) Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale, or character of the surrounding general area of the project? IJa • • (:\PLANNING\EINALWORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Part1.docPage 4 of 10 Rev.3/17/04 A,B,C & D- 41 15) Indicate the type of short-term and long-term noise to be generated,including source and amount. How will these noise levels affect adjacent properties and on-site uses? What methods of soundproofing are proposed? W4( " Wll.l. 13E 714-0 IE GrtIJEit47ED 13i IWC/DONTJ , 09- • CR-itS, t7 c- • • q- v-e VIi . dE pro S1 cow/1Gq-Al1 Iw4NA2r oN 7l l G AQ'D Tit EN7 Pp-ovERTI G5 *16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees: 0 kr 7124 tn)lf.t_ !3 . A-.9-141 8VG7) 17) Indicate any bodies of water(including domestic water supplies)into which the site drains: N.A . 18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please • contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at 987-2591. QE TED h•+Uwt.cW, '^nr7ER Ps(T 7os x S 0N175 teet Not 'M-Vw k a. Residential(gal/day) '` 3/SW Grim / Peak use(gaLDay) Pat- NSe- "0L • OA"( b. CommerciaUlnd. (gal/day/ac) P•A • Peak use(gaUmin/ac) N- ' 19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. ❑ Septic Tank ❑ Sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, attach percolation tests. If discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification,please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at 987-2591. a. Residential(gal/day) 230 K 5 umTs= I, 35'b ecitt-/b4-Y . b. Commercial/Industrial(gal/day/ac) WA • RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of residential units: 5 Detached(indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size: vn I14 w i Siz-E to, 31 S �7= wtlrx• IA7 512-f r- 2M, 27 z_. kr . Attached(indicate whether units are rental or for sale units): N•4 • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage 5 of 10 Rev.3/17/04 A,B,C & D- 42 21) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents: Sale Price(s) $ b$b, 5v° to $ 15 r bv-o Rent(per month) $ M 4• to $ N•h" • • 22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: i`Ci) A = 3 B SD K co wl Type g 3 - dell-von.., • Tilt d-I = 3 - BED Roowi Type C- a 4 - BED/Loom TYPE U = 3 - g6Dp-trei+n 23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type: b PR So N S 24) Indicate the expected number of school children who will be residing within the project: Contact the appropriate School Districts as shown in Attachment B: a. Elementary: ` GTTo1'6 b. Junior High: psi r.p._em it 61). c. Senior High - • COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25) Describe type of use(s)and major function(s)of commercial, industrial or institutional uses: Ns A- • 26) Total floor area of commercial, industrial, or institutional uses by type: N - 4 - 27) Indicate hours of operation: 28) Number of employees: N Total: Maximum Shift Time of Maximum Shift: • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage 6 of 10 Rev.3/17/04 A,B,C & D- 43 29) Provide breakdown of anticipated job classifications,including wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication of the rate of hire for each classification(attach additional sheet if necessary): 30) Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City: jJ - 4- • '31) For commercial and industrial uses only, indicate the source, type, and amount of air pollution emissions. (Data should be verified through the South Coast Air Quality Management District, at(818)572-6283): , � • ALL PROJECTS 32) Have the water,sewer,fire,and flood control agencies serving the project been contacted to determine theirability to provide adequate service to the proposed project? If so,please indicate their response. • 33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include,but are not limited to PCB's;radioactive substances;pesticides and herbicides;fuels,oils,solvents, and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above. Please list the materials and describe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, it known. NO . • • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage 7 of 10 Rev.3/17/04 A,B,C & D- 44 34) Will the proposed project involve the temporary or long-term use,storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials, including but not limited to those examples listed above? If yes,provide an inventory of all such materials to be used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along with the storage and shipment areas, shall be shown and labeled on the application plans. • NO • 35) The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fee. The project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission/Planning Director hearing: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for adequate evaluation of this project to the best of my ability,that the facts,statements, and information presented are true and correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. • • Date: I /b/ •cl Signature: Title: I "�ur /44 C-.44 4AL✓ • • • I:\PLANNING\FINALIFORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage B of 10 Rev.3/17/04 A,B,C & D- 45 ATTACHMENT "A" CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • ESTIMATED WATER USE AND SEWER FLOWS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT (Data Provided by Cucamonga Valley Water District February 2003) Water Usage Single-Family 705 gallons per EDU per day Multi-Family 256 gallons per EDU per day Neighborhood Commercial 1000 gal/day/unit (tenant) General Commercial 4082 gal/day/unit (tenant) Office Professional 973 gal/day/unit (tenant) Institutional/Government 6412 gallday/unit (tenant) Industrial Park 1750 gal/day/unit (tenant) Large General Industrial 2020 gal/day/unit (tenant) Heavy Industrial (distribution) 1863 gal/day/unit (tenant) • Sewer Flows Single-Family 270 gallons per EDU per day • Multi-Family 190 gallons per EDU per day General Commercial 1900 gal/day/acre Office Professional 1900 gal/day/acre Institutional/Government Industrial Park 3000 gal/day/acre Large General Industrial 2020 gal/day/acre Heavy Industrial (distribution) 1863 gal/day/acre Source: Cucamonga Valley Water District Engineering & Water Resources Departments, Urban Water Management Plan 2000 • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Paull.docPage 9 of 10 Rev.3/17/04 A,B,C & D- 46 ATTACHMENT B Contact the school district for your area for amount and payment of school fees: • Elementary School Districts Alta Loma - 9350 Base Line Road, Suite F Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 987-0766 Central 10601 Church Street, Suite 112 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 989-8541 Cucamonga 8776 Archibald Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 987-8942 Etiwanda 6061 East Avenue P.O. Box 248 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 (909)899-2451 High School Chaffey High School • 211 West 5th Street Ontario, CA 91762 (909) 988-8511 • • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.docPage 10 of 10 Rev.3117/04 A,B,C & D- 47 J. /,K:t-T -„------:<- 1: (69- pk, :\if t-c.,,,,QT,L, g itz',...5-, ,, V'e- t'l';:yr,W '' ,t•/ i 2 ,,,c,,.::.'m . i', . - --,- vm,R,),(,\ .11, -?.,) -7*-gfit" Y-4---4 -s4il„,;44'44,ir'•%•.,!6,r,; ,1:9;p.41494tit•t°,40.,, 4,0& :. - .."-eaeneen - ' l •/-.9) ts• Ii‘, ,) •'''•;'=i)-101-.)„.,.,,,,,,-;').424ixo•7! ‘'''\/ . '-y\-------2 \-/ ; tikt, C-N.s.,'W \ vr lar ,'.4.).) --1) pra%-- '44'•nflick:'," . . \ `)11•4 9 Y /"......4/02/1/.4VS'''''' ...-' 0 -cc j./VC• --- -' >-- - _, 4(•:::j./,),--- "Or 7 5VV—_,i' ).'''''''''.'""te-'''''`ar- cf\- N,, .._1) kir :: , a, - ■0-',.:z>/_7,6 ,- \ it, c \,, I 1\,,41,,,--/IL-- .; ■ C •-7-7--5.71‘ in-/-"--i( • ---) ‘..,/ ruA c \ ,,T:f,':, Irl;.''.•I'i\ Cri _7.„,,t /‘..,_..,:::: --, rp cc---) r I^ - :, v 114,,:"," jr,..._.,/,,' :71‘.,::: ... ', -\ 1 ,,,,,,, __7 ksicin=q=-:::_n;---), j,_, .,-/ o■ F------..tia-t2..--- '''' ).-,..25,,/■;,-. Vs/ y 04 Ji-ipt-,.,\_y-v ;..,, if\ii_ ' `1.11/ -3 ,” -74 3,_,-1,7 .,.t.,A - , . c. I -- —/ ---- " --,==-----,.; J ----=.) -N , 1 71-‘1.11..„,■59) 4, fl!\11.1)(1 ic-,.:55`V ,A Jr1 C-1,13- i •_...7.:.:c ;7•44■04.C.' - '-',8 1, ion / cv , ---7—,..4"-KM::;::-;; ...., '. '--'ii -='---"-oN):,?,"..,,c' - k LI„, ,4) .00— :f.', 9„, iv '-i --- N',_ -- ,,---- '\-— ./ ) i 2 ''',- \-1- , r' a, ) - - ---- '' - • -•••; y , I 2 ,:s.t.70° , i iiH / ,A / , , ,,, /,_„,f,it cc v,. •1:,c,1:1),: t.,-11,,,1 [1,,,,,,,:11 51__z_.,_\ _,. , -_-,,,,--=-=, , 7, ,....-- '•,,,, Tarnszerszkifffiimstemim ?--- -__ f :i / 7' 1 ' 11 „5------7 t :y t±:—,i BM 2722 ---7, _-1\ I ...., ta \ /, I ..--' ---- / -- L) N- --'' \gDo : .. , , tc./ , ,..: ,, d H I?::. T(-,,, I ...-- , '- —T.._1‘,..„____,--"-i :\IP„_,,,------- --------- ___i_.,-7---' \ i '- .7 ' ,7 • ,'r) ) ./ --"' , 7)---._.,' 7 \ , ..-2000----.. A ‘‘,4 • ty:4 /. 1 7.-4\., _ --. •____,-.---"•---' ..-- , 7, ' "1 _..„..- Li- N.:7-')/5/'/'..71'•_4..._ ,, ( ___---------•--' _- \ rj---'-. ' __--X , --/-- / v. . I: (. ----- .8---1/..._______--_■ ---1.----- -;4 171.:;.:E: '''' 119 I \ ) I -• \ "'-7 _r--4E4E2 _...., 2.1/-r- \\/.../-2 -Y i\l'-' . .'. t:P-`""----/._ __ ( i 1 a _--- I %-"1- 7 J --) iii : , — ‘[71-1 - - IV - '---- I>J1 ,771 -/:-- ( '--)\ r7 -.-----\-----jill:1111 11111 --------Tani:111-7:1 1 11 I 1--1-1 ‘ .I 1 :117--13-1 1=1:7:::::1 3.:!;-/C G-G\1119:131:1 1 ..----- / `-----•27: ) _ . • . , _„.----/ ---- 1 -------. .."'" Z' '-' __Jr rn \\1/4- — --_, 1.11 ---- , - 1 ---jc PROJECT SITE 1.••• . 4- _...- - _--- \ ) '\,, .s„..c.-.,- -k, 1, ri-:-__ --- ) t- • _____- __summit Avenue ..." School LI ‘ ---- ! ) -:ThCt.--.■,, " C‘ I 1 —_,--/Z-4L------::---- . 7:5. ::1,:Litista;ilf28. 7_sas..I.,/------- \ 1.27 4.------ 30\ "1.--iS,.*,•,:x \ 1 , ,),-- 29 . -- / - " --- 1 _ __ -- • . ----- 7---- •7_____.... : ---.-- -" • __ ---- , ../__-) •;i /-L, 5 ' ------- Ry --- - ___f ) I 1 ,..- _,-- Lu • cc • i --I I 0 , C 7498 C.5 —-;71VENUE a — • • 1414 '.;:t.' 17. II ‘\ ----' %%Gaging I. l• C-) II Station .1I2 i‘ti4I,...101:e: st, • ii 1 :I. If_7(j./ .•. (.6- iii. n ,-- __z .. 1,1AI:,..- tt-I ,•,: ;FTNiia;:t :kir." ....,m. N ii,,HA.- ' ,,,oc:.,, • .-,:- p.-- (.; . , tr. ' ' 1 ' orir •••• •• l• V/ Lie ti 1 I,. an i•O. 1 kr. • .1 ,=-- --€_, _.: '-- :----, - I lwancia I . Fire. . • ...) ' , 1 y 'aimto, Station i: —, ".I ----4---- — I • • '13 SI— II/ 34 • . . . • -----• •. • . 1 / 1 , fii - I ', lgr-;, fil 1359 .,:a_ : ,-, ' '• •\___„/ 1.77.75 is .L., • • /- • • • ' Etiwanda V II ,_„ _ „ • ,--=,-, I 449 3130° I 451 452000 m E INTERIOR GEOLOGILAL SURVEY.RESTON IRGINIA 1999 1 1 1 k [ A,B,C & D- 48 HIGHWAYS AND ROADS r---i Li z e 0 0 tie; 6 I . . ti a, , —11 i ; . I In cii co ._ N. ---, . 3 . , t— u I 11 4; . ' I ;; ; - 1 . k''; _ 4 ; , , P-W 1111, .1 1 I !I i a U ui. -. i . bi _I zi 0 ri g • 5 ,ze, .11 is . \ ,_ \ ,...4 ss iL. ) • Az ,.3.: p z te7 0 2 cn -E5 1 ;ar. .'d \ , ..s.8 a\ \! t,.>„) ,), 0 • \ \, 8\ .)t. ' ",\ .r,9.th,E • \ r:,-3 \ ' r oes \ (4' 1;\ \ \\ ''' 1 t2\1\ \IN. 'Nil Tsirf,," & ii 1 , In- . ti, .,„ ., — CNi tij -A Ow w a> Li? r, (2 (78 13 • e , \ , op .. en •• [, ,, , • 4 6: \ t, , „IC=16.20156DOS ; / -N‘ C \ 91 it,.i\ i . ,----4\-;.:---1-1,)i,* •, -,,, 3\ \ q % %, % \ g% N„ \ 1 te “Q3c) II; i i-(7.„„,. II 7\ \ ; i \ , ,... , , t 1 r \ ; r\ r t, --IN) \)‘ k k ! ;1\ .\\\‘ i li 1(-•,. , \ 1 \ \ \ )1 r\ \ . u - \ . li,‘ '- I b) ‘ ‘ ' \ ' \ 1 1 -frrl." 11 a; ; ; 4 C 1 I ; i / ■ -1 egf, 4 I "-ETTI i I , J 4 4 ; h .vi , A, at \, ) 1%! k. IS tett; A% '1 1-‘ pi lw. . 1 k• \/1 . \ /• , ‘ \ ') t‘ , , o • \ ) , \Yg ‘I'D., ,t i ) ), \ ' t; t \ - ‘„ fie\ / ,k„. c. --1 1.1nr , / i ., If 1 1 :'1 ,-, ; ,/ / , 4 \ 4 S, V '3.. \ ii I 1 11 i.I ,c '.. 4..\ \ /t .4 \a-3'P T \ ‘.., '.' , 4: \ . 4k,l-''' ; \ ' s 4'3% \ r • 1.-1G b 1 ' \` Ill , !,‘,. T 1. '.. ‘ .../ -, 4 , ...) ■ . '.,I.I.T' ' • ' \ / ; ; 4 t; II ' t \\tir. , \\ \ o 2 1 ii.g?' {SI; I \., (tl: ki''''' \ \\ ...:. ..I :f....4:1, ill Ea ler,1 ‘ 1 1 7,,!'•ti '1 1 ) )1 I (7.1j1 i • _II 1! I ', I 1 1 '- w \ cil " t II ; t r , \ \ \ , = -\'‘ 3.5 \A \ g Ilk..1-...■ \ \ N a) 5 ci , , 1/4 . \ . 11 I //:11," ', V.'s \ A 1 i I 5 , 4” \IN \ . ) t*. ( 114111'' 1J \ \ \ I \ I .L I ' ; I, ' I'. r----- i •.., 'Li.: ,,,••+,11 \ ‘. 4. • „ . '''• 1, k ) \, 4,„ I•-‘,1 i . \ t, 1 Lai - o- - - ..m, . , 1 - •w it, ,,, . , \"‘ ‘,,..‘,.. %r:t. ‘; ! ek-,. ,L, ti' I \ '-. ' - ''',.. t, ....1 t. \ \ .... 6 i % '''a ' "c--T --" /4-4 .I. 1I\- \\I\TIkr-----‘,.1, " \\---k- L 0 '1\1 \:\ \A --- ''' .tracc UtOLOON I I t if ,\''..,, \ \ \1 21/pis__ -----..- -‘;3/4,.. '''..\ ,...: i 7 = < ‘,\,,..A; 9 ; ; I' i. ,,,,i/ 1, ni , k v,-, < < 0 LL ___, --,iro. ,,, ,,EL", : , Li \ ::1 ... Y \r, : "4-killt.. . yi —".-"P.;,/,r ,--41 1 ) - i. ri \ is''' \ 1\y1/ ILI 0 E2 _,, 1 ,.. .,6.4-.1 f, lit, ....•••■■•N . i7 !!". te ".. ;. VI i \ I \ I I Ce I —=-- '1 . 1 I■ ;1 ' I-- -1 —1 ' / I ( i I. i , \ ■ \ c_ \ < cv,l.:,,,-. 10 0 Y CV Cu) .,..c 0 in le A,B,C & D- 49 • T 11 t : 1 • ` ta` I: 1.1 T, .� r 11 •i J: `i 7Y:S�!� � : ' �i{MF +.5. y 3:' : _ _ ~4:"nv . 'T•4;20:1 ,-ti,:-.. r.: : i.,•47•1:,714 ... .♦.... ...:^�':.. ...5...,, — '....e.. .... — ...... ... :...'...nom., . ...:-.nc .. .. .....�,.: ,. _..... ..". : .. nom, .,:Imo: ...:. ....••e •p 'ak.-i� fY �:Ci••:4�Ji%I _'-F._i rlii.,lna. •.i'4.s .T:::..� i4v.,� l5, I fx"r:MT•^'I('` .v.„l• :, yE F nR l - _ L rr, `;,5 d s R fza♦ •' (:,::;�^: •`q ��..,E a i4 RACY 5 - _ - `� i.•5.. . ' ' _. : a v�K Fi" _ . [La : N:.h'• ' 5[.• • • a ••ice .� Jet S. . -. ysws, _•I,..?,�:• ) vrf�, III fir• t w r G�' `" -:: .•• :4 44 PY 4N Y'isi1'r ,Y�. v +., �lf Ii tI s 'tS: : ! .. L�. .dpi- ,,:,_ .:' Lr': -..1.,.:::::::.:-,-..,,,,z. 1-_... ..-.....--' , ..}fl}� .ahxr'l,•;''^"-.5?...��_.:-C• ,� S;r k.t' . ] IS do♦ , ..N I 4 ��yy�y• sp' , f.�7ys. a 19} ( ,ti..ry��n •ti..�n� -' t , • • _r F . .. ': . : .. _. ..-T:.' ,.. -.. . (isr, ':l,tl _' _ J: v • ". h:::�Yi,`:i :, : u rya . . .' 'i/ ... : .. . . . . • ,r'�'v Y.':' {%s`!'_ MS�r. �i 'k.ca. '... ur vw �w, 5 .N �y ay f*'i- / fry ,zre,R Yh City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM • �. 74, INITIAL STUDY PART II au n BACKGROUND 1. Project File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Variance DRC2010-00963 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00964. 2. Related Files: n/a 3. Description of Project: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 - A proposal to sub-divide a vacant parcel of about 146,000 square feet(3.4 acres) into five (5) lots and construct one single-family residence on each lot in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place -APN: 0225-181-73. VARIANCE DRC2010-00963 - K.U. & ASSOCIATES - A request for a Variance to allow a reduction in the lot depth (from the required 200 feet minimum to approximately 135 feet) for two (2) lots of a proposed 5-lot subdivision in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00964. • TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2010-00964 - K.U. &ASSOCIATES - A request to remove four (4) trees in conjunction with a 5-lot subdivision and construction of five (5) single-family residences on a property located in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225-181-73. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010, and Variance DRC2010-00963. • 4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Philip Chung K.U. &Associates, Inc. 650 Camino De Gloria Walnut, CA 91789 5. General Plan Designation: Very Low Residential 6. Zoning: Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project area is a parcel of about 146,000 square feet (3.4 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 442 feet (east to west) by approximately 331 feet (north to south). The site is vacant. There are several trees at the west and south sides of the project site; low vegetation otherwise dominates the site. To the north, south, and west of the project site are single-family residences. To the east are a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. The subject property is generally level with a southeasterly slope; the elevations at the northwest and • southeast corners are approximately 1,462 feet and 1,448 feet, respectively. A,B,C & D- 52 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 Page 2 8. Lead Agency Name and Address: • City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive • Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 9. Contact Person and Phone Number: Mike Smith, Associate Planner • (909)477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): GLOSSARY—The following abbreviations are used in this report: CVWD—Cucamonga Valley Water District EIR — Environmental Impact Report FEIR — Final Environmental Impact Report FPEIR - Final Program Environmental Impact Report NPDES— National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NOx— Nitrogen Oxides ROG— Reactive Organic Gases PM10— Fine Particulate Matter . RWQCB— Regional Water Quality Control Board SCAQMD—South Coast Air Quality Management District SWPPP—Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan URBEMIS7G — Urban Emissions Model 7G • ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or"Less Than-Significant-Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. (x) Aesthetics (x) Agricultural Resources (x) Air Quality (x) Biological Resources (x) Cultural Resources (x) Geology & Soils (x) Greenhouse Gas Emissions (x) Hazards &Waste Materials (x) Hydrology &Water Quality (x) Land Use & Planning ( ) Mineral Resources (x) Noise ( ) Population & Housing ( ) Public Services ( ) Recreation ( ) Transportation/Traffic ( ) Utilities & Service Systems (x) Mandatory Findings of Significance • DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: (x) I find that although the proposed •,ect could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in a ,case because revisions in the project have been made by, or t agreed to, by the project propo MIT GATED NEGATIVE DECLARATI will be prepared. Prepared By: �� Date: S tZ Reviewed By: \ Date: ci '1— • A,B,C & D- 53 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 3 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP 9 Significant Incorporated Significant Impact Incorporatetl Impact Impact • EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: a) There are no significant vistas within or adjacent to the project site. The site is not within a view corridor according to General Plan Figure LU-6. b) The project site contains no scenic resources and no historic buildings within a State • Scenic Highway. There are no State Scenic Highways within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. c) The site is located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, south, and a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company to the east. The visual quality of the area will not degrade as a result of this project. The property will be developed with single-family residences similar to those in the surrounding area. The architecture of the homes will be required to be consistent with the design standards and policies established by the Planning Commission and City Council. They will also be required to comply with technical requirements including maximum building height, minimum setbacks, and maximum lot coverage as described in the Etiwanda Specific Plan to ensure that the site is not overbuilt. The homes that are part of this application have been submitted for review and approval by the City. Approval by the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission will be required prior to approval of the homes. Also, City standards require the developer to underground existing and new utility lines and facilities to minimize unsightly appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-96, unless exempted by said Resolution. Lastly, existing trees will be required to be preserved in- place to the maximum extent possible. d) When the project site is developed with houses, the project will increase the number of • street lights and residential lighting used in the immediate vicinity. The design and placement of street lights will be required to comply with City standards including requirements for shielding, diffusing, or indirect lighting to avoid glare. Residential lighting is generally not a source of substantial glare as such lighting is limited to within the • confines of the home. Exterior residential lighting will be required to comply with City standards for maximum height and setbacks for light poles. The impact is not considered significant. A,B,C & D- 54 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 4 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP 9 Significant co Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220 (g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code Section 51104 (g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or • conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Comments: a) The site is not designated as Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The site is located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, south, and a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company to the east. There are approximately 209 acres of Farmland of Local Importance, Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City of Rancho Cucamonga according to General Plan Table RC-2. Concentrations of Important Farmland are sparsely located in the southern and eastern parts of the City that is characterized by existing and planned development. Farmland in the southern portion of the City is characterized by industrial, residential, and commercial land uses and Farmland in the eastern portion of the City is within the Etiwanda area and planned for development. Further, a large number of the designated farmlands parcels are small, ranging from 3 acres to 30 acres, and their economic viability is doubtful; therefore, they are not intended to be retained as farmland in the General Plan Land Use Plan. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) identified the conversion of farmlands to urban uses as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. b) There is no agriculturally zoned land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no Williamson Act contracts within the City. c) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land or • timberland. Therefore no impacts would occur related to the conversion of forest land to A,B,C & D- 55 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 5 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Penificanv wm Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact - Incorporated Impact t Impapa ct non-forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. No mitigation is required. d) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land or timberland. Therefore no impacts would occur related of the loss or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. e) The site is located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, south, and a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company to the east. There are no-agricultural uses within one mile of the project site. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. Furthermore, there are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land. Therefore, there is not potential for conversion of • forest land to a non-forest use. 3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: • a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) applicable air quality plan? • b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ( ) (V) ( ) ( ) concentrations? e) . Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) number of people? Comments: a) As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.3), the proposed project would not interfere with the ability of the region to comply with Federal and State air quality standards for Criterion 1 Increase in the Frequency or Severity of Violations (local air quality impacts) or Criterion 2 Exceed Assumptions in the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) (consistency with the 2003 AQMP). Therefore the project is consistent with the 2003 AQMP and is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. According to the Air Quality Impact Analysis prepared by Giroux & Associates on May 17, 2010, the project will not exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) regional significance emission thresholds during construction or operation and the construction emissions from the project would not • exceed the SCAQMD localized significance thresholds. The project is consistent with the (AQMP); the project would not result in a cumulative impact; and the project would not create objectionable odors that affect sensitive receptors. A,B,C & D- 56 Initial Study for • City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 • AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 6 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Both the State of California and the Federal Government have established health-based Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) for seven air pollutants. These pollutants include ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (502), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PM10), fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PM2,5) microns in diameter and lead. Among these pollutants, ozone and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) are considered regional pollutants while the others have more localized effects. In addition, the State of California has set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), vinyl chloride and visibility reducing particles. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safety. The City of Rancho Cucamonga area is within the South Coast Air Basin, which is under the jurisdiction of the SCAQMD. The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) provides the SCAQMD with the authority to manage transportation activities at indirect sources. Indirect sources of pollution are generated when minor sources collectively emit a substantial amount of pollution. Examples of this include motor vehicles at an intersection, a mall, and on highways. SCAQMD also regulates stationary sources of pollution within in jurisdictional area. Direct emissions from motor vehicles are regulated by the Air Resources Board (ARB). The combination of topography, low mixing height, abundant sunshine, and emissions • from the second largest urban area in the United States gives the Basin the worst air pollution problem in the nation. The Basin experiences a persistent temperature inversion (increasing temperature with increasing altitude); this inversion (coupled with low wind speeds) limits the vertical dispersion of air contaminants, holding them relatively near the ground. Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) of 1970, the EPA established national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for six major pollutants, termed criteria pollutants: ozone (O3), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PMto), fine particulate matter less •than 2.5 (PM2,5) microns in diameter, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead. Criteria pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the Federal and State Governments have established AAQS, or criteria, for outdoor concentrations in order to protect public health. Data collected at permanent monitoring stations are used by the EPA to classify regions as "attainment" or "non-attainment" depending on whether the regions met the requirements stated in the primary NAAQS. Non-attainment areas have additional restrictions as required by the EPA. The EPA has designated the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) responsible for ensuring the Basin's compliance with the FCAA. The South Coast Air Basin is in Non-Attainment Status for Ozone, PM10 and PM2.5. Specific criteria for determining whether the potential air quality impacts of a project are significant are set forth in the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The criteria include daily emissions thresholds, compliance with State and national air quality standards, and consistency with the current AQMP. As prescribed by SCAQMD, an Air Quality Impact Analysis was prepared by Giroux & Associates on May 17, 2010 that • utilizes the Urban Emissions Model 7G (URBEMIS7G) Version 9.2.4 methodology and CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 1993 to evaluate short-term construction emissions A,B,C & D- 57 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 7 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially ga an PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant Im No Impact Incorporated _ Impact Impact and short-term construction emissions for localized significant thresholds, long-term operational emissions, operation emissions for localized significant thresholds, and Green House Gas Emissions. Emissions(pounds per day) Source w }` ROGNOCNO: �?' "CO '1 'SO: PM�o PMzs -: Grading -No Mitigation 4.3 41.9 20 0 59.6 13.8 -With Mitigation 4.3 38.2 20 0 7.1 2.1 Building Construction -No Mitigation 1.1 8.7 5.5 0 0.6 0.5 -With Mitigation 1.1 7.4 - 8.5 0 0.1 0.1 Painting and Paving -No Mitigation 3.4 11.6 8.8 0 1.0 0.9 -With Mitigation 3.3 9.9 8.8 0 0.2 0.2 • Maximum Daily Emissions 4.3 41.9 20 0 59.6 13.8 Significance Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Significant Impact? No No No No No No Note:The maximum daily emissions refer to the maximum emissions that would occur in one day; it was assumed that the grading activities do not occur at the same time as the other construction activities;therefore,their emissions are not summed. ROG=reactive organic gases; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; CO =carbon monoxide; SOx=oxides of sulfur; PMto and PMz 5= particulate matter Short Term (Construction) Impacts • Equipment Exhausts and Related Construction Activities Construction activities produce combustion emissions from various sources such as site grading, utility engines, on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, asphalt paving, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions from construction activities envisioned on-site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. The use of construction equipment on-site would result in localized exhaust emissions. Fugitive Dust Fugitive dust emissions are generally emissions are generally associated with land clearing and exposure of soils to the air and wind, and cut-and-fill grading operations. Dust generated during construction varies substantially on a project-by project basis, depending on the level of activity, the specific operation and weather conditions at the • time of construction. Construction emissions can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils, weather conditions and other factors. The proposed project will be required to comply • with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 to control fugitive dust. A,B,C & D- 58 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 8 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: penIficalnt Wlh Than PP 9 Significant corporiae Significant _ Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Architectural Coatings Architectural coatings contain ROGNOC and are part of the 03 precursors. Based on the proposed project, it is estimated that the proposed buildings will result in approximately 3-4 lbs of ROGNOC per day during the coating phase. The emissions would occur after grading activities, near the end of the construction period. Therefore, this ROGNOC emission is the principal air emission and is less than the SCAQMD ROGNOC threshold of 75 lbs/day. Emissions associated with architectural coatings could be reduced by using precoated/natural-colored building materials, using water-based or low- ROGNOC coating, and using coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency, For example, a high-volume, low-pressure (HVLP) spray method is a coating application system operated at air pressure between 0.1 and 10 pounds per square inch gauge (psig), with 65 percent transfer efficiency. Manual applications such as paintbrush, and roller trowel, spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge have 100 percent transfer efficiency. Odors Heavy-duty equipment in the project area during construction would emit odors. However, the construction activity would cease to occur after individual construction is completed. • No other sources of objectionable odors have been identified for the proposed project, and no mitigation measures are required. In compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402 the proposed uses are not anticipated to emit any objectionable odors. Therefore, objectionable odors posing a health risk to potential on-site and existing off-site uses would not occur as a result of the proposed project. Naturally Occurring Asbestos The proposed project is located in San Bernardino County, and it is not among the counties that are found to have serpentine and ultramafic rock in their soils. In addition, there has been no serpentine or ultramafic rock found in the project area. Therefore, the potential risk for naturally occurring asbestors (NOA) during project construction is small and less than significant. 2010 General Plan FPEIR Air Quality Analysis and Mitigation Measures (short term) Short Term (Construction) Emissions - Continued development will contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. During the construction phases of development, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, construction worker vehicles, and energy use will generate emissions. In addition, fugitive dust would also be generated during grading and construction activities. While most of the dust would settle on or near the project site, smaller particles would remain in the atmosphere, increasing particle levels within the surrounding area. Construction is an on-going industry in the Rancho Cucamonga area. Construction workers and equipment work and operate at one development site until their tasks are complete. Nevertheless, fugitive dust and equipment emissions are required to be assessed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) on a project- • specific basis and in conformance with the General Plan FPEIR. Therefore, the following A,B,C & D- 59 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 9 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PotentiallyWith Th an pp g Significant corporiate Significant pa Impact Incorporated Impact Impact mitigation measures as identified in the FPEIR shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels: 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good 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. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the 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. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. • 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • 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 activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public 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., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover • payloads using tarps or other suitable means. A,B,C & D- 60 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 10 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than pp g Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • 6) The site, including the truck dump and spread fill areas, shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce Fine Particulate Matter (PM,0) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Air Quality based on the future build out of the City. Based upon on the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS7G) estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan (FPEIR), Nitrogen Dioxide (No2), Ozone (03), and Particulate Matter (PM2.5 and PM10) would exceed SCAQMD thresholds for significance; therefore, they would all be cumulatively considerable if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less-than-significant. • Lonq Term (Operational) Impacts Lonq Term Project Operational Emissions Long-term air pollutant emission impacts are those associated with stationary sources and mobile sources involving any project-related changes. The proposed project would result in a net increase in the number of residential structures and uses in the project area; therefore, the proposed project would result in net increases in both stationary and mobile source emissions. The stationary source emissions would come from additional natural gas consumption for on-site buildings and electricity for the lighting in the buildings and at . the parking area. Based on trip generation factors included in the Air Quality Impact Study prepared by Giroux & Associates on May 17, 2010, long-term• operation emissions associated with the proposed project, calculated with the URBEMISG7 shows that the increase of all criteria pollutants as a result of the proposed project would be less than the corresponding SCAQMD daily emission thresholds. Therefore, project-related long-term air quality impacts would not be significant. Mitigation measures would not be required. Table 5: Project-Related Emissions Burden Emission (pounds per day) • Source ROGNOC NOx CO SOx Mir) PM2.5 Area 0.3 0.1 0.2 0 0 0 Sources • Vehicles 0.4 0.6 5.2 0 0.9 0.2 A,B,C & D- 61 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 11 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially ignifi anp With man PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant pa Impact Incorporated Impel Impact Total 0.7 0.7 5.4 0 0.9 0.2 • Significant 55 55 550 150 150 55 Threshold Significant No No No No No No Impact • 2010 General Plan FPEIR Air Quality Analysis and Mitigation Measures (long term) Lonq Term (Operational) Emissions - The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report(FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Air Quality based on the future build out of the City. In the long-term, development consistent with the General Plan would result in significant operational vehicle emissions based upon on the URBEMIS7G model estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan FPEIR; therefore, would all be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less-than-significant. The following mitigation measures as identified in the FPEIR shall be implemented: • 10) Landscape with native and/or drought-resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. 11) Provide lighter color roofing and road materials and tree planting programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources MSC-01 measure. 12) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 13) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. After implementation of the preceding mitigation measures, the General Plan FPEIR identified the citywide increase in operational emissions as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.3). c) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 4.3), continued development would contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. The General Plan FPEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant and adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The project proposed is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. d) Sensitive receptors are defined as populations that are more susceptible to the effects of pollution than the population at large. The SCAQMD identifies the following as sensitive • receptors: long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities. According to the SCAQMD, projects have the potential to create significant A,B,C & D- 62 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 12 Less Than • Significant Less Potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant Mitigation Significant nt No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact impacts if they are located within 1/4 mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air contaminants identified in SCAQMD Rule 1401 • The project site is located immediately adjacent to residences. Potential impacts to air quality are consistent with the Public Health and Safety Super-Element within the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. During construction, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be generated from grading the site. • The mitigation measures listed under b) above and the following mitigation measure will reduce impact to less-than-significant levels. 14) All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning devices (i.e. fireplaces/hearths) in new development on or after March 9, 2009. e) Construction Odors (short-term) may include odors associated with equipment use including diesel exhaust or roofing, painting and paving. These odors are temporary and would dissipate rapidly. Operation Odors (long-term) are typically associated with the • type of use. Odors from residential uses would be from cooking and gardening. Similarly common odors associated with mixed-use and commercial land uses would be expected (i.e. restaurants). Local odors from the majority of land uses would be similar to other urban areas and would not be considered significant. Industrial uses could create objectionable odors and, therefore, are located away from residential uses and sensitive • receptors. Typically, the uses proposed do not create objectionable odors. •No adverse impacts are anticipated. • 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: • a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery • sites? A,B,C & D- 63 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 13 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP 9 Significant corporae Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impacl e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Conservation Plan, Natural Community conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? Comments: a) The site is located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, west, and south, and a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company to the east. The site has been very minimally disrupted along its perimeter for the construction of equestrian trails for the surrounding residential developments to the west and north and fencing along the south and east perimeter. The project site is located within a habitat conservation or natural community plan area. According to the General Plan Figure RC-4, and Section 4.10 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is within an area of sensitive biological resources— the Coastal California Gnatcatcher(CAGN). • According to the Habitat Assessment for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher (CAGN) prepared by Leatherman BioConsulting, Inc. on February 22, 2010, no habitat for the Gnatcatcher occurs on the project site, The report states that no individuals of the many shrub species that make up the coastal sage scrub or alluvial fan sage scrub communities • in the Gnatcatcher lives were observed on the site. The Coastal California Gnatcatcher (CAGN) is not expected to be present. However, to ensure that the Coastal California Gnatcatcher (CAGN) is not present at the time of grading and construction: 1) Prior to grading or other ground disturbance of the site, the applicant shall conduct a final focused survey to determine the presence/absence of this species following protocols established by the United States Fish and Wild Life Services (USFWS). In the event that CAGN is detected or observed within the area of disturbance, avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures shall be developed and implemented. b) The project site is located in an urban area with no natural communities. No riparian habitat exists on-site, meaning the project will not have any impacts. c) No wetland habitat is present on-site. As a result, project implementation would have no • impact on these resources. d) The City is primarily located in an urban area that does not contain large, contiguous natural open space areas. Wildlife potentially may move through the north/south trending tributaries in the northern portion of the City and within the Sphere of Influence. However, • the site is located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place•and is characterized by residential development to the north, south, and a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company to the east. As • such, the project site does not represent an area that would link two or more significant wildlife areas and wildlife are not likely to utilize the project site as a wildlife corridor. Therefore no adverse impacts are anticipated. A,B,C & D- 64 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 14 Lass Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant With Than PP g siImpct Mitigation SiImpct Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e) There is one heritage tree, a Blue Gum Eucalyptus, on the project site; therefore, the proposed project is in conflict with the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance. The applicant is proposing to remove this tree to allow grading and the construction of the home on Lot 1. The applicant has submitted an application to remove this tree — Related file: Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00964. To mitigate the impact of the removal of the tree, the applicant shall: 2) The removed Blue Gum Eucalyptus tree shall be replaced with a matching species (or equivalent) of a minimum 24-inch box size. f) Neither the City nor the SOI are within an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved State habitat conservation plan area. The project site is not located within a local conservation area according to the General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Plan, Figure RC-1. No conflicts with habitat conservation plans will occur. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) • significance of an archeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: a) The project site has not been identified as a "Historic Resource" per the standards of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 2.24 (Historic Preservation). There will be no impact. b) There are no known archaeological sites or resources recorded on the project site; however, the Rancho Cucamonga area is known to have been inhabited by Native Americans according to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6). Construction activity, particularly grading, soil excavation and compaction, could adversely affect or eliminate existing and potential archaeological resources. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Cultural Resources based on the future build out of the City. The following mitigation measures as identified in the FPEIR shall be implemented: 1) 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: A,B,C & D- 65 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 15 • Less Than Significant Less Potentially VN Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Siondic p Si t No Impact Incoro ate E Impact Impact • Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. • Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying a in-kind mitigation fee. • Prepare a technical resources management report, 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. • c) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6) indicates that the Rancho Cucamonga area is on an alluvial fan. According to the research performed at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and the San Bernardino County database, no paleontological sites or resources have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the • sphere-of-influence, including the project site; however, the area has a high sensitivity rating for paleontological resources. The older alluvium, which would have been deposited during the wetter climate that prevailed 10,000-100,000 years ago during the Late Pleistocene epoch of the Quaternary period, when the last "Ice Age" and the appearance of modern man occurred, may contain significant vertebrate fossils. The project site is underlain by Quaternary alluvium per the Public Safety Element of the General Plan; therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 2) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal 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 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 or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading A,B,C & D- 66 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 16 Less Than • Significant Less Potentially With rnan Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant Mitigation SiNo Impact Incfpmeted Impac t Impact contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga: Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. d) The site is located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, south, and a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company to the east. The site has been very minimally disrupted along its perimeter for the construction of equestrian trails for the surrounding residential developments to the west and north and fencing along the south and east perimeter. No known religious or sacred sites exist within the project area. No evidence is in place to suggest the project site has been used for human burials. The California Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5) states that if human remains are discovered on-site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. As adherence to State regulations is required for all development, no mitigation is required in the unlikely event human remains are discovered on-site. No • adverse impacts are anticipated. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) ( ) (1) iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including ( ) .( ) ( ) (1) liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ( ) (1) ( ) ( ) c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, ( ) ( ) ( ) (1) or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? • A,B,C & D- 67 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 17 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially ignifi aly With Than PP g Significant Mitigation With ie Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use ( ) ( ) (7) ( ) of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: a) No known faults pass through the site and it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault, according to the General Plan Figure PS-2, and Section 4.7 of the General Plan FPEIR. The Red Hill Fault, passes approximately 1 mile northwest of the site, and the Cucamonga Fault Zone lies approximately 2.5 miles north. These faults are both capable of producing MV, 6.0-7.0 earthquakes. Also, the San Jacinto fault, capable of producing up to M„,7.5 earthquakes is 11.5 miles northeasterly of the site and the San Andreas, capable of up to M„, 8.2 earthquakes, is 13.5 miles northeasterly of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. Adhering to the Uniform Building Code and Standard Conditions will ensure that geologic impacts are less-than-significant. • b) The City of Rancho Cucamonga is within a designated Soil Erosion Control Area Exhibit 4.7-4 of the General Plan FPEIR. The proposed project will require the excavation, stockpiling, and/or movement of on-site soils. The Rancho Cucamonga area is subject to strong Santa Ana wind conditions during September to April, which generates blowing sand and dust, and creates erosion problems. Construction activities may temporarily exacerbate the impacts of windblown sand, resulting in temporary problems of dust control; however, development of this project under the General Plan would help to reduce windblown sand impacts in the area as pavement, roads, buildings, and landscaping are established. Therefore, the following fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels: 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM" emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM" emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM" emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM" emissions. • c) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.7) indicates that there is a potential for the hillside areas at the northern end of the City and in the SOI for slope failure, landslides, and/or A,B,C & D- 68 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 18 Less Than • Significant Less Potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant Mitigation SiNo Imact Incorporated Impact t Impa ct erosion. Areas subject to slope instability contain slopes of 30 percent or greater. Landslides may be induced by seismic activity, rain, or construction. The City Hillside Development Regulations prohibits the development within slopes of 30 percent or greater and limit the number of units that could be constructed within the Hillside Residential and Very Low Density Residential designations in the Hillside areas. The site is not within an Earthquake hazard zone or other unstable geologic unit or soil type according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-2. Soil types on-site consist of Tujunga Gravelly Loamy Sand (TvC) Soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. No adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The majority of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located on alluvial soil deposits. These types of soils are not considered to be expansive. Soil types on-site consist of Tujunga Gravelly Loamy Sand (TvC) Soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. These soils are typically stable. No adverse impacts are anticipated. • e) The project proposes the installation of septic systems that will be required to be permitted by the City's Building and Safety Department and meet all related environmental regulations. Additionally, the project shall be required to comply with Chapter 5 of the Santa Ana Region Basin Plan. If the site is unsuitable for the installation of septic systems, the applicant shall be required to connect to the City's existing sewer system per • Section 4.7.6 Threshold 4.7e of the General Plan that limits the number of septic systems if the site is overlain by Cieneba and Ramona soil types. Soil types on-site consist of Tujunga Gravelly Loamy Sand (TvC) Soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) greenhouse gases? Comments: a) Regulations and Significance -The Federal government began studying the phenomenon of global warming as early as 1979 with the National Climate Protection Act (92 Stat. 601). In June of 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger established California's Green House Gas ("GHG") emissions reduction target in Executive Order (EO) S-3-05. The EO created goals to reduce GHG emissions for the State of California to 2000 levels by 2010; GHG emissions reduced to 1990 levels by 2020; and GHG emissions reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Additionally, on December 7, 2009 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued findings regarding GHGs under rule 202(a) of the Clean Air Act: (1) that GHGs endanger human health; and (2) that this will be the first steps to regulating GHGs through the Federal Clean Air Act. The USEPA defines six key GHGs (carbon dioxide [CO2], methane [CH4], nitrous oxide [NZO], hydroflourocarbons • [HFCs], perflourocarbons [PFCs], and sulfur hexafluoride [SF6]. The combined emissions of these well-mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and engines contribute to GHG pollution. • A,B,C & D- 69 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 19 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact t Incorporated Impact Impact The western states, including Arizona, California, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, already experience hotter, drier climates. California is a substantial contributor of GHGs and is expected to see an increase of three to four degrees Fahrenheit (°F) over the next century. Assembly Bill (AB) 32 requires that the California Air Resources Board (ARB), the lead agency for implementing AB 32, determine what the statewide GHG emission level was in 1990 and approve a statewide GHG emissions limit (427 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent) to be achieved by 2020 and prepare a Scoping Plan to outline the main strategies for meeting the 2020 deadline. Significant progress can be made toward the 2020 goal through existing technologies and improving the efficiency of energy use. Other solutions would include improving the State's infrastructure, and transitioning to cleaner and more efficient sources of energy. The ARB estimates that 38 percent of the State's GHG emissions in 2004 was from transportation sources followed by electricity generation (both in-State and out-of-State) at 28 percent and industrial at 20 percent. Residential and commercial activities account for 9 percent, agricultural uses at 6 percent, high global warming potential gases at 3 percent, and recycling and waste at 1 percent. It is not anticipated that any single development project would have a substantial effect on • global climate change but that GHG emissions from the project would combine with emissions across California, the United States, and the world to cumulatively contribute to global climate change. Therefore, consistent with the ARB's Climate Change Scoping Plan, the proposed project was evaluated for consistency with the Early Action Measures (Scoping Plan is a recommendation until adopted through normal rulemaking). The proposed project is assessed by determining its consistency with the 37 Recommended Actions identified by ARB. In compliance with Senate Bill (SB) 97 and CEQA, the project has been analyzed based on a quantitative based standard (CEQA 15064.4). Additionally, the ARB was directed through SB 375 to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved within the automobile and light truck sectors for 2020 and 2035. SCAQMD and ARB maintain ambient air quality monitoring stations in the Basin. The stations closest to the project site are the Upland station and the Ontario Highway station. The Upland station monitors all criteria pollutant except PM,0, PM2.5, and SO2 which are monitored at the Ontario station. The ambient air quality in the project area for CO, NO2, and SO2 are consistently below the relevant State and Federal standards (based on ARB and EPA from 2007, 2008, and 2009 readings). Ozone, PM10, and PM2.5 levels all exceed State and Federal standards regularly. Project Related Sources of GHG's- Based on the Guidelines for the Implementation of California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G, a project would normally be considered to have a significant effect on air quality if the project would violate any ambient air quality standards, contribute substantially to an existing air quality violation, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community. However, neither the CEQA statutes, Office of Planning • and Research (OPR) guidelines, nor the draft proposed changes to the CEQA Guidelines prescribe thresholds of significance or a particular methodology for performing an impact analysis. Significance criteria are left to the judgment and discretion of the Lead Agency. A,B,C & D- 70 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 20 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant c porate Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Project related GHG's would include emissions from direst and indirect sources. Based on the Air Quality Impact Analysis prepared by Giroux & Associates on May 17, 2010 the project would result in the following emissions of carbon dioxide [CO2], methane [CH4], nitrous oxide [N20], and hydroflourocarbons [HFCs] and would not result in the other GHG's - (perflourocarbons [PFCs] and sulfur hexafluoride [SF6]). As seen in the tables below the proposed project would result in a total of 6.8 MTCO2eq/yr from construction activities; 27.3 MTCO2eq/yr from operational activities; and 87.7 MTCO2eq/yr for mobile sources. Total project related emissions would result in 121.8 MTCO2eq/yr (construction, operational, and mobile combined). Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions -The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.5) indicates that GHG emissions result from construction activities associated with diesel- powered construction equipment and other combustion sources (i.e. Generators, workers vehicles, material delivery, etc.). The GHG emitted by construction equipment is primarily carbon dioxide (CO2). The highest levels of construction related GHG's occur during site preparation including demolition, grading and excavation. Construction related GHG's are also emitted from off-site haul trucks and construction workers traveling to the job site. • Exhaust emissions from construction activities would vary each day with the changes in construction activity on site. The combustion of fossil-based fuels creates GHG's such as CO2, Cho, and N2O. CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment. Construction greenhouse gas emissions are: • Source Emissions Emissions (tons of carbon dioxide) (MTCO2e) Grading 154 140 Construction, Paint, and Pave 71 64 Total 225 204 Average(30 years) 7.5 6.8 Although the emissions are less than the de facto SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 MT/year, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented to further reduce impacts to less- than-significant levels: 1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAWMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site, including the truck dump and spread fill areas, with water or other soil-stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 2) The construction contactor shall select construction equipment based on low- emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the grading plan that ensures all construction equipment will be tuned and • maintained in accordance with the manufactures specification. 3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes. A,B,C & D- 71 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 21 • • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP g Significant corporal Significant Impact 'Incorporated_ Impact Impact 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel-powered engines where feasible. 5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak-hour traffic. 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for construction crew. Long Term (Operational) GHG's Emissions - The primary source of GHG emissions generated by the proposed project would be from motor vehicles, combustion of natural gas for space and water heating, as well as off-site GHG emissions from generation of electricity consumed by the proposed land use development over a long term. CEQA requires the Lead Agency to review the project for "adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure," to determine potential impacts of GHG's. Therefore the project has been analyzed based on methodologies and information available to the City at the time this document was prepared. Estimates are based on calculations for each GHG source and represent a scenario that is a worst case with the understanding that technology changes may reduce GHG emissions in the future. To date, there is no established quantified GHG emission threshold but the de facto screening threshold is 3,000 MT/year. Operational greenhouse gas emissions are: • Source Emissions (MTCO2e) Motor Vehicles 87.7 Natural Gas 13.1 • Electricity 10.2 Water Transport 2.0 Waste 2.0 Subtotal—Operations Total 115 Subtotal—Construction Total 6.8 (Average 30 years) Total (Operations + Construction) 121.8 The project is the subdivision of one (1) vacant parcel with an area of 146,000 square feet (3.4 acres) into five (5) lots and construction of five (5) single-family residences. This will result in an increase in both stationary and mobile source emissions. The majority of energy consumption typically occurs during project operation (more than 80 percent and less than 20 percent during construction activities). The proposed project will incorporate • several design features that are consistent with the California Office of the Attorney General's recommended measures to reduce GHG emission including fiber optic A,B,C & D- 72 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 22 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially w,lh Than PP g Sicant Mirgaron Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact communications infrastructure, on-street bike lanes, sidewalks, fire defensible space, and water efficient landscaping. The project is consistent with the California Environmental Protection Agency Climate • Action Team proposed early action measures to mitigate climate change included in the CARB Scoping Plan mandated under AB 32. The developer of the proposed project will be required to provide fiber optic communications infrastructure, on-street bike lanes, sidewalks, fire defensible space, and water efficient landscaping. Additionally, the City is participating in the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) with SANBAG for the San Bernardino County area pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 375. The project's long term operation greenhouse gas emissions will contribute to area pollutants but will not exceed the SCAQMD's threshold of 3,000 MT/year. To further reduce the emissions, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 7) Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials" such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low-volatile-organic-compound (VOC) materials. 8) Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy • • standard including but not limited to any combination of; • Increased insulation, • Limit air leakage through the structure, • Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances, • Landscape and developed site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping, • Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems, • Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements, • Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED's)for outdoor lighting. 9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following; • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available and/or • install the infrastructure to deliver and use reclaimed water. A,B,C & D- 73 Initial Study for • City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 • AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 23 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless urinals/water heaters. • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non-vegetated surfaces. 10) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. The proposed project will result in 121.8 MTCO2eq/yr total project-related emissions without reduction from project design features. The annual Greenhouse Gas emissions will be below the de facto 3,000 MT/year screening threshold. b) The project is the subdivision of one (1) vacant parcel with an area of 146,000 square feet (3.4 acres) into five(5) lots and construction of five (5) single-family residences. No other applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emission apply to the project. The 2010 General Plan Update included adopted policies and Standard Conditions that respond to the Attorney General and the California Air • Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). The General Plan policies and Standard Conditions guide infill and sustainable development reliant on pedestrian connections, re- use and rehabilitation of existing structures, link transportation opportunities, promote development that is sensitive to natural resources and incentivizes denser mixed use projects that maximizes divers opportunities. The developer of the proposed project will be required to provide fiber optic communications infrastructure, on-street bike lanes, sidewalks, fire defensible space, and water efficient landscaping and therefore is consistent with the policies of the General Plan. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of GHG's and determined that GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable, which would be a significant unavoidable adverse cumulative impact. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project would not hinder the State's GHG reduction goals established by Assembly(AB) 32 and therefore would be less than a significant impact. 8. HAZARDS AND WASTE MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste • within 1/4 mile of an existing or proposed school? A,B,C & D- 74 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 24 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and.Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Nth Than PP 9 Significant Incorporated Significant No Impact Inwrporated Impact Impact d) Be located on a site Which is included on a list of ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or . • working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ( ) (✓) ( ) () loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? • • Comments: a) Development within the City may utilize or generate hazardous materials or wastes. This is usually associated with individual households, small business operations, and maintenance activities like paints, cleaning solvents, fertilizers, and motor oil. Additionally, through construction activities that would use paints, solvents, acids, curing compounds, grease, and oils. These materials would be stored and used at individual sites. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition that is considered a full-service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive that any other in the State. The City has an Emergency Operations Plan that meets State and Federal requirements and is in the process of updating the approved 2005 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials and/or waste will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less-than-significant. No adverse impacts are expected. b) The proposed project does not include the use of hazardous materials or volatile fuels. • The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition that is considered a full-service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive than any other in the State. The City has an Emergency Operations Plan that meets State and Federal requirements and is in the process of updating the approved 2005 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials or volatile fuels will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less-than-significant. No adverse impacts are anticipated. c) There is a school, Summit Intermediate Junior High School, located approximately 1/4 mile north of the project site at 6061 East Avenue. The project will be required to • comply with existing State and Federal standards on the use and transport of hazardous A,B,C & D- 75 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 25 • Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant torpor to Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact materials. Typically, the uses proposed do not create objectionable odors. No adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The proposed project is not listed as a hazardous waste or substance materials site. Recent site inspection did not reveal the presence of discarded drums or illegal dumping of hazardous materials. No impact is anticipated. e) The site is not located within an Airport Land Use Plan according to the General Plan Figure PS-7 and General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.8-1 and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The project site is located approximately 6.5 miles northeasterly of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. f) There are no private airstrips within the City. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2.5 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. g) The City has a developed roadway network that provides emergency access and evacuation routes to existing development. New development will be located on a site that has access to existing roadways. The City's Emergency Operation Plan, which is updated every three years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the • City of Rancho Cucamonga in the event of a disaster. Because the project includes at least one points of public street access and is required to comply with all applicable City codes, including local fire ordinances, no adverse impacts are anticipated. h) Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest ongoing threat from a wind-driven fire in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone found in the northern part of the City. The project is located with the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according to General Plan Figure PS-1. The City recognizes the risk and has adopted policies and Standard Conditions that limit uses to Very Low density residential development and Hillside residential uses in these areas to limit property exposed to wildland fire hazards. The project shall prepare a Fire Protection Plan to outline appropriate measures to address fire hazards. Therefore, the following wildland fire mitigation measure shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels: 1) The project shall comply with Chapter 7A of the California Building Code (CBC), which includes building standards for the Wildand-Urban Interface Fire Area. The standards call for the use of ignition-resistant materials and design to inhibit the intrusion of flame or burning embers projected by a vegetation fire and help reduce losses resulting from repeated cycles of interface fire disasters. • A,B,C & D- 76 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 26 less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: potentially with Than PP g Significant Magellan Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ( ) (V) ( ) ( ) requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, • which would result in flooding on-or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) that would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? • j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Comments: a) Water and sewer service is provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). The project is designed to connect to existing water and sewer systems. The State of California is authorized to administer various aspects of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. The General Construction Permit treats any construction activity over 1 acre as an industrial activity, requiring a permit under the State's General NPDES permit. The State Water • Resource Control Board (SWRCB) through the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Santa Ana Region, administers these permits. A,B,C & D- 77 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 • AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 27 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP 9 significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated _ Impact Impact Construction activities covered under the State's General Construction permit include removal of vegetation, grading, excavating, or any other activity for new development or significant redevelopment. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, a discharger must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to obtain coverage under the General Permit. The General permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction activities, including site clearance and grading: • Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) that would prevent construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters. • Eliminate or reduce non-storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation. • Perform inspections of all BMPs. Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges. A construction.project for new development or significant redevelopment requires an NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are required to prepare a Storm Water • Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). To comply with the NPDES, the construction contractor of the project will be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction activities, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post-construction operational management of storm water runoff. The applicant has submitted a WQMP, prepared by W&W Technologies on August 24, 2011, which identifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize the amount of pollutants, such as eroded soils, entering the drainage system after construction. Runoff from driveways, roads and other impermeable surfaces must be controlled through an on-site drainage system. BMPs include both structural and non-structural control methods. Structural controls used to manage storm water pollutant levels include detention basins, oil/grit separators, and porous pavement. Non-structural controls focus on controlling pollutants at the source, generally through implementing erosion and sediment control plans, and various Business Plans that must be developed by any businesses that store and use hazardous materials. Practices, such as periodic parking lot sweeping can substantially reduce the amount of pollutants entering the storm drain system. The following mitigation measures would be required to control additional storm water effluent: Construction Activities: . 1) Prior to issuance of Grading Permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval, a 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. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, 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. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of A,B,C & D- 78 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 28 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than pp 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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. 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street 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. • 5) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) prepared on August 24, 2011 by W&W Technologies to reduce pollutants during construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. Post- Construction Operational: 6) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality • Management Plan prepared by W&W Technologies on August 24, 2011, to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for 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. b) According to CVWD, approximately 35 percent of the City's water is currently provided from water supplies coming from the underlying Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins. CVWD complies with its prescriptive water rights as managed by the Chino Basin Watermaster and will not deplete the local groundwater resource. The proposed project will not deplete groundwater supplies, nor will it interfere with recharge because it is not within an area designated as a"recharge basin or spreading ground according to General Plan Figure RC-3. The development of the site will require the grading of the,site and excavation, however, would not affect the existing aquifer, estimated to be approximately 300 to 470 feet below the ground surface. As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.9), continued development citywide will increase water needs but will not be a significant impact. CVWD has plans to meet this increased need to the year 2030. No impacts are anticipated. c) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and • amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to A,B,C & D- 79 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 • AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 29 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pmenlalnt With Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact handle the flows. The project design includes landscaping of all non-hardscape areas to prevent erosion. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The impact is not considered significant. d) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns; and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on-or off-site. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, all runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project will not result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, • increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are anticipated. f) . Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary increase in the amount of suspended solids in surface flows during a concurrent storm event, thus resulting in surface water quality impacts. The site is for new development, therefore, is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to minimize water pollution. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 8) Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official 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. 9) Prior to issuance of Grading Or Paving Permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice 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. • g) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. No adverse impacts are expected. A,B,C & D- 80 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 30 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP g Significant corporal Significant Impact Impact Incorporated Impact pa • h) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. No adverse impacts are expected. i) The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood protected by an extensive storm drain system designed to adequately convey floodwaters from a 100-year storm event. The system is substantially improved and provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage flows. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, spreading grounds, concrete-lined channels, and underground storm drains as shown in General Plan Figure PS-6. The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. No adverse impacts are expected. j) There are no oceans, lakes, or reservoirs near the project site; therefore impacts from seiche and tsunami are not anticipated. The Rancho Cucamonga area sits at the base of the steep eastern San Gabriel Mountains whose deep canyons were cut by mountain streams. Numerous man-made controls have been constructed to reduce the mudflow impacts to the level of non-significance within the City. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, and spreading grounds both within and north of the City. 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or ( ) ( ) (• ) ( ) regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, - specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) or natural community conservation plan? Comments: a) The site is located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, west, and south, and a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company to the east. This project will be of similar design and size to surrounding residential development to the north and west. The project will become a part of the larger community. No adverse impacts are anticipated. b) The project site land use designation is Very Low Residential. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and does not interfere with any policies for environmental protection, SCAG's Compass Blueprint, or SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is for five (5) lots which will be developed with single-family residences. The development of the site with residences will be consistent with the land use designations as described in the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the General Plan. The dwelling unit density of the subdivision and subdivision layout are consistent with the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the General Plan. With the exception of the lot depths of two (2) of the proposed • lots, all lots will comply with the development standards applicable to this zoning district as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Individual lot areas will range • A,B,C & D- 81 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 31 • Less Than Significant Less • Potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: S i nsficant Incorporated Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact between 20,494 square feet to 30,051 square feet which are in excess of the minimum of 20,000 square feet that is required. The minimum average lot area is 25,835 square feet which is in excess of the minimum 25,000 that is required. The depth of Lots 2 - 4 will be at least 200 feet as is required. However, the depth of Lots 1 and 5 will not comply with the minimum requirement of 200 feet; these lots will only be about 135 feet in depth. As a result, the applicant has submitted a Variance application - related file: DRC2010-00963. c) The site is located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, south, and a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company to the east. The site has been very minimally disrupted along its perimeter for the construction of equestrian trails for the surrounding residential developments to the west and north and fencing along the south and east perimeter. According to the General Plan Figure RC-4, and Section 4.10 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is within an area of sensitive biological resources—the Coastal California Gnatcatcher (CAGN). However, according to a habitat assessment for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher prepared by Leatherman BioConsulting, Inc. on February 22, 2010, the habitat suitable for the Gnatcatcher is not present on the site and, therefore, the Gnatcatcher is not expected to be present. 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: • a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ( ) . ( ) ( ) (✓) resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? • Comments: a) The site is not designated as a State Aggregate Resources Area according to the City General Plan, Figure RC-2 and Table RC-1; therefore, there is no impact. b) The site is not designated by the General Plan, Figure RC-2 and Table RC-1, as a valuable mineral resource recovery site; therefore, there is no impact. • 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) levels in the project vicinity above levels existing • without the project? A,B,C & D- 82 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 32 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Saengant With Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant pa Impact Incorporeted Impact Impact d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ( ) (• ) ( ) ( ) ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f)° For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: a) The project site is partly within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards according to General Plan Figure PS-9 at build-out. According to Figure PS-9, about 50 percent of the project site is within the 65dBa noise contour of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210). However, the boundary that defines the edge of the area where the noise level exceeds City standards is a guideline and does not consider topographic conditions, intervening • development, and noise barriers. The project site is about 750 feet north of the Foothill Freeway (SR-210). The freeway surface is below grade by about 15-20 feet • between a point about 2000 feet west of Etiwanda Avenue and another point about 1700 feet east of East Avenue to allow the freeway to pass beneath the East Avenue roadway. There is residential development on the properties between the project site and the freeway. Along the top of the embankment along the freeway corridor is a noise attenuating wall along the south side of existing residential development (Tract 12870) that terminates about 700 west of East Avenue. From that point eastward, there are vacant parcels and no noise attenuating walls. No development is pending on the property (APN: 0225-381-06) located between Tract 12870 and East Avenue. On the property located east of East Avenue a noise attenuating wall will be constructed as part of the development of that site (Tentative Tract 18122) that will begin at East Avenue and extend to a point about 2,500 feet to the east. Along the south perimeter of the project site screen walls of 6 feet in height will be constructed. These existing noise attenuating walls will reduce any noise impacts to a level of less than significant. b) The uses associated with this type of project normally do not induce ground borne vibrations. There may be short term construction related vibration. However, the applicant will be required to follow all City requirements regarding construction activities. As such, no impacts are anticipated. c) The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. The proposed activities will not significantly increase traffic as analyzed in Section 16 — . Transportation/Traffic and therefore will not likely increase ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project. d) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.12) indicates that during a construction phase, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will generate noise exceeding City standards, The following measures are provided to • mitigate the short-term noise impacts: A,B,C & D- 83 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 33 • Less Than Significant Less Potentially WM1h Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant corporate Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 2) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. The developer shall hire a consultant 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. 3) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase. The preceding mitigation measures will reduce the disturbance created by on-site construction equipment; but do not address the potential impacts because of the transport • of construction materials and debris. The following mitigation measure shall then be required: 4) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, 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. e) The site is not located within an Airport Land Use Plan and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The site is located approximately 6.5 miles northeasterly of the Ontario Airport and is off-set north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. f) The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2.5 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ( ) ( ) ( ) (/) directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) necessitating the construction of replacement housing • elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? A,B,C & D- 84 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 34 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potamia wtm Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Comments: a) The project is located in a predominantly developed area and proposes the subdivision of the property into five (5) lots and construction of five (5) single-family residences. Although the project will increase the population growth in the area there will be a less than significant impact as the project is consistent with the underlying Zoning and General Plan Designation which density was analyzed as part of the build out in the General Plan FPEIR. Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new employees to the area. No impacts are anticipated. b) The project site is vacant. Because the property is vacant, there will be no displacement of housing or people. Therefore, no adverse impact is expected. c) The project site is vacant. Because the property is vacant, there will be no displacement of-housing or people. Therefore, no adverse impact is expected. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order • to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (1) b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) c) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) d) Parks? () O O (✓) e) Other public facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Comments: a) The site is located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place and would be served by a fire station located approximately 1.5 mile from the project site. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Standard conditions of approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be placed on the project to lessen the future demand and impacts to fire services. No impacts are anticipated. b) The increase in residential units may lead to an increase in calls for service. Although there•may be an increase in calls, additional police protection is not required as the addition of the project will not change the pattern of uses within the surrounding area and will not have a substantial increase in property to be patrolled as the project site is within an area that is regularly patrolled. c) The Etiwanda School District and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District serve the project area. Both school districts have been notified regarding the proposed development. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay the A,B,C & D- 85 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 35 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With an PP g Significant incorporated Significant Impact Impact 'Incoryoretetl Impact Impact school impact fees. With this standard mitigation, impacts to the School Districts are not considered significant. d) The project site is located in an area that is characterized by residential development to the north, south, and a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company to the east. There is a park, Etiwanda Creek Park, located 0.40 mile north from the project site. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees. No impacts are anticipated. e) The proposed project will utilize existing public facilities. The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Cumulative development within Rancho Cucamonga will increase demand for library services. According to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.14), there will be a projected increase in library space demand but with the implementation of standard conditions the increase in Library Services would be mitigated to less-than-significant impact. Additionally, the Paul A. Biane Library has an additional 14,000 square foot shell of vacant library space that is planned for future Library use. The proposed project is consistent with the General • Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. Therefore no adverse impact is expected. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: a) The project site is located in an area that is characterized by residential development to the north, south, and a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company to the east. There is a park, Etiwanda Creek Park, is located 0.40 mile north from the project site at 5939 East Avenue. This project is not proposing a substantial number of new housing or large employment generator that would cause an increase in the use of parks or other recreational facilities. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees. No impacts are anticipated. b) See a) response above. • - • A,B,C & D- 86 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 36 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: • Potentially ign cant With Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy ( ) ( ) ( ) (• ) establishing measures of effectiveness for the • performance of the circulation system, taking into • • account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant • components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass - transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) program, including, but not limited to a level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including ( ) • ( ) ( ) (✓) either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that result in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. • Comments: a) Implementation of the proposed project will generate 65 vehicle trips daily. The proposed project contemplates the subdivision of the property into five (5) lots which will allow for the development of five (5) single-family residences. The Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Model estimates that each residence will generate 13 trips daily. As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.16), continued development will contribute to the traffic load in the Rancho Cucamonga area. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with street improvements existing or included in project design. The project will not create a substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips, traffic volume, or congestion at intersections. The project site will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site per City roadway standards. In addition, the City has established a Transportation Development fee that must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of building permits. Fees are used to fund roadway improvements necessary to support adequate traffic circulation. No impacts are anticipated. b) The Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Model estimates that each residence will generate 1.75 • two-way peak hour trips daily. In November 2004, San Bernardino County voters passed the Measure I extension which requires local jurisdictions to impose appropriate fees on • A,B,C & D- 87 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 37 • Lees Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Wih Than PP 9 Significant corporate Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact development for their fair share toward regional transportation improvement projects. On May 18, 2005, the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted a Comprehensive Transportation Fee Schedule updating these development,impact fees. As a result, the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Agency waived the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) Traffic Impact Analysis reporting requirement. This project will be required, as a condition of approval, to pay the adopted transportation development fee prior to issuance of building permit. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with all street improvements existing. The project will not negatively impact the level of service standards on adjacent arterials. The project will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of-the site. No impacts are anticipated. c) •Located approximately 6.5 miles northeasterly of the Ontario Airport, the site is off-set north of the flight path and will not change air traffic patterns. No impacts are anticipated. d) The project site is located in an area that is characterized by residential development to the north, south, and a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company to the east. The site has been very minimally disrupted along its perimeter for the construction of equestrian trails for the surrounding residential developments to the west and north and fencing along the south and east perimeter. The project will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street • frontage of the site. The project design does not include any sharp curves or dangerous intersections or farming uses. The project will, therefore, not create a substantial increase in hazards because of a design feature. No impacts are anticipated. e) The proposed project contemplates the subdivision of the property into five (5) lots which will allow for the development of five (5) single-family residences. Each residence will have adequate parking, specifically an enclosed garage and a driveway, in compliance with standards of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code. No impacts are anticipated. 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause • significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ( ) ( ) ( )• (✓) project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? • A,B,C & D- 88 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 38 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: potentially With Than PP 9 Significant rption Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment ( ) ( ) ( ) (• ) provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) regulations related to solid waste? Comments: a) The project proposes the installation of septic systems for each single-family residence that will be required to be permitted by the City's Building and Safety Department and meet all related environmental regulations. There will be no need for off-site wastewater treatment. No impacts are anticipated. b) The project proposes the installation of septic systems for each single-family residence that will be required to be permitted by the City's Building and Safety Department and meet all related environmental regulations. The construction of new water or wastewater • treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities will not be required. No impacts are anticipated. c) All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. The impact is not considered significant. d) The project is served by the CVWD water system. There is currently a sufficient water supply available to the City of Rancho Cucamonga to serve this project. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project proposes the installation of septic systems for each single-family residence that will be required to be permitted by the City's Building and Safety Department and meet all related environmental regulations. There will be no need for off-site wastewater treatment. No impacts are anticipated. f) Solid waste disposal will be provided by the current City contracted hauler who disposes the refuse at a permitted landfill with sufficient capacity to handle the City's solid waste disposal needs. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. g) This project complies with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding solid waste. The City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to implement waste reduction procedures consistent with AB 939. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. • A,B,C & D- 89 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 39 • Lass Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant l Mitigation Significant pa Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important • examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? • c) Does the project have environmental effects that will ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, • either directly or indirectly? Comments: a) The site is located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, south, and a single-family residence and an operations facility for a telephone company to the east. The site has been very minimally disrupted along its perimeter for the construction of equestrian trails for the surrounding residential developments to the west and north and fencing along the south and east perimeter. The project site is located within a habitat conservation or natural community plan area. According to the General Plan Figure RC-4, • and Section 4.10 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is within an area of sensitive biological resources—the Coastal California Gnatcatcher (CAGN). According to the Habitat Assessment for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher (CAGN) prepared by Leatherman BioConsulting, Inc. on February 22, 2010, no habitat for the Gnatcatcher occurs on the project site. The report states that no individuals of the many shrub species that make up the coastal sage scrub or alluvial fan sage scrub communities in the Gnatcatcher lives were observed on the site. Therefore, the Coastal California Gnatcatcher (CAGN) is not expected to be present. There is one heritage tree, a Blue Gum Eucalyptus, on the project site; therefore, the proposed project is in conflict with the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance. The applicant is proposing to remove this tree to allow grading and the construction of the home on Lot 1. The applicant has submitted an application to remove this tree — Related file: Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00964. A mitigation measure contained in this Initial Study will ensure impacts are at less-than-significant levels. • b) If the proposed project were approved, then the applicant would be required to develop the site in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The 2010 A,B,C & D- 90 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 40 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PotentiallyWith hen PP g SiImpact l corporiat Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact General Plan was adopted along with the certification of a Program FEIR, Findings of •Fact, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant adverse environmental effects of build-out in the City and Sphere-of-Influence. The City made findings that adoption of the General Plan would result in significant adverse effects to Aesthetics, • Agriculture and Forest Resources, Air Quality, Climate Change and Mineral Resources. Mitigation measures were adopted for each of these resources; however, they would not reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels. As such, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations balancing the benefits of development under the General Plan Update against the significant unavoidable adverse impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15092 and 15096(h)). These benefits include less overall traffic volumes by developing mixed-use projects that will be pedestrian friendly and conservation of valuable natural open space. With these findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, no • further discussion or evaluation of cumulative impacts is required. c) Development of the site under the proposed land use change would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The Initial Study identifies construction-related emissions of criteria pollutants as having a potentially significant impact. However, air quality impacts resulting from construction would be short-term and would cease once construction activities were completed. Mitigation measures contained in this Initial Study will ensure impacts are at less-than-significant levels. EARLIER ANALYSES • Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one • or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier PEIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (T) General Plan FPEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified May 19, 2010) (T) General Plan FEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified October 17, 2001) (T) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (T) Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR (SCH #82061801, certified July 6, 1983) (T) Etiwanda North Specific Plan EIR (SCH #89012314, certified April 1, 1992) (T) Air Quality Impact Analysis (including Greenhouse Gas Analysis) • Giroux &Associates, May 17, 2010 hardco to South Coast Air Quality Management District; all others refer to attached CD) (hardcopy tY 9 A,B,C & D- 91 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 41 • Less Then Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Wth Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact (T) Habitat Assessment for Coastal California Gnatcatcher Michael Brandman Associates, March 4, 2011 (hardcopy to California Department of Fish and Game; all others refer to attached CD) (T) Arborist Report Phil May, Landscape Architect, February 17, 2010 (T) Water Quality Management Plan W&W Technologies, August 24, 2011 • • • • • A,B,C & D- 92 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 Page 42 • I Lou Than Sgnfrant Leas Issues and Supporting Information Sources: 0e" " w"" 11 m Sipn Mrcivotion SmMic nt No !moan oact Inwmomtod Impact Imoatl APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur. • Applicants Signature: Date: 5/742— Print Name and Title: 0f-/ G(#9-j • • • • • A,B,C & D- 93 City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING • -...__. PROGRAM Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010, Variance DRC2010-00963, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00964 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 Planning Director, 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 A,B,C & D- 94 MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM SUBTT18747, DRC2009-00010, DRC2010-00963,AND DRC2010-00964—K.U. &ASSOCIATES Page 2 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staffs 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 by the 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 Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits. • A,B,C & D- 95 • AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS 5-UNIT SUBDIVIDE • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NOV 302010AA' A' RECEIVED - PLANNING Prepared for: WSW) , 040610 (him-lark Holdings LLC vF�- • Attn: Richard Macias Sitar(047 12227 Valley Blvd. #M El Monte, CA 91732 Date: May 17, 2010 • Project No.: P10-025 A A,B,C & D- 96 METEOROLOGY CLIMATE • The climate of western San Bernardino County, as with all of Southern California, is governed largely by the strength and location of the semi-permanent high pressure center over the Pacific Ocean and the moderating effects of the nearby vast oceanic heat reservoir. Local climatic conditions are characterized by very warm summers, mild winters, infrequent rainfall, moderate daytime on-shore breezes, and comfortable humidity's. Unfortunately, the same climatic conditions that create such a desirable living climate combine to severely restrict the ability of the local atmosphere to disperse the large volumes of air pollution generated by the population and industry attracted in part by the climate. The project area is situated in an area where the pollutants generated in coastal portions of the Los Angeles basin undergo photochemical reactions and then move inland across the project site during the daily sea breeze cycle. The resulting smog at times gives western San Bernardino County some of the worst air quality in all of California. Fortunately, significant air quality improvement in the last decade suggests that healthful air quality may someday be attained despite the limited regional meteorological dispersion potential. Winds across the project area are an important meteorological parameter because they control both the initial rate of dilution of locally generated air pollutant emissions as well as controlling their regional trajectory. Winds across the project site display a very unidirectional onshore flow from the southwest-west that is strongest in summer with a weaker offshore return flow from the northeast that is strongest on winter nights when the land is colder than the ocean. The onshore • winds during the day average 6-10 mph while the offshore flow is often calm or drifts slowly westward at 1-3 mph. During the daytime, any locally generated air emissions are thus rapidly transported eastward toward Banning Pass and northeast towards Cajon Pass without generating any localized air quality impacts. The nocturnal drainage winds which move slowly across the area have some potential for localized stagnation, but fortunately, these winds have their origin in the adjacent mountains where background pollution levels are low such that any localized contributions do not create any unhealthful impacts. In conjunction with the two characteristic wind regimes that affect the rate and orientation of horizontal pollutant transport, there are two similarly distinct types of temperature inversions that control the vertical depth through which pollutants are mixed. The summer on-shore flow is capped by a massive dome of warm, sinking air which caps a shallow layer of cooler ocean air. Such marine/subsidence inversions act like a giant lid over the basin. They allow for local mixing of emissions, but they confine the entire polluted air mass within the basin until it escapes into the desert or along the thermal chimneys formed along heated mountain slopes. One other important local wind pattern within the project vicinity drainages occurs when high pressure over the Great Basin creates funneled, gusty down-canyon flows. The air moving downslope is warmed by a process called "adiabatic compression." Because the air was already dry at the top of the mountains, it is super-dry when it reaches the bottoms of local canyons. • Such "Santa Ana" downslope winds can create dust storms, and make dust control difficult. Rancho Cucamonga SubDidde AQ A,B,C & D- 97 • In winter, when the air near the ground cools while the air aloft remains warm, radiation inversions are formed that trap low-level emissions such as automobile exhaust near their source. As background levels of primary vehicular exhaust rise during the seaward return flow, the combination of rising non-local baseline levels plus emissions trapped locally by these radiation inversions creates micro-scale air pollution "hot spots" near freeways, shopping centers and other, traffic concentrations in coastal areas of the Los Angeles Basin. Because the nocturnal downslope has its origin in very lightly developed areas of the San Gabriel Mountains, background pollution levels at night in winter are very low in the project vicinity. Localized air pollution contributions are insufficient to create any "hot spot" potential when superimposed upon the clean nocturnal baseline. The combination of winds and inversions are thus critical determinants in leading to the degraded air quality in summer, and the generally good air quality in winter in the project area. • • • Rancho Cucamonga SubDonde AQ A,B,C & D- 98 • AIR QUALITY SETTING • AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS (AAQS) In order to gauge the significance of the air quality impacts of the proposed Rancho Cucamonga 5-Unit Subdivide project, those impacts, together with existing background air quality levels, must be compared to the applicable ambient air quality standards. These standards are the levels of air quality considered safe, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health and welfare. They are designed to protect those people most susceptible to further respiratory distress such as asthmatics, the elderly, very young children, people already weakened by other disease or illness, and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise, called "sensitive receptors." Healthy adults can tolerate occasional exposure to air pollutant concentrations considerably above these minimum standards before adverse effects are observed. Recent research has shown, however, that chronic exposure to ozone (the primary ingredient in photochemical smog) may lead to adverse respiratory health even at concentrations close to the ambient standard. National AAQS were established in 1971 for six pollution species with states retaining the option to add other pollutants, require more stringent compliance, or to include different exposure, periods. The initial attainment deadline of 1977 was extended several times in air quality problem areas like Southern California. In 2003, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) adopted a rule which extended and established a new attainment deadline for ozone for the year 2021. Because the State of California had established AAQS several years before the • federal action and because of unique air quality problems introduced by the restrictive dispersion meteorology, there is considerable difference between state and national clean air standards. Those standards currently in effect in California are shown in Table 1. Sources and health effects of various pollutants are shown in Table 2. The Federal Clean Air Act Amendments (CAAA) of 1990 required that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) review all national AAQS in light of currently known health effects. EPA was charged with modifying existing standards or promulgating new ones where appropriate. EPA subsequently developed standards for chronic ozone exposure (8+hours per day) and for very small diameter particulate matter (called "PM-2.5"). New national AAQS were adopted in 1997 for these pollutants. Planning and enforcement of the federal standards for PM-2.5 and for ozone (8-hour) were challenged by trucking and manufacturing organizations. In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that EPA did not require specific congressional authorization to adopt national clean air standards. The Court also ruled that health-based standards did not require preparation of a cost-benefit analysis. The Court did find, however, that there was some inconsistency between existing and "new" standards in their required attainment schedules. Such attainment-planning schedule inconsistencies centered mainly on the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA subsequently agreed to downgrade the attainment designation for a large number of communities to "non-attainment" for the 8-hour ozone standard. • Rancho Cucamonga SubDivide AQ A,B,C & D-3. 99 • Table 1 Ambient Air Quality Standards • • • RanchoCucamoyeSubdivideno A,B,C & D- 100 -a. Table 2 • Health Effects of Criteria Pollutants • • • • • • Rancho Cucamonga SubDivide AQ A,B,C & D;t. • Evaluation of the most current data on the health effects of inhalation of fine particulate matter prompted the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to recommend adoption of the statewide PM-2.5 standard that is more stringent than the federal standard. This standard was adopted in 2002. The State PM-2.5 standard is more of a goal in that it does not have specific attainment planning requirements like a federal clean air standard, but only requires continued progress towards attainment. Similarly, the ARB extensively evaluated health effects of ozone exposure. A new state standard for an 8-hour ozone exposure was adopted in 2005, which mirrors the federal standard. The California 8-hour ozone standard of 0.07 ppm is more stringent than the federal 8-hour standard of 0.075 ppm. The state standard, however, does not have a specific attainment deadline. California air quality jurisdictions are required to make steady progress towards attaining state standards, but there are no hard deadlines or any consequences of non-attainment. During the same re-evaluation process, the ARB adopted an annual state standard for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) that is more stringent than the corresponding federal standard, and strengthened the state one- hour NO2 standard. As part of EPA's 2002 consent decree on clean air standards, a further review of airborne particulate matter (PM) and human health was initiated. A substantial modification of federal clean air standards for PM was promulgated in 2006. Standards for PM-2.5 were strengthened, a new class of PM in the 2.5 to 10 micron size was created, some PM-10 standards were revoked, • and a distinction between rural and urban air quality was adopted. In response to continuing evidence that ozone exposure at levels just meeting federal clean air standards is demonstrably unhealthful, EPA has proposed a further strengthening of the 8-hour standard. Draft standards have been published. The likely future 8-hour standard will be 0.065 ppm. Environmental organizations generally praise this proposal. Most manufacturing, transportation or power generation groups oppose the new standard as economically unwise in an uncertain fiscal climate. A new federal one-hour standard for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) has also recently been adopted. This standard is more stringent than the existing state standard. Based upon air quality monitoring data in the South Coast Air Basin, the basin will likely be designated as "non- attainment". That designation will require the inclusion of NO2 in the basin air quality management plan. • A,B,C & Rancho Cucamonga SubDuAde AC) 6 102 6- BASELINE AIR QUALITY Existing levels of ambient air quality and historical trends and projections in the project area are best documented from measurements made near the project site. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) operates a monitoring station in Ontario that measures particulate matter. The closest station to Rancho Cucamonga that measures nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide and ozone is located in Upland. Table 3 summarizes the last six years of published SCAQMD monitoring data from the Ontario and/or Upland stations. From these data the following conclusions can be drawn: 1. Photochemical smog (ozone) levels frequently exceed standards. The 1-hour state standard was violated an average of 41 days a year in the last six years near Ontario. The 8-hour state ozone standard has been exceeded an average of 48 times a year in the past five years. The Federal eight-hour ozone standard has averaged around 27 violations per year since 2003. While ozone levels are still high, they are much lower than 10 to 20 • years ago. Attainment of all clean air standards in the project vicinity is not likely to occur soon, but the severity and frequency of violations is expected to continue to slowly decline during the current decade. 2. PM-10 levels have exceeded the state 24-hour standard on approximately 28 percent of all measurement days. The three times less stringent federal 24 hour-standard has not • been exceeded in the past six years. Year to year fluctuations of overall maximum 24- hour PM-10 levels seem to follow no discernable trend, though 2005 had the lowest maximum 24-hour concentration (with 2006 second lowest) in the last six years. 3. The federal 24-hour PM-2.5 standard was reduced in 2006 from 65 µg/m3to 35 µg/m3. The substantially more stringent standard of 35 µg/m3 has been exceeded on 6 percent of all days since 2006. The prior, more lenient, standard of 65 µg/m3 was rarely exceeded. 4. More localized pollutants such as carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, etc. are very low near the project site because background levels in western San Bernardino County, never exceed allowable levels. There is substantial excess dispersive capacity to accommodate localized vehicular air pollutants such as NOx or CO without any threat of violating applicable AAQS. • Rancho Cuonwnga AubDAAdc AQ A,B,C & D- 103 • Table 3 Air Quality Monitoring Summary (Number of Days Standards Were Exceeded and Maximum Levels During Such Violations) Pollutant/Standard 2003 I 2004 2005 2006 I 2007 2008 Ozone 1-Hour> 0.09 ppm (S) 48 31 34 50 32 51 1-Hour> 0.12 ppm (F)* 15 2 8 14 - - 8-Hour> 0.07 ppm(S) - 31 34 54 55 65 8- Hour>0.075 ppm (F) 35 18 15 25 18 50 Max. 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0.16 0.14 0.15 0.17 0.15 0.16 Carbon Monoxide . . 1=Hotir> 20. ppm(S) 0 0 • 0 . 0 0 0 1-Hour> 9. ppm (S,F) 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 Max 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) 4.0 3.3 3.0 3.0 2.0 ' 2.0 Max 8-Hour Conc. (ppm) 2.9 2.2 2.1 I 1.8 1.6 1.6 • Nitrogen Dioxide 1-Hour> 0.18 ppm (S) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Max 1-Hour Conc. (ppm) 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.10 0.10 0.09 Inhalable Particulates (PM-10)t 24-Hour> 50 µg/m3 (S) 18/62 17/58 19/60 17/62 14/58 15/62 24-Hour> 150 1.tg/m3 (F) 0/62 0/58 0/60 0/62 0/58 0/62 Max. 24-Hr. Conc. (µg/m3) 149. 93. 74. 78. 115. 90. Ultra-Fine Particulates(PM-2.5)' 24-Hour>65 pg/m3 (F) 3/118 2/112 1/110 0/107 - - 24-Hour>35 ttg/m3 (F)** - - - 7/107 . 6/102 6/113 Max. 24-Hr. Conc. (µg/m3) 88.9 86.1 87.8 53.7 72.8 54.3 * standard revoked in 2006 **reduced to 35 p.g/m3 in 2006 Source: South Coast AQMD Upland Monitoring Station(5175) Ontario 1408 Francis Street(5817) • aa��no cvwmonga s�nov�me AQ A,B,C & D- 104 -8- AIR QUALITY PLANNING • The Federal Clean Air Act (1977 Amendments) required that designated agencies in any area of the nation not meeting national clean air standards must prepare a plan demonstrating the steps that would bring the area into compliance with all national standards. The SCAB could not meet the deadlines for ozone, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, or PM-10. In the SCAB, the agencies designated by the governor to develop regional air quality plans are the SCAQMD and the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). The two agencies first adopted an Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) in 1979 and revised it several times as earlier attainment forecasts were shown to be overly optimistic. The 1990 Federal Clean Air Act Amendment(CAAA) required that all states with air-sheds with "serious" or worse ozone problems submit a revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Amendments to the SIP have been proposed, revised and approved over the past decade. The most current regional attainment emissions forecast for ozone precursors (ROG and NOx) and for carbon monoxide (CO) and for particulate matter are shown in Table 4. Substantial reductions in emissions of ROG, NOx and CO are forecast to continue throughout the next several decades. Unless new particulate control programs are implemented, PM-10 and PM-2.5 are forecast to slightly increase. The Air Quality Management District (AQMD) adopted an updated clean air "blueprint" in August 2003. The 2003 AQMP was approved by the EPA in 2004. The Air Quality • Management Plan (AQMP) outlined the air pollution measures needed to meet federal health- based standards for ozone by 2010 and for particulates (PM-10) by 2006. The 2003 AQMP was based upon the federal one-hour ozone standard which was revoked late in 2005 and replaced by an 8-hour federal standard. Because of the revocation of the hourly standard, a new air quality planning cycle was initiated. With re-designation of the air basin as non-attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard, a new attainment plan was developed and adopted in 2007. This plan shifted most of the one-hour ozone standard attainment strategies to the 8-hour standard. As previously noted, the planned attainment date for the existing 8-hour ozone standard is 2021. The 2007 attainment plan also includes strategies for ultimately meeting the federal PM-2.5 standard. Because projected attainment by 2021 requires control technologies that do not exist yet, the SCAQMD has requested a voluntary "bump-up" from a "severe non-attainment" area to an "extreme non-attainment" designation for ozone. An extreme designation would allow a longer time period for these technologies to develop. If attainment cannot be demonstrated within the specified deadline without relying on "black-box" measures, EPA would be required to impose sanctions on the region. With an anticipated further strengthening of the federal eight-hour ozone standard, action on the bump-up request may be delayed until possible new standards are finalized. If/when that happens, new planning deadlines will be adopted and the 2007 AQMP will ultimately be modified to demonstrate compliance with the probable new federal ozone standard. • Rancho Cucamonga SubDivide AQ A,B,C & D- 105 -9- • Table 4 South Coast Air Basin Emissions Forecasts (Emissions in tons/day) Pollutant 2005' 20106 20156 20206 NOx 985 742 580 468 ROG 735 576 526 505 CO 4124 2950.. 2476 2203 PM-10 281 286 297 307 PM-2.5 103 • 102 102 • 103 '2005 Base Year. 6With current emissions reduction programs and adopted growth forecasts. Source: California Air Resources Board,The 2009 California Almanac of Emission&Air Quality. • • Rancho Cucamonga SubDivide AQ A,B,C & D- 106 io- The current (2007) AQMP recognizes the interaction between photochemical processes that create both ozone and the smallest airborne particulates (PM-2.5). The 2007 AQMP is therefore a coordinated plan for both pollutants. Key emissions reductions strategies in the updated air quality plan include: - Ultra-low emissions standards for both new and existing sources (including on- and-off-road heavy trucks, industrial and service equipment, locomotives, ships and aircraft). - Accelerated fleet turnover to achieve benefits of cleaner engines. - Reformulation of consumer products. - Modernization and technology advancements from stationary sources (refineries, power plants, etc.) Projects such as the proposed Rancho Cucamonga 5-Unit Subdivide project do not directly relate to the AQMP in that there are no specific air quality programs or regulations governing "general" development. Conformity with adopted plans, forecasts and programs relative to population, housing, employment and land use is the primary yardstick by which impact significance of master planned growth is determined. If a given project incorporates any available transportation control measures that can be implemented on a project-specific basis, and if the scope and phasing of a project are consistent with adopted forecasts as shown in the • Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP), then the regional air quality impact of project growth would not be significant because of planning inconsistency. The SCAQMD, however, while acknowledging that the AQMP is a growth-accommodating document, does not favor designating regional impacts as less-than-significant just because the proposed development is consistent with regional growth projections. Air quality impact significance for the proposed project has therefore been analyzed on a project-specific basis for both construction and operations. The analysis is based upon significance thresholds that are presumed to have regional consequences even though that impact cannot be reliably quantified on an individual project basis. • Rancho Cucamonga.SubDlvide AQ A,B,C & p- 107 • AIR QUALITY IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA Air quality impacts are considered "significant" if they cause clean air standards to be violated where they are currently met, or if they measurably contribute to an existing violation of standards. Any substantial emissions of air contaminants for which there is no safe exposure, or nuisance emissions such as dust or odors, would also be considered a significant impact. Appendix G of the California CEQA Guidelines offer the following five tests of air quality impact significance. A project would have a potentially significant impact if it: a. Conflicts with or obstructs implementation of the applicable air quality plan. b. Violates any air quality standard or contributes substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. c. Results in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). d. Exposes sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. • e. Creates objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. PRIMARY POLLUTANTS Air quality impacts generally occur on two scales of motion. Near an individual source of emissions or a collection of sources such as a crowded intersection or parking lot, levels of those pollutants that are emitted in their already unhealthful form will be highest. Carbon monoxide (CO) is an example of such a pollutant. Primary pollutant impacts can generally be evaluated directly in comparison to appropriate clean air standards. Violations of these standards where they are currently met, or a measurable worsening of an existing or future violation, would be considered a significant impact. Many particulates, especially fugitive dust emissions, are also primary pollutants. Because of the non-attainment status of the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) for PM-10, an aggressive dust control program is required to control fugitive dust. SECONDARY POLLUTANTS Many pollutants, however, require time to transform from a more benign form to a more unhealthful contaminant. Their impact occurs regionally far from the source. Their incremental regional impact is minute on an individual basis and cannot be quantified except through complex photochemical computer models. Analysis of the significance of such emissions is thus based on a specified amount of emissions (pounds, tons, etc.) even though there is no way to • translate those emissions directly into a corresponding ambient air quality impact. Rancho Cucamonga SubDivide AQ A,B,C & D- 1 08 t.- Because of the chemical complexity of primary versus secondary pollutants, the SCAQMD has • designated significant emissions levels as surrogates for evaluating impact significance independent of chemical transformation processes. Projects within the SCAB with daily emissions that exceed any of the following emission thresholds are recommended by the . SCAQMD to be considered significant: SCAQMD Emissions Significance Thresholds (lbs/day) Pollutant Construction Operations ROG 75 55 NOx 100 55 CO 550 550 PM-10 150 150 PM-2.5 55 55 SOx . 150 150 .lead 3 3 Source: SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook,November, 1993 Rev. ADDITIONAL INDICATORS In its CEQA handbook, the SCAQMD also states that additional indicators should be used as • screening criteria to determine the need for further analysis with respect to air quality. The additional indicators are as follows: • Project could interfere with the attainment of the federal or state ambient air quality standards by either violating or contributing to an existing or projected air quality violation. • Project could result in population increases within the regional statistical area which would be in excess of that projected in the AQMP and in other than planned locations for the project's build-out year. • Project could generate vehicle trips that cause a CO hot spot. The SCAQMD CEQA Handbook also identifies various secondary significance criteria related to toxic, hazardous or odorous air contaminants.. Hazardous air contaminants are contained within the small diameter particulate matter ("PM-2.5") fraction of diesel exhaust. Other than diesel exhaust during construction, the project will create negligible air toxics emissions. Health risks from toxic air contaminants (TAC's) are cumulative over an assumed 70-year lifespan. Measurable off-site public health risk from diesel TAC exposure would occur for only a brief portion of a project lifetime during building construction, and only in dilute quantity. • Rancho Cucamonga subDmde AO A,B,C & D- 109 • CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY IMPACTS Dust is typically the primary concern during construction of new buildings and infrastructure. Because such emissions are not amenable to collection and discharge through a controlled source, they are called "fugitive emissions." Emission rates vary as a function of many parameters (soil silt, soil moisture, wind speed, area disturbed, number of vehicles, depth of disturbance or excavation, etc.). These parameters are not known with any reasonable certainty prior to project development and may change from day to day. Any assignment of specific parameters to an unknown future date is speculative and conjectural. Because of the inherent uncertainty in the predictive factors for estimating fugitive dust generation, regulatory agencies typically use one universal "default" factor based on the area disturbed assuming that all other input parameters into emission rate prediction fall into midrange average values. This assumption may or may not be totally applicable to site-specific conditions on the proposed project site. As noted previously, emissions estimation for project- specific fugitive dust sources is therefore characterized by a considerable degree of imprecision. Average daily PM-10 emissions during site grading and other disturbance are stated in the SCAQMD Handbook to be 26.4 pounds/acre. This estimate is based upon required dust control- measures in effect in 1993 when the AQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook was prepared: Rule 403 was subsequently strengthened to require use of a greater array of fugitive dust control on construction projects. All construction projects in the SCAQMD are required to use strongly • enhanced control procedures. Use of enhanced dust control procedures such as continual soil wetting, use of supplemental binders, early paving, etc. can achieve a substantially higher PM-10 control efficiency. Daily emissions with use of reasonably available control measures (RACMs) for PM-10 can reduce emission levels to around ten (10) pounds per acre per day. With the use of best available control measures (BACMs), required by Rule 403.1, the California Air Resources Board URBEMIS2007 computer model predicts that emissions can be reduced to 1-2 pounds per acre per day. It is assumed that the entire 3.4 acre project site will be under simultaneous heavy construction at some point during the build-out lifetime of the project. With the use of RACMs, daily PM-10 emissions during site grading would be 34 pounds per day (3.4 X 10.0 = 34 lb/day). The SCAQMD significance threshold of 150 pounds per day would not be exceeded. With the use of Best Available Control Measures (BACM), daily PM-10 emissions can be further reduced. Because of the PM-10 non-attainment status of the air basin, construction activity dust emissions are considered to have a cumulatively significant impact. Use of BACMs is thus required even if SCAQMD individual CEQA thresholds are not exceeded by use of RACMs. Current research in particulate-exposure health suggests that the most adverse effects derive from ultra-small diameter particulate matter comprised of chemically reactive pollutants such as sulfates, nitrates or organic material. A national clean air standard for particulate matter of 2.5 microns or smaller in diameter (called "PM-2.5") was adopted in 1997. A limited amount of construction activity particulate matter is in the PM-2.5 range. PM-2.5 emissions are estimated • by the SCAQMD to comprise 20.8 percent of PM-10. Other studies have shown that the fugitive dust fraction of PM-2.5 is closer to 10 percent. Daily PM-2.5 mitigated emissions during Rancho Cucamonga SubDivideAQ A,B,C & D- 110 Ia. construction will be less than 3 pound per day compared to the SCAQMD CEQA significance • threshold of 55 pounds per day. In addition to fine particles that remain suspended in the atmosphere semi-indefinitely, construction activities generate many larger particles with shorter atmospheric residence times. This dust is comprised mainly of large diameter inert silicates that are chemically non-reactive and are further readily filtered out by human breathing passages. These fugitive dust particles are therefore more of a potential soiling nuisance as they settle out on parked cars, outdoor furniture or landscape foliage rather than any adverse health hazard. The deposition distance of most soiling nuisance particulates is less than 100 feet from the source (EPA, 1995). There are several sensitive receptors within 100 feet from the project construction site perimeter. Exhaust emissions will result from on and off-site heavy equipment. The types and numbers of equipment will vary among contractors such that such emissions cannot be quantified with certainty. Initial grading will gradually shift toward building construction and then for finish construction, paving, landscaping, etc. The URBEMIS2007 computer model was used to calculate emissions from the following prototype construction equipment fleet: 1 Grader Grading 1 Dozer 1 Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1 Water Truck • 4 Cement Mixers Paving 1 Paver 1 Roller 1 Tractor/Loader/Backhoe 1 Crane Construction ; 2 Forklifts 1 Tractor/Loader/Backhoe Utilizing the above equipment fleet the following emissions are calculated by URBEMIS2007: • Rancho Cucamonga SubDivide AQ A,B,C & �S 111 • Construction Activity Emissions (pounds/day) - Activity ROG NOx CO SO2 PM-10 PM-2.5 CO2 Grading No Mitigation 4.3 41.9 20.0 0.0 59.6 13.8 4,667.1 With Mitigation 4.3 38.2 20.0 0.0 7.1 2.1 4,6667.1 Construction No Mitigation 1.1 8.7 5.5 0.0 0.6 0.5 1,006.4 With Mitigation 1.1 7.4 5.5 0.0 0.1 0.1 1,006.4 Painting and Paving No Mitigation 3.4 11.6 8.8 0.0 1.0 0.9 1,234.0 With Mitigation 3.3 9.9 8.8 0.0 0.2 0.2 1,234.0 SCAQMD Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 - Source: URBEMIS2007 Model, Output in Appendix With or without the use of mitigation, peak daily construction activity emissions will be below • SCAQMD CEQA thresholds and will be further reduced by recommended mitigation. The recommended emissions mitigation measures are detailed in the "Mitigation" section of this report. Construction equipment exhaust contains carcinogenic compounds within the diesel exhaust particulates. The toxicity of diesel exhaust is evaluated relative to a 24-hour per day, 365 days per year, 70-year lifetime exposure. Public exposure to heavy equipment emissions will be an extremely small fraction of the above dosage assumption. Diesel equipment is also becoming progressively "cleaner" in response to air quality rules on new off-road equipment. Any public health risk associated with project-related heavy equipment operations exhaust is therefore not quantifiable, but small. Construction activity air quality impacts occur mainly in close proximity to the surface disturbance area. There may, however, be some "spill-over" into the surrounding community. That spill-over may be physical as vehicles drop or carry out dirt or silt is washed into public streets. Passing non-project vehicles then pulverize the dirt to create off-site dust impacts. "Spillover" may also occur via congestion effects. Construction may entail roadway encroachment, detours, lane closures and competition between construction vehicles (trucks and contractor employee commuting) and ambient traffic for available roadway capacity. Emissions controls require good housekeeping procedures and a construction traffic management plan that will maintain such "spill-over" effects at a less-than-significant level. • Rancho cucan"nuz subDlyde AO A,B,C & 112 12 6_ LOCAL SIGNIFICANCE THRESHOLDS • The SCAQMD has developed analysis parameters to evaluate ambient air quality on a local level in addition to the more regional emissions-based thresholds of significance. These analysis elements are called Local Significance Thresholds (LSTs). LSTs were developed in response to Governing Board's Environmental Justice Enhancement Initiative 1-4 and the LST methodology was provisionally adopted in October 2003 and formally approved by SCAQMD's Mobile Source Committee in February 2005. Use of an LST analysis for a project is optional because they were derived to ensure that economically or socially disadvantaged communities not be subjected to disproportionate levels of long-term air pollution exposure. They have been used in a number of CEQA studies as a guideline to evaluate short-term exposure. For residential development, the only source of LST impact would be during construction. LSTs are only applicable to the following criteria pollutants: oxides of nitrogen (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM-10 and PM-2.5). LSTs represent the maximum emissions from a project that are not expected to cause or contribute to an exceedance of the most stringent applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard, and are developed based on the ambient concentrations of that pollutant for each source receptor area and distance to the nearest sensitive receptor. The project site will be 3.4 acres. LST pollutant concentration "look-up" data is currently published for 1, 2 and 5 acre sites. Interpolating data from a 2 and 5 acre site, and a conservative source receptor distance of 25 meters to the nearest off-site residence, the following thresholds • are determined (pounds per day): Northwest San CO NOx PM-10 PM-2.5 Bernardino LST Threshold 1,712 220 11 7 Proposed Project Max Unmitigated 20 42 60 14 Max Mitigated 20 38 7 2 Without the use of a strongly enhanced fugitive dust control program, LST thresholds for PM-10 and PM-2.5 could be exceeded at the closest existing neighbors. The primary dust source would be from the import, spreading and compaction of approximately 25,000 cubic yards of needed fill. Substantial water spray at the truck dump and on the spread fill will be required. With aggressive dust control, all mitigated emissions are below LST thresholds for construction. OPERATIONAL IMPACTS Possible project-related air quality concerns typically derive from the mobile source emissions generated from the residential uses proposed for the project site. The project will generate approximately 52 average daily trips (ADT) with an associated vehicle miles traveled (VMT) of 527 miles per day. Operational emissions for project-related traffic were calculated using a computerized procedure developed by the California Air Resources Board (CARE) for urban • growth mobile source emissions. The URBEMIS2007 model was run using default trip Rancho Cucamonga SuhDivide AO A,B,C & p5. 113 • generation factors for residential uses. The model was used to calculate area source emissions and the resulting vehicular operational emissions for an assumed project build-out year of 2011. The results are shown in Table 5. The project will not cause the SCAQMD's recommended CEQA threshold levels to be exceeded. Operational air quality impacts from this very limited project will be at a less-than-significant level. • • Rancho Cucamonga SubDivide AP A,B,C & D- 114 I6 N M O. C O 7 V1 M VJ O N O O O ' • O i' O O' OT OF O O O O b V of i .0 t- N O O 0 0 CC p ; • O O O di O O E d N N E • L W � � O rce d (, O Vt V7 kr) 25 u i 0 O O h 7 N 0 o 0 0 CZ -a a) °D o O I L v - O V ti is' V] c O O •+ t N V 4 a V a R u © 0 U v; Ly < H CI) a, Li a • A,B,C & D- 115 • GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS "Greenhouse gases" (so called because of their role in trapping heat near the surface of the earth) emitted by human activity are implicated in global climate change, commonly referred to as "global warming." These greenhouse gases contribute to an increase in the temperature of the earth's atmosphere by transparency to short wavelength visible sunlight, but near opacity to outgoing terrestrial long wavelength heat radiation. The principal greenhouse gases (GHGs) are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, ozone, and water vapor. Fossil fuel consumption in the transportation sector (on-road motor vehicles, off-highway mobile sources, and aircraft) is the single largest source of GHG emissions, accounting for approximately half of GHG emissions globally. Industrial and commercial sources are the second largest contributors of GHG emissions with about one-fourth of total emissions. California has passed several bills and the Governor has signed at least three executive orders regarding greenhouse gases. The Governor's Office of Planning and Research is in the process of developing CEQA significance thresholds for GHG emissions but thresholds have yet to be established. GHG statues and executive orders (EO) include AB 32, SB 1368, EO S-03-05, EO S-20-06 and EO S-01-07. AB 32 is one of the most significant pieces of environmental legislation that California has adopted. Among other things, it is designed to maintain California's reputation as a"national and international leader on energy conservation and environmental stewardship." It will have wide- • ranging effects on California businesses and lifestyles as well as far reaching effects on other states and countries. A unique aspect of AB 32, beyond its broad and wide-ranging mandatory provisions and dramatic GHG reductions are the short time frames within which it must be implemented. Major components of the AB 32 include: • Require the monitoring and reporting of GHG emissions beginning with sources or categories of sources that contribute the most to statewide emissions. • Requires immediate "early action" control programs on the most readily controlled GHG sources. • Mandates that by 2020, California's GHG emissions be reduced to 1990 levels. • Forces an overall reduction of GHG gases in California by 25-40%, from business as usual, over the next 13 years (by 2020). • Must complement efforts to achieve and maintain federal and state ambient air quality standards and to reduce toxic air contaminants. Statewide, the framework for developing the implementing regulations for AB 32 is under way. Additionally, through the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR now called the Climate Action Reserve), general and industry-specific protocols for assessing and reporting GHG emissions have been developed. GHG sources are categorized into direct sources (i.e. company owned) and indirect sources (i.e. not company owned). Direct sources include combustion emissions from on-and off-road mobile sources, and fugitive emissions. Indirect sources include off-site electricity generation and non-company owned mobile sources. • Rancho Cucamonga SubDividc AQ A,B,C & D- 116 -30- Greenhouse Gas Emissions Significance Thresholds • There are currently no adopted GHG significance thresholds for project CEQA clearance. The California Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) has developed revisions to CEQA implementation guidelines to incorporate GHG. These were forwarded to the California National Resource Agency on April 13, 2009. They contain requirements to characterize the GHG setting, quantify the impacts resulting from the proposed project, determine impact significance, and mitigate as appropriate. They leave the determination of significance to the Lead Agency. On December 5, 2008 the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted an Interim quantitative GHG Significance Threshold for industrial projects where the SCAQMD is the lead agency (e.g., stationary source permit projects, rules, plans, etc.) of 10,000 Metric Tons CO2 equivalent/year. As part of the Interim GHG Significance Threshold development process for industrial projects, the SCAQMD established a working group of stakeholders that also considered thresholds for commercial or residential projects. As discussed in the Interim GHG Significance Threshold guidance document, the focus for residential projects is on performance standards and a screening level threshold. For discussion purposes, the SCAQMD's working group considered performance standards primarily focused on energy efficiency measures beyond Title 24 and a screening level of 3,000 metric tons (MT) CO2 equivalent/year based on the relative GHG emissions contribution between non-industrial sectors versus stationary source (industrial) sectors. The working group and staff ultimately decided that additional analysis was needed to further define the performance standards and to coordinate with CARB staff s interim GHG proposal. Staff, therefore, did not recommend action for adopting an interim threshold for non-industrial projects but rather • recommended bringing this item back to the Board for discussion and possible action in March 2009 if the CARB board did not take its final action by February 2009. As of this date, no final action on a quantitative significance threshold has been taken, but 3,000 MT per year has become a de facto screening threshold. Impacts - Greenhouse Gas Emissions Implementation of the proposed project would contribute to long-term increases in greenhouse gases (GHGs) as a result of traffic increases (mobile sources) and minor secondary fuel combustion emissions from space heating, etc. Development occurring as a result of the proposed project would also result in secondary operational increases in GHG emissions as a result of electricity generation to meet project-related increases in energy demand. Electricity generation in California is mainly from natural gas-fired power plants. However, since California imports about 20 to 25 percent of its total electricity (mainly from the northwestern and southwestern states), GHG emissions associated with electricity generation could also occur outside of California. Space or water heating, water delivery, wastewater processing and solid waste disposal also generate GHG emissions. Short-term GHG emissions will also derive from construction activities. The General Reporting Protocol (GRP) in the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR) divides project-related operational GHG emissions into three categories. These three sources include the following: • Rancho Cucamonga SubDividc AQ A,B,C & D- 117 • Source 1- On-site combustion of fossil fuels (space and water heating, fireplaces, landscape utility equipment, etc.) Source 2- Consumption of purchased energy (electricity) Source 3- Indirect emissions (transportation, solid waste disposal, fresh-and wastewater conveyance and treatment) For general residential development projects such as the proposed project, Source 3 is typically a much larger contributor to the GHG burden than Sources I and 2. For convenience, project related GHG emissions were aggregated into transportation and non-transportation sources. The transportation component is calculated and reported in the URBEMIS2007 computer model. The non-transportation sources require additional analysis, as shown below. Construction Activity GHG Emissions During project construction, the URBEMIS2007 computer model predicts that the following activities will generate the following animal CO2 emissions during the construction timeframe: Grading 140 metric tons' Construction, Paint and Pave 64 metric tons Total 204 metric tons • Equipment exhaust also contains small amounts of methane and nitric oxides which are also GHGs. Non-CO2 GHG emissions represent approximately a three percent increase in CO2- equivalent emissions from diesel equipment exhaust. For screening purposes, the temporary (one-time) construction activity GHG emissions were compared to the chronic operational emissions in the SCAQMD's interim thresholds. The screening level operational threshold is 3,000 metric tons (MT) of CO2-equivalent (CO2(e)) per year. Worst year construction activities generating a total of 204 MT if the project is built-out in a single year are well below this threshold. Construction emissions are a short-term (assumed for 8 months) issue and will cease after the project is built. Project Operational GHG Emissions The input assumptions for operational GHG emissions calculations, and the GHG conversion from consumption to annual regional CO2(e) emissions are summarized in Table 6. Annual GHG emissions, from non-transportation sources associated with residential development are shown in Table 7. Annual project-related GHG emissions will be below the 3,000 MT/year screening threshold. • ' Output provided in appendix Rancho Cucamonga SubDidde no A,B,C SLR-. 118 • Table 6 • Annual Non-Transportation Consumption/Generation Land Use Unit Electricity Nat. Gas Solid Waste Water (MWHR) (106 cu ft) (tons) (106 gal) Residential DU 5.6 0.0481 0.73 0.073 Conversion to CO2(e) [tons/year] Electricity MWHR x 0.364 tons/MWHR (1) Nat. Gas 106 cubic feet x 54.6 tons/106 cubic feet (2) Solid Waste tons x 0.46 tons/ton (3) Water and Wastewater 106 gal(MG) x 4.62 tons/MG (4) (1) California Climate Action Registry (2) California Climate Action Registry (3) Energy Information Admin., Voluntary Reporting of GHG (4) California Energy Commission, Integrated Energy Policy Report (12.7 MWHR per MG conveyed, treated and disposed in Southern California) • Table 1 Project-Related GHG Emissions Use Unit Electricity Nat. Gas Solid Water (MWHR) (106 cu ft) Waste (MG) (tons) Residential 5 DU 28 0.2 4.4 0.4 Conversion Factor 0.364 54.6 0.46 4.62 CO2(e) tons/yr 10.2 13.1 2.0 2.0 Total Non-Transportation 27.3 metric tons/year Total Transportation* 87.7 metric tons/year Combined tons CO2(e)/yr 115 metric tons/year Transportation Share 76% *Residential = 365 days/yr • Rancho Cucamonga SubDivide AQ A,B,C & D- 119 -3l. • Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Measures GHG reduction options on a project-level basis are similar to those measures designed to reduce criteria air pollutants (those with ambient air quality standards). Measures that reduce trip generation or trip lengths, measures that optimize the transportation efficiency of a region, and measures that promote energy conservation within a development will reduce GHG emissions. Additionally, carbon sequestering can be achieved through urban forestry measures. For the proposed project the transportation component will comprise approximately 80 percent of the project-related GHG emissions. Reductions in the vehicular contribution are therefore critical in achieving the goals of statewide/national GHG minimization programs. However, substantial mobile source tripNMT reduction or increases in vehicular fuel efficiency are not achievable on a project-specific basis. State or national programs are in place to significantly upgrade fuel efficiencies. Most discretionary actions for GHG reduction must therefore focus on energy conservation. Project-specific mitigation recommendations to reduce the global cumulative impact from project implementation include the following: • . Construct the new residential buildings to meet California Title 24 energy efficiency requirements • • Require acquisition of new appliances and equipment to meet Energy Star certification • Participate in green waste collection and recycling programs for landscape maintenance • Encourage use of landscaping with low water requirements and fast growth • Plant trees or vegetation to shade buildings and thus reduce heating/ cooling demand and to sequester carbon • Rancho Cucamonga SubDivide AO A,B,C & 0- 120 1a- MITIGATION • CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS MITIGATION Construction activity air pollution emissions are not anticipated to individually exceed SCAQMD CEQA thresholds. LST thresholds for PM-10 and PM-2.5 could be exceeded at the closest neighbors during the import and placement of fill. Maintaining local particulate exposures below LST increments requires that Best Available Control Measures (BACMs) be used where feasible. Recommended construction activity mitigation including BACM's includes: Dust Control • Apply soil stabilizers to inactive areas. • Prepare a high wind dust control plan and implement plan elements and terminate soil disturbance when winds exceed 25 mph. • Stabilize previously disturbed areas if subsequent construction is delayed. • Water exposed surfaces 3 times/day and limit on-site travel speeds to less than 15 mph. • Cover all stock piles with tarps if left undisturbed for more than 72 hours. • Replace ground cover in disturbed areas as soon as feasible. • • Provide adequate water spray at truck drops and compaction surfaces during fill placement Exhaust Emissions • Require 90-day low-NOx tune-ups for off-road equipment. • Limit allowable idling to 5 minutes for trucks and heavy equipment. • Utilize equipment whose engines are equipped with diesel oxidation catalysts if available. • Utilize diesel particulate filter on heavy equipment where feasible. Painting and Coatings • Use low VOC coatings and high pressure-low volume sprayers. OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS MITIGATION Operational emissions will not exceed adopted significance thresholds. • Rancho Cucamonga Sunrnviac AQ A,B,C & D- 121 �s- APPENDIX -_ URBEMIS2007 Computer Model Output A,B,C1& D- 122 N CO j p t O c U U C L U C (0 St.-. CO "Co O j m C o O -- a rn V N C • (V C O p O ` s a o > N co co > c E (N O N > co •N D N W N N 0 • E o o w U O D. N C C' UO E 0 E W O 0 U 8 CO 0• N y U. m 72 N LA- w 11,; > O -0 C m O O O 2 v -p U 7 CO QU m C N •-• m m U O C O O c 0 N N N O L co N 2 y U C w WW N , N . N M O 0 U U U E • cf0i > > EZ a v 0 0 C U U O O Csi 0I N Z 0 N N N O CL i a` a- ") o A,B,C & D- 123 N VI N 0 0 O o q 0 o CCJJI o n n e e N o m m o o N N o v r t- • o f m m V O O .9- m rn O d O to -O ! 0 O O V N N O O N (O • h na O O 00 ^O N o • v m . - 1 rn m m 0 0 0 a ° _ o m oJ m x o c M 0 4 U- aWW m r o o r.: e o o 0 a 1 o 0 o .• Cl N N O O 9N ((/j O O O o O tp N O O O O a m t0 h N m m n n of a v m 4 w p o Z 0 z o ', o o a m q m _rn p?q E U `n" vii m N n ZZII e n - O1 n o a N q a o 2 o O 0 N E z w y Z a M M a N E e e r M N o N a c7� IW- w E OI 2 C C z m w CO w 0 P w z C a O n p P a a 2 N a K H N 0 v P m O to w = = w o w 0 z z O 'c -°' E _9, Z a w 'm C m 0 0 2 to o E 7 E J of 0 rn -n O a __� d N W 'O a a D CCC O M a N N W = > 0 = J z • a rO D L n w N J N N l0 C O o N = 1¢- H la- Q 0 n Q n G D 2` K F U K ° E O O O O ¢ O H Eli N ¢ ¢ < ¢ E 2 o o - w 1- w 1- 2 1- c z M 'n O 00 N co N N ¢ p O 0 U O 0 A,B,C & D- 124 0 0 N O 07 V T. m r O r 0 m V C m o O 0 O an C) C) O R C l( 1.0 CD O N N. tO C') O CT R 0 N. Li) v CO CO Cn m O) O o O) ti n 6 0 0) CO N N r 0 0 a) N o N 0) DJ r N 0 N O < N N r 7 r R R 2 ' O O r V O O O r r O O r r O O O La b O O A O O O) O O O O O • C) (7 N r O O O O O O O q O O O O 0 O O O • NJ O O t V O r r O 0 O y r O O O ° 0 O O 0 O UT N h 0 0 0) 0 O) 0 0 0 0 0^ ° 7 O O O O 0 0 O O 0 O O O O O O N C') 0 t') 0 0 0 0 0 0 d 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r O) LC) N. CO CO R r 0 0 0) N O 0 0 co la N N O N U) U) O O ('1 O ° O 0 °0 0 0 0 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r�ll 7 O O can 0 0 0 O a e ° 6 a) 0 6 u) v 0 0 O)I 0) 0 CO 0 0 0 0) m 0 N CO O 0 IO U O 0 O0 0) ° O) 0 o O 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ly n m o m 0 0 0 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 �4N171 CO �n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N O O 0 O 0 O O O Q O 0 O O O O O 0 • : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 0 5.U y m 0 C 1 0 SA Ol or O H CO r IO N ? O 0 m O CO O r O O O > O W O) a o Co (� N 0 a) CO N. CO (O (O r 0 L J� la 0 CO 0) 0 0 0 0 O' A 0 O) CO 0 co (O 40 r 0 laf la O N O O O a C7 Q Q O N 0 0 G O OJ O O ^ O r O O o 0 0 d N N °M a 0 an C) 0 0 a) Ch Q Q r N r C') an O O N 0 O 0 C' 0)) O co O O V V 0 N d' V o t7 r O r 7 e- O O cal 7 O r O O r r C a O O N t') N 0 N O '0 r r r f d co m N O O O O a r 0 - ° O N° N a m a (7 O O m ° O O � 0 v p n n O m m m w 0 Cr n o F °N . s m ° 4 F Q o 5 6 ° o . d c o m N O O O O O Y r O O d m T 0 H 0 - m L. r C) p O O) 0) or a) N ix r U C N C C C C O Q 0 N I K K - N N Co • o� � m 1 °m n Mm 0 O > v T o O o N O U N m r N C a 0 O C C N 0 OI T O) CO O) ° C CO m T O N N V N m T C N a u c aa a •a 2 _ C C m C m 0 Q m� m co Co co 0 > > > 0 m CO C u o m N N m m C) 2 2 2 2 tom a m m m m m 'm a a a a m a 0 a O N m > m m > o m > a m m r E"1 2r E" CO E ¢ 0 a d. (n Q i- Q i-C a A,B,C & D- 125 • • o c o 00 T T d T a O N N 0 . 0 V 'm0 11 `O 0 O o O 0 0 u a a 0 0 0 0 0 N a N 0 N m > > m N J 0 = m m 0 a 0 7 L 2 o ma) w c ta r T =• r N co O tC 'U 'U d • m O D O O C O O m U m , 6 6 y L p 0 m C N D .0• O U co N D U a p m T U 0 m t 0 O Q E W 0 2 N 0 - V a m D D D A N N D L O N T a O ` a y O m O .n 6 m m m a O. o N '- m U m O L a O 7 7 ` a' m N N _ m O y 0 o Il J w e O U• L D N O d O o m m O j N m N N - c D O 0 0 O n L O L O m 0 Q c • p m a m O ` m CO m woo '7: jF 0 m0'- m ` N - N - to U a • O ry ` m N N N ^ N 0 m O U O O m 0 m 2 7 9 0 U m a a A m O — ^ N- N m m h 2 D m D m M - N N In = 2 C 0 a m m m U o `' m m a ID, c c C C O O - 0 a m o ,� o O .g' .0 'rn 12 "2 ° O n m c m m m a m L O O N N N Of w a 3 D a m o o r= N O m 0 0 m o m m c 5 - 7 in m L V N m y ^ 10 `r' i0 C C m m O [` y 0 N m m O 2 Iris o n CO `m C m 0 °- c = o g U U 0 0 a n m O a > n r In m o 2 ` v v o 0 CU 0 a a t2 0 L op m Cu m m = N 0 000 Cu -o m > 0 m 'a 0l N o - I`p a N 00 .. a o fL U m d d In d o m `r m N a 0 e - m - 0 0 - O N O a -:-.2 m c a w w • c 0 a > Q H E L 0 m N O > p .12- 1R2 m a L L 'O U m m m m O m J '> > ,:r N m yj m m •O D O L m C OI O m �l C C C C O m 0 j F W 0 F- ` ` > m W m ° - -] • W En ... J 0 a D D 1 m E y N r m .a y ` ` N 5 N N I- u 0 m 0 N m `m m 2 a o m m L' 0 m m m ;c o 0 m m m m M a m x .'_. m re w g m m 0 m K aa) m o m m K m o 0 m 'aWi hi 'di aWi [0 p m ' c c r '' K 1- 3 $ m U a ti: H CO r' 0 a H 2 5 5 5 5 a N i- a 0 0 O. r r r a C O e r r r a - N a K ¢ X K .. A,B,C & D- 126 U N- 1- O I- b C CO CO l C O CO O O) N 0 0 • ] N Co m N N 0 m Q N N 3- 3- 1 ! N N ' (O 0 0 Co 0 0 0 • O O O 0 0 O O O 6w m O r to O Co O O 0 O d O O O o O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O - O O O O O O O O I of ` Co O) h 0) 0) co D- O 0 0 O 0 0 N- h Co O O O O O O O O Co o m o 0 m m o 0 m o m o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O 0 O O o O o eJ e m 0 0 0 0 0 Cl N - 0 0 O O O 0 O O lC) CO Co O O O O O O O O • N O O N O O O o O O O o O O O O O o O O 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O N in N _N O 0 O 0 O O • > m q co m o m Co CO r r Co al 0 0 0 O m a) o c a o c a CO o A y 0 .p ¢ a) O N Co r la N R O O 0 6 4 O 0 O o N O T 0 0 " - O N 0 O fl l7 N r O C) C m Can 0 O N Co O N- N. N- O o co N a y N 0 to C 0 0 O La 3.0 a /ry O N 0 iJ f? N) O 0 N 0 e P 0 0 E W E c e 0 Ci o 0 0 O N C .a, co co 0 .0 H m 0 a) C 05 Ca O H N Ti O O 0 O Z N O N O 0 2 ! N 0 o m O o m 0 ~ o O y N co 0 A co 'L 0 K o 4_Nl (� N_ ;50 ' O_' '0 N O O. D_ a s w °m o 0 0 0 4 � ~ ~ N N N 001 Z O a C C) C1 a) N x C Y rC C N O C p • 0 0 O ,_0 01 4 a V °O Ny) '� 0 a s 2 F m e n m E E a0 o O > r .0 )y a O ° y O O 0 0 0 U�' rn En m N N O C C C 10 p o o K ON_ 0 m m 0 p m - b 'o N N Z Z N N 0 2 c7, M 2 m 0 9 Co Co Co 0) t� m ti c 2 0 > co a m > 'S CO " > > o 0 E'� E., co 0. is X Z 0 0 1=Q 1-Q A,B,C & D- 127 • o m o o 0 0 CD Ip O N n ' M O M N O m m ` m O m N N- N On N • f'1 ^ O P O O O `C']+ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O M .- O O O O _ _ O R o c o c o Q O O O O O O O O 1 O 0 0 0 O 0 O O ]A O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O n O m N 0 0 0 0 r 0 O 0 O O e Q O O O O O O O O C O a U co m CO CD O m O O O 0 O O O O O O C o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O m O T % n W y 8 c c o O O O O O O O O T in 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o n o c E m O T T a y n • 0 0 0 0 o O o 0 0 m n• c cu v m o y 'N c n N a 0 0 o o 0 O 0 00 o u m E Q o 0 o O O 0 o o � .y . y a C a y p • o w o a aE 0 u .o v Ln m �, m 0 3 S. c E c n y e N N O N 0 c 0 m O O) O n O O O M C > N a p a m O f0 O O O O ^ O Y y N T 2 • = e E = E E m c O O_, Q O , 0) d C 0 C y C y O m o f m m m y o N y m d O m 0 y :. ° J E E 4 m o N. m o 0 0 0 o 2 a 3 a T m 0 a p°.]M 0 0 m 0 0 o 0 d of o of o 0 0 0 0 0 m .o -2 2 m o i.-• N O m C CO N %N N co C C a _y _E C a to — u J c 'a 0 m to > m• o d _ N a o m o m > o m 0 f o m M o N y m.E LL 0 0 0 m • o w a c d m= y d m o m = In p o o L a L co O) 6 d d J o "p U N ? N 9 y U • N d T m 11,-;) N co d m co n a d Z LL m - m Q K m m U m y m y r �- d L , ) S -. ,_, m o m O O j - N N y _ _ d a) V '� O a v m O m m m ter J t a t N f\ y y [\ y m _ _ y y N % o m d m o+ p, E y y a M o O O n o a c m e m m o d o m o m = O `d CO y -p F - Q ~ 0 d 0 0 m to 2 Q 2 Lo to to N N . 0 to co y 0 `d Cp 2 m 2 e 2 in y O N _d m W_ O 0 co r O 0 O_' O.' Y N m on to O) on N p C!) a N O 10 o 0 • ' N .- CO- O C N C t!') C N p N p N m N y 'O t�J R O O O O O .J. E N N N •N 2' d' L t a a a a a h H m O m m o ,Od, m C N e N Q' m o m a co o ~ (O m -- > > > '> °' L 'm to c to a to m m Zr m m m °) -0. .n N fA L m N m m C 0 O - m - - O 6 V p CO m m tap �1 L hi a d m w a a a a .a Q U N 0 m 0 En o j o j 0 0 o Ur •• CC a U F L l LL ^ 80- N H< a a. 0 d a a a d U. Z IL • A,B,C & D- 128 • • C O a V N N 0 C O o N C O 0 m c c v 5.a o a C • C _ N C m o N O O y n m N T N . 0 E 0 m m T m O ' m C O O N r y d U N a o CO 0 W as E c a 0 °' a E N o m m o y E m m o N N N m T T y (7 m N C m N o m C N C m C y E °- E N ° o 0 0 c °- = m `m a m C . o o m t 9 N m m y -O r a N y T T m EO N m m N r _ N m �? m N !!� a E a E N E o 0 c 0 c E m m m_ m m` m co y O_ y O d m r y I'- m N th p, m m N H m C m r - V N U N O U o N 'E `o_ 5 `, ` E a 'E a 'E r E � a V m a r m m m m o 2 m m LL m m .- - o 'E c a '`' o o a o p r o 0 o ;n m a m a ' U m y 1` m jp 1(! T m `1 m 2 >` m ... m F m m 2 y r. - m m �' -• LL . ; .0 :E > ii m E o E o V 'v E m o IL N a o H ' H m m o m H S v `-' a O $ vmEE mo m o a O m a m p a = a , a O a s m O N N ° ° N ° 9 N .N X m N 0 T T m m T O ° ° m O m m 0 m 6 ° N d _ y • 0 m O _ CO y N m 0 m it • t t U " U U t m O m t Lm m m o m p N N j m R 2 ,m m a 0 a N N _ O N m m 0 m q U.c y y m ] t L m C O m m E x x Cu a x m a R v v E m a e y O o ° a O a O m m a c m m m ` o in N N N m o m O = 0 = m N m N e m O m N m 0 t t O O co CO N N 00 0 N a 8 ° N ° ° ° ° - N V N CO Y N y N N CO m N m N m o 2 o o 2 o E c 2 c m 2 m m 2 m o 2 o • r a P a J 2 a 2 m m a m - € a a t ; a ; m = H H C_ c .72 N. O ,- 5 a ° t N t o N a 3 m N m e N I[l ` e• ` N e o O N O o 3 m Nm a r 0 °' CO m `m m r. ° E m E 'r we m m ^ m m m Im ` m ° m 6N - or a O K k H O F- j� �i 0 s k -O U 0 U j� a O a k K O cc X H 0 H k -O U EL N a lL Z LL a a ^ lL a LL Z H lL a LL Z IL a IL Z ^ tEL lL Z lL a IL802 Z H a • A,B,C & D- 129 lill c a O a .a°y c T T .y O N m 1 N y a c y E m . 0 m M N m N . c E N E U m j U m m c a ry 0 y d m o o O O U d N d O O • NE J2 e Im o O c m c w ° ^' y E U CO E N 0 m m U m 0 c 0 o — U • o E m U o O O N m 0 o O U o 3 .0 y n 0 _a o o°- m a c OI 0 g -, j T i/� 3 .. y E N .E C N N 0 o O W C O N O y m 0 N = D 0 m N U N i- m m Q W E a E E c m m m 0 cy ly c , U W a u a a v° N N N N N ,� O ... .0 .0 m m d OI c 0 T U m m C C c E c LL - 'a 10 z z° P U s m m m m m H m ry C d' d' L_. L. ° Q 0 0 E N E u m w m ay t m E CO m m o m a. - a 0 a > > 0 0 N � N N 0 N N ' 0 0 10 0 g 2 in 0. 2 2 Cm m S . 0 U 0 U 5 m m c co N o 0 o m U 0 m° 2 w m ° m 7, m ° m O O U > a L' m L L N m m U U R a 0 ° u E 5 m m m a - m , m m_ Co a v m N CO N 0 m N y m a' M C L < < N O N 0 m m m 2 2 t• c N m N 0 CO N m Q Q N a = L a = aE m m m m Le; a N m m e c o a O m C t0 , m Y N U m U l0 O y O y O C O c O 7, 0 N m m m m 2 1 0 X a _O a r ° 1- a Ur a U' 2 0 Z b 8 0 8 C O 2 o '� `O `o O t o O `O O o O o 0 a a) a a z a a a a a a Z F a K a K 11 K a K A,B,C & D- 130 1y I'- 0 CO N N N III ((.;A� a CO M 0 m CO O O o O O V b O O O N m 0 o O O N O O O 2 O o a o o ' 0 0 _ 0 0 0 0 0 m 2 0 0 0 E o 0 a. . a CY 0 0 0 N 0 o o O o o 0 o N 0 o 0 o • 0 O� 0' N N O cA O N N O 0 0 o In In a m v m 'm m M o .c ( m O m E x 0 0 0 C O N N Z O O O 2 O o T >. N O o • 0 0 . a a 0 N y d O a a E c a c o 7 0 o ' ` o o N n o o O O O O a K o o d N m m `c_ E E E —° m m E al o to CO y m N O 0 0 ° E 0 N Fw- w a O CO x > O Q .0 m ` z a Q n P l = O N• f/w vca 0 N O m a w v li m m ° O m c o D_ 0 E N E = o N E '2 m y u N m Cn w H E d E m a E is-N m y V rn c m N C c y c E • n : w E D o 0 g c D 0 u .D° w E o m >. w > >. D a c •ca -. N O 0 , Q o N 9 N O 7 J N O U 0 W O y a al 2 c O E O C C N N pa 9 O o z a `F 0 c H E w c Y v fa N CO N m L Cm' E 0 J O J O c Oc f, >if! ( a m K m o o 0 E 0 a a .' r a o o c E a. < ¢ z m o a r O O 0 O 0 0 ¢ w A,B,C & D- 131 v N r O o m O c0 O O O O o E o N o 0 r o n o 0 0 0 o E _ a r o 0 0 0 0 H m CO r r r r A 2 m m m • m m 0 N N N U) m O Y Q O r` A . N ^ 0 U C 0. ` 0 g N N , 0 0 0 0 N 0 N 0 0 0 r` O E Z 0 U] m 0) m ) 4 O N O O O 0 O o To o 0) m Om m m N m m EO ✓ 0 0 m C] m Ci E w o E o 0 0 m d • Z y m r, e m O o 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 a o N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o e o 0 To o o C 0 L O) H o C O E c 2 E 2' 9 jp 6 C cC d O n — o � F m m o m m m )n — — m — m > o. r ri o 0 0 0 0 o 6 o o m o N m E 0 O O N E 2 m v u o y v o` a a I-- o O N N E 0 2 A a O O 0 O o 0 O O O 6 0 o m T O P m n a nn o — p O a 0 O N m a 0 Op ,00 0o y m 'E f7 0 N mi m .e o L..CO 4111 a a v m N F- 1- T > o d J 0 o m .E , o u u u 0' > > y m m ° E a y N D o u C F F F 2 2 >, m m 0 m =o = 0) a O1 L L L U ' > O m O O O N m r Ip C m m m m o d d m o - -L o O n M N J (n > J J J 2 J J 22 m O 5 co 0 A,B,C & D- 132 S o o ' o `� U s N o O m O N > m 0 E Z E E 0 U o v o N O n U ` rn o • L < O O r C ? O 0 n o n 0 o m L 0 N 0 m E a_ o 0 0 S (O O o O C N M M v 0 C T D_ a 13 E o a E n m • y E K U c a a o n d N F y 0 0 M a m d 0 d F o A,B,C & D- 133 Table 1 • Ambient Air Quality Standards California Standards Federal Standards Averaging Pollutant Time Concentration Method Primary Secondary Method 1 Hour 0.09 ppm(180 pglm3) Ultraviolet Same as Ultraviolet Ozone (03) Photometry Primary Standard Photometry Hour 0.070 ppm(137 pg/m3) tiY 0.075 ppm(147 pg/m3) ry by 24 Hour 50 pg/m3 150 pg/m3 Respirable Gravimetric or Same Inertial Separation ame as Particulate Annual Beta Attenuation Primary Standard and Gavime nc Matter(PM10) Arithmetic 20 pg/m Revoked(2006) Analysis Mean 24 Hour • No Separate State Standard 35 pg/m3 Fine Same as Inertial Separation Particulate Annual Gravimetric or Beta Prima Standard and Gravimetic Matter(PM2s) Arithmetic 12 pglm3 Attenuation 15 pg/m3 Primary Analysis Mean 8 Hour 9.0 ppm(10 rig/m3) 9 ppm(10 mg/m3) Non-Dispersive Carbon Non-Dis rsive None Infrared Photometry Monoxide 1 Hour 20 ppm(23 mg/m3) Infrared Pho Photometry 35 ppm(40 mg/m3) (NDIR) (CO) 8 Hour (NDIR) (Lake Tahoe) 6 ppm(7 mg/m3) — — — Annual Nitrogen Arithmetic 0.030 ppm(57 pg/m3) Gas Phase 0.053 ppm(100 pg/m3) • Dioxide Mean Same as Gas Phase Chemiluminescence Primary Standard Chemiluminescence (NO2) 1 Hour 0.18 ppm(339 pg/rn3) 0.100 ppm(189 pg/m3) 30-Day average 1.5 pg/m3 — — _ Lead Calendar Atomic Absorption 1.5 pg/m3 • Primary Standard Sampler r and Atomic Quarter Absorption • Annual Arithmetic — 0.030 ppm(80 pg/m3) — Mean Sulfur Dioxide Ultraviolet Spectrophotometry (S02) 24 Hour 0.04 ppm(105 pg/m3) Fluorescence 0.14 ppm(365 pglm3) —. (Pararosaniline 3 Hour — — 0.5 ppm(1,300 pg/m3) 1 Hour 0.25 ppm(655 pg/m3) — — Extinction coefficient of 0.23 per kilometer— Visibility visibility of 10 miles or more(0.07-30 miles or Reducing 8 Hour more for Lake Tahoe)due to particles when No relative humidity is less than 70 percent Particles Method: Beta Attenuation and Transmittance through Filter Tape. Sulfates 24 Hour 25 pg/m3 on Chromatography Federal Hydrogen 1 Hour 0.03 ppm(42 pg/m3) U aviolet Sulfide Fluorescence Standards • Vinyl Chloride 24 Hour 0.01 ppm(26 pglm3) Gas Chromatography California ARB (06/26/08) C WSERSWICHMO MACIASNPPDATALLOCAIVAICRO5OF TIWINDOWSITEMPORARY IrgRgr raESsOrcyNr IE1 34BVF1TBLE 1-AMBNr NR OLTY_STNOROS[11000 Table 2 • Health Effects of Major Criteria Pollutants Pollutants Sources Primary Effects Carbon Monoxide • Incomplete combustion of fuels and other • Reduced tolerance for exercise. (CO) carbon-containing substances,such as motor • Impairment of mental function. exhaust. • Impairment of fetal development. • Natural events,such as decomposition of Death at high levels of exposure. •organic matter. • Aggravation of some heart diseases(angina). Nitrogen Dioxide • Motor vehicle exhaust. • Aggravation of respiratory illness. (NO2) • High temperature stationary combustion. • Reduced visibility. • Atmospheric reactions. • Reduced plant growth. • Formation of acid rain. Ozone • Atmospheric reaction of organic gases with • Aggravation of respiratory and (03) nitrogen oxides in sunlight. cardiovascular diseases. • Irritation of eyes. • Impairment of cardiopulmonary function. • Plant leaf injury. Lead(Pb) • Contaminated soil. • Impairment of blood function and nerve construction. • Behavioral and hearing problems in children. Fine Particulate Matter • Stationary combustion of solid fuels. • Reduced lung function. • (PM-10) • Construction activities. • Aggravation of the effects of gaseous • Industrial processes. pollutants. • Atmospheric chemical reactions. • Aggravation of respiratory and cardio respiratory diseases. • Increased cough and chest discomfort. • Soiling. • Reduced visibility. Fine Particulate Matter • Fuel combustion in motor vehicles, • Increases respiratory disease. (PM-2.5) equipment, and industrial sources. • Lung damage. • Residential and agricultural burning. • Cancer and premature death. • Industrial processes. • Reduces visibility and results in surface • Also, formed from photochemical reactions soiling. of other pollutants, including NOx, sulfur oxides,and organics. Sulfur Dioxide • Combustion of sulfur-containing fossil fuels. • Aggravation of respiratory diseases(asthma, (SO2) • Smelting of sulfur-bearing metal ores. emphysema). • Industrial processes. • Reduced lung function. • Irritation of eyes. • Reduced visibility. • Plant injury. • Deterioration of metals,textiles, leather, finishes,coatings, etc. Source: Califomia Air Resources Board,2002. • A,B,C & D- 135 LEATHERMAN BIOCONSULTING, INC. Biological Surveys, Management&Monitoring • CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA February 22, 2010 NOV 302010 Mr. Richard Macias RECENrn - PLANNING OAKMARK HOLDINGS LLC 12227 Valley Boulevard, Suite 0 El Monte, California 91732 Re: Results of a Habitat Assessment for California Gnatcatcher on a Proposed Project Site in Rancho Cucamonga (APN# 0225-181-73) 1i.CWC • 00010/ s66rr it 7'f7 Dear Mr. Macias: This letter reports the results of a habitat assessment for the California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica) on a small property in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California. Specifically, the property is located north of Interstate 210 and east of Etiwanda Avenue at the current terminus of Arapahoe Road. It is our understanding that the City has • requested this assessment as part of its environmental review process. The project consists of the development of five single family homes on an approximately 3.36-acre parcel (APN# 0225- 181-73). SPECIES' BACKGROUND The California gnatcatcher was listed by the USFWS as a threatened species in 1993 (USFWS 1993). Historically it occurred in California from the Santa Clara River valley and northern San Fernando Valley south through the coastal foothills of San Diego County(Garrett and Dunn 1981). Habitat loss and fragmentation from expanding development and agriculture has been a major factor in the decline of this species in southern California(Atwood 1993). The USFWS published a proposal to designate critical habitat for the California gnatcatcher in 2003 (USFWS 2003). The California gnatcatcher inhabits moderately dense stands of coastal sage scrub occurring on arid hillsides, mesas, and washes. Coastal sage scrub communities dominated by California sagebrush, California buckwheat, and white sage seem to be preferred by this species, but shrub composition in occupied areas across the species' range varies, as does shrub community structure(height,density, etc.). Alluvial fan sage scrub, which is similar to coastal sage scrub, is also known to be utilized by the California gnatcatcher in some portions of its range. Other habitats may be used temporarily by dispersing and foraging individuals when adjacent to occupied stands of sage scrub. Individuals have been recorded as high as 2,640 ft. in elevation,but most occurrences are well below that,with populations generally below 1,800 ft. in inland areas and below 1,350 ft. in coastal habitats(Atwood • and Bontrager 2001). 4848 Lakeview Avenue, Suite 100E B C rbaa Lind3 California f 92886 • (714) 701-0863 The California gnatcatcher is a resident(non-migratory) songbird that nests and forages in coastal • sage scrub vegetation in southern California year-around. Territory size varies with season and locale. Territory size may increase by as much as 80% during the non-breeding season as pairs and individuals tend to wander more widely, and inland populations tend to have larger home ranges than coastal populations. The breeding season generally occurs from March through July. Juvenile dispersal distances average less than 1.2 miles from natal territories,but have been documented up to nearly 6 miles (Atwood and Bontrager 2001). METHODS Before the field survey, Leatherman BioConsulting, Inc. reviewed the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CDFG 2010) and other relevant available literature to search for historic and current records for the California gnatcatcher in the vicinity of the project site. Brian Leatherman, a California gnatcatcher permitted biologist with over 17 years of experience in southern California, subsequently visited the property on February 19, 2010 to conduct the habitat assessment. The survey was conducted in the morning hours; weather conditions consisted of overcast skies, a light breeze (2-4 mph), and cool temperatures(-58°F). The approximately 3.36-acre project site was surveyed for California gnatcatcher habitat by walking meandering transects over the entire property. The focus of the survey was on the detection and assessment of habitat for the California gnatcatcher, but all wildlife observed or detected was recorded in field notes. RESULTS • The project site is a flat parcel of land dominated by non-native grasses and annual herbs. It appears to be periodically mowed or tilled, and is surrounded on all four sides by development. Small piles of yard waste were observed around the perimeter of the property, likely from adjacent residents. Dominant non-native plant species included ripgut brome grass (Bromus diandrus) and red-stemmed filaree(Erodium cicutarium). Numerous other species were observed including wild oat (Avena fatua), foxtail barley (Hordeum murinum), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus), white-stemmed filaree (Erodium moschatum), cheeseweed (Malva parviflora) and Lamb's quarters (Chenopodium album). One native herb, Rancher's fiddleneck (Amsinckia menzeisii), occurred throughout the site. Nearly all of these species are common weedy plants that occur on vacant lots throughout southern California. No habitat for the California gnatcatcher occurs on the project site. In fact, no individuals of the many shrub species that make up the coastal sage scrub or alluvial fan sage scrub communities in which the gnatcatcher lives were observed on the project site. Therefore,the California gnatcatcher is not expected to occur. The status and distribution of the California gnatcatcher in San Bernardino County was reviewed by Liam et al. (1995). Although historical records of the California gnatcatcher in the region remain in question, six substantiated observations of California gnatcatcher were made in southwestern San Bernardino County between 1990 and 1995, all in alluvial fan sage scrub habitat. These included • observations in the Lytle Creek area(including its confluence with Cajon Creek), Etiwanda Fan, A,B,C & D- 137 • Jurupa Hills, and Santa Ana River near Highland(Liam et al. 1995). Since that time, additional observations have been made near Glen Helen Park in 2000 and Lytle Creek in 2003 (CDFG 2010). Finally, a presumed nesting pair was discovered in 2008 near Redlands (Daniels pers. comm. 2008). The closest record to the project site is the one from the Etiwanda Fan. That record was from 1999 from the east side of Day Creek approximately 2 miles northwest of the project site. However, that site has been developed and no observations of California gnatcatcher have been reported for that area since (CDFG 2010). CONCLUSIONS No coastal sage scrub or alluvial fan sage scrub habitat suitable for the California gnatcatcher occurs on the project site, and none was observed adjacent to the project site. Based on the lack of suitable habitat, the apparent lack of habitat in the vicinity, the lack of recent sightings of California gnatcatcher in the region, and professional experience and judgment, the California gnatcatcher is not expected to occur on the project site at this time, and additional surveys are not recommended or required. * * r It has been a pleasure to conduct this survey effort for Oakmark Holdings LLC. The references cited are enclosed. If you have any questions or comments regarding the information provided in this letter report please contact me by phone at (714) 701-0863 or by email me at • bleathermanwlb @aol.com. Sincerely, LEATH RMAN BIO ONSU INC. i — Brian Leatherman President, Wildlife Biologist Enclosures C:/.../work/Oakmark cagn assess rpt • A,B,C & D- 138 • REFERENCES CITED • Atwood, J. L. 1993. California gnatcatchers and coastal sage scrub: the biological basis for endangered species listing. Pages 149-169 in Keeley, J. E. Interface between ecology and land development in California. Southern California Academy of Science, Los Angeles. Atwood, J. and D. Bontrager. 2001. California Gnatcatcher(Polioptila californica). The Birds of North America, No. 574. (A. Poole and F. Gill eds.). California Department of Fish and Game,Natural Diversity Data Base (CDFG). 2010. Rarefind electronic data base of special status species locations for the Ontario, Guasti, Fontana, Devore and San Bernardino North USGS 7.5 minute series quadrangles. California Department of Fish and Game,Natural Heritage Division, Sacramento. Daniels, Brian. 2008. Telephone communication regarding his recent observation of two California gnatcatchers along the Santa Ma River wash near the Redlands Airport. September 5. Davis, Liam., R. McKernan and J. Burns. 1995. Current status and history of the California Gnatcatcher(Polioptila californica) in San Bernardino County. Paper presented at the Symposium on the Biology of the California Gnatcatcher. University of California, • Riverside. September. Garrett, K. and J.Dunn. 1981. Birds of Southern California: Status and Distribution. Los Angeles Audubon Society, Los Angeles. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1993. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; determination of threatened status for the coastal California gnatcatcher. Federal Register 58: 16742-16757. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2003. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants; Proposed determination of critical habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher. Federal Register 68:20227-20312. • A,B,C & D- 139 • CItY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA TREE REPORT NOV 3 0 2010 FOR RECEIVED - PLANNING Richard Macias 12227 Valley Blvd. El Monte, CA 91723 SITE ADDRESS PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP No. 16969, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • REPORT DONE BY: PHIL MAY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT 1937 W 9TH STREET UPLAND, CA 91786 (909) 373-1959 WC WO/ 0001 0 svbrr/ 1747 February 17, 2010 • A,B,C & D- 140 • TABLE OF CONTENTS TREE REPORT LETTER 3 SITE PLAN 4 SITE AND TREE DISCUSSION 5 EXISTING TREE PICTURES 6-7 • A,B,C & D- 141 • February 17, 2010 Richard Macias 12227 Valley Blvd. El Monte, CA 91723 RE: Tree Report Site: PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP No. 16969, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Dear Mr. Macias Per your request, I have prepared an Tree Report based on the comments from the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The following opinions expressed are based on field inspection. My observations, recommendations, and opinions are within this report. Based on the site visit there is one Eucalyptus globulus within the protected green zone pertaining to your property. Mitigated Eucalyptus tree is proposed to be removed. We are proposing four (4) Tristania laurina trees as replacement for mitigated Eucalyptus. Please refer to the "SITE PLAN" included in this report for location of new trees. I have included in • this report a "SITE & TREE DISCUSSION"which contains information for existing Eucalytus tree discuss in this report. Please feel free to give me a call if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, / i fiNfre f" /CA l Mike Parker Certified Arborist WE3414A l • A,B,C & D- 142 „ @, ,. { .SQ sm ;i VONOWVOf10 OHONVN JO k1.13 CD �y d is t 3H1 NI '69691 N�dW���ld J0 Z 13021Vd . . a -larl ag le 2 ZUw m a a� I w z o - ' c r V I L • ¢ o o 4 1 n O J J 0 w I • O d 4 2 (9 N ) hi tm a °m 0l•3 Is Q E Z z w I — \ D 4 Z o r� o W 1 d V I N w m a w Nal a 1 al I w o W f p i N \ , 1:4 1 0 ¢ N Q O I I J (O 4 hi U y Q U < I r w Z -• ED C) m c v� E� w r <I $ 4 4R O qt \ Q b w w * N �\ M E W iT Qr IT 4 2. W d ` U 04 CC Q / \ '\ 0- ° 41 _ I �4 I Z 0= I / \ W a r ■nr 1 1 re K O I / O O w \ / 2 Z w ir g IT fL”1{L ad �x ¢ _..._q AWN LOOS SCI N D o �o p O w O Z a wa , t Q ' I ! I J O fil O bo i N Q .O 4- I ' 61 $ L N •N A B,C rt21143 iI EUCALYPTUS TREE SITE & TREE DISCUSSION AREAS: I. Eucalyptus globulus-Blue Gum AGE: 50 years TRUNK DIAMETER: 72" HEIGHT & WIDTH: 60'X 40' HEALTH: Good condition MECHANICAL: Good condition STRUCTURE: Good condition - INSECT/DESEASE: Presently minor damage. MAINTENANCE: None noted. PRESERVATION DISCUSSION Tree is to be removed SPECIES AND INVENTORY See attached sheet. • SITE PLAN See attached "TREE PLAN" • A,B,C & D- 144 :m, .•.•w, „:„i••••;_ esla-ri..,,,a!-•••T-4, ' --44Nis-raei ot‘..Rvetiee, ._.,trie..41-77t14..; 0 • •"--''''‘ ..e&a.-.41-4;.fle-w-t. 4,,"'Vr•W.- - ... '& 'Sir •-i;4E—t. ---,-N--mi-tg;alo,' trAcbarat 4-,-.•awbs:::**Sfr:44*,..',,t`.4 -1,92-"r„,t;_± 1/.11,24.1".1f4:41-T •' ,isa...r -`erab-4t1 -"rt.,' ilyisg'.1..‘41W14-414..*Sta;;X:Ttti-T4tera- ",:::<-'1•A;:c.J'' ,..4kriP-4,24t-4-- -1:1\t".'-' s,'4-,4.''''.- :41;:t„.;•r,.,:t',,_:,t-c;,'I„-,.,‘,',:;I,.,,i..;it..q,fri,i,I„,t,,s!,ee4';A'r"aX'.-i•'-T'",''''-:.':t.t,:;";,1-.A.-"W,'", ,I.-c•*_,4,-"Y" ,t ,a".1". ...'"- r- tk iii-grivai4-4,L4C.te''...t.<4,..„ 7.4,-,y-tf..;;!' '..!.,-titri.r. •.-.0,,.,-„,c7I,L,”-V-.,=,..-ka-z.,..- :4-. fas k.:a.tLLT4.-■, 44M'..1;t5tr,),"" ,54M4--.' ".‘;"Y 1?-4111 ig."14-',14-V,A, r :, 4",-..,_. ;',4:„ .,„... t-s "._:. ---4,,,_,--4-„,..-Asn-ip.-a,nit .---_.. tv,.- ,- '•' -, a-- - ir --a-v-st:7145,Ni;r; jet-,,,Tztzu-4,-,..4t,-- - ',••r..•' :- i.- r."'-z'.':it a...rft.4.i.talk 4- ,-Airzig ,,,,,At,,,I.t, , „-rava,_.4s. ,...; r.,ir .., tz:., 4-4„,:-...,: er. :s;r:_4!,t,.. , :.v,•5:.,..4:crmviiictsg,4-tp&,}1,4,-,,,,k,"."., :- _,..,,,.... .r-__----ci.k::,L.,,,SU 4-.'/tit".4...-1:....,44:.:W.," .".:■,...j),,...ix-.4 Wale?---.4eaff,,,,,r.",-1!..an".i'.. ...•.,"-,'.• t';.*'-'11, - Nnr. 41 .5.,',.urich.1.;', ,..4 44-4-J.,',t),,,4--,''.,2,t,',:.-...7:.-,,' Flia" 11",*-Ve•:",Ig;r ar:'-'4:,7 ''..i.d::l': ::14., ,, ''tie' Itci'lgiltt i'jicitieter,t17 4;-%4C-', -.A,..t".;-....::,.`,..-;:aar,7,7:';324.r.,,-;, . ' '••-..LIM-",ete,217-.. it 4-k-:-I'M'ern.-;4 - e -'1%.-4,'''`„,..-"{:', ..-ckt . pim,- "tVL:,,,sr....T.-'„,,- 44 •;.‘„,„-r,'"41,,Le.,1.,;. yft k Acc;.„,:,,, "',,.1.it;^it.; .,--,;„z.,...,.S.,,-. t-ii±.:='• ',...,,,-Ft.,;!,‘,.."412,-•,'tc4:77,- ..::::* ;-ir_...n. tIzette,....,..." it,,,,...Sq‘g. ,. ,4',:',-, "i4,-.' ,.''', ijkty"t,•/7,--t4, 4;-,) "...:`141-1:4`,r1'2,,,Th: '44;4. 4.-...1..!..171.4'1•/*..t.-14'7` I), 1,-14-4.tf,; ::-.‘.-;,%‘•'1.'. - 1. c 'L.':•s '...,..---(4 ;:k.- -,4 ,,,=" " .;%.,_,...v7 ,..i -4'..tictN, '0,54-4t-fri•-`:”"tg:' - , • zi, ,-.1.t„. -.. ,,,,S-4:-;$ -jri.`„,::::,4;._, •••••,'",,,yr t't,„",„-•.„.i,.,..,t ,2,, ;1: --‘61,. .44- -,7'. -4 ..• t!. • ils,...jr...-; , '„ A& tC zj. V '' ':",%.,•!W.r. 1'1 wil-r11".,4",,,,,;4,11-77/<'' 5- .., .t...7- '..:.:J4-..., ,1.,;city„.‘,..?.. •• •194et tlii,1„,..<4 4,7.17;2,...11g3A5.?"4.- c„,i.•.;...,' •-;%*:.P."-7‘'•'IsF,, ..-;;Vr. ' 11 'it, ...fpfrg41! -;:.....,Y,R ;;;:-:,.„., -')::>::it- =:)sl. 'itt,Igrier44.-6 --. olvt,1::-.4t,c 3.,,,-, 1,1,1..,1 f 7,,L; "iltaa,T•T'■;:51:CJ'i■"'.- 1.1d-?..;4:-,...dAtt*-- —.. . .7:::R7P:k-4711;'fel r 1 L..a-r-frf Fr'-'44i;r',-, `.?`viiVA5 41 r-V tObtalei;rtg,t; ;pV.!7, , --.-; ii.- 2.11$,4 L•f:'.- 4,oa::-7,44%.,$),2-1:tt pv,I. ,,s..1:eitt. , ' 4t _ -- ; ' .itil.,.2.,:..;::. -,..k..-1;,,9-Lmn .±..;■,..1,3-‘.:!••,1q..,4•11„,)rAgi;". ...0,-.:relt-',I-N., •--t 1- _,•,,,• ,,,,,, - . `c,,;.'-.•n • .1-41..± ;t72a,Ta.,":q•••• ••••;2c,,:th,-.1ess.uf-'1,- 7-.'As-.47 `...' ' --t•• . :"- • " er-1-• r•,e-'.-11-'1%.,:.:-,c -1,,lic.-,T., ,.... , ,, ‘,..?, es„ mta„.. ,‘...., "4".,,,;`,•d .,,,IP-t-g„,..,_....C7-.■-d--•Sr•t.`--;-‘•.V.-7.--.'?:k':;`;44C.."{.)r... -1.7v,l(i,•I't-:',...... ;.;../: ..,zt• 1 '•-4..e-'11 •• --4..:re„..7,y;fi; ..44L,31.4rec - ... .-.-. . ifr I,. f....,• ..: -. - i;41.%,,, t (i-st;:sats; ... N. ) ,41,..-0`•44-1,,•4 Pla...11.4,(--,.., ..tt,-,--9ez-e,,,,'‘'Cr ,, J..,''''t -es,'' Vi■s ' ' ':. ,-.Z.Ir• r,iL,-/:;2-.1.- q, - , -..... f.,%,-4....4:,...me.z4,-.4:.,..—-... • - 44-2--',----4--'n,fir..g - -- "Iri-;Ctig.;;;L'.' atit04-0: ' tytert",..",:.,),-;.4i4ck.,..rc. 4-4-.1-114,-Thl• 0 --447,:r. ., }1t*NyArr, ._-4.-41... .4a. ,4,,,,. ilt-4',r'in II • \ *-Cer\s„,...,,. :•;-...-.,61?4. ..t*„..7 ..t;3/j.],142 IL..(Ir•-7gIr ,, 41.eacp.fr; ,.-..-.-rt•t&:,v2 , 4.1•Vir;--B ' •'-a- v.:4r1'-'rjiF.1.;.f; lrA•aX'•.,"i'•,,..' ' a . i"t•Z-. .-0(1.":":3&: c'2 '''''•-, ear, It -, -0 • ,-..t.4-...-..../.4.71:. -:.,....2. ,-Jhw - , ' P 7 j.i.t- . k1,4", 4r... -"''''..: - .. .— was taken. picture w "TREE PLAN" • #1, see PICTURE- of where AN" for location 0 A,B,c 8c D- 145 r q ICs iS y�i t ip, Vg. � �V\t it w r r �': � l 40' tl ". .' .M uv IM1- •, .,�y'pf, . i A( 1t '+Id^ n '4% Jcy ,V e m` f-. �:. Yt "1 .. ., r�� v J y. st1 9 a e. ; - y , rx l ary+y ,d 'rkvI� j. k e la.'S 'sF' .q‘'. • PICTURE-#2, see "TREE PLAN" for location of where picture was taken. END OF REPORT • A,B,C & D- 146 WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR FIVE (5) SIGNLE-FAMILY RESIDE CES TRACT MAP NO. 18747 ISCC0077 Ob/d' EAST END OF ARAPAHO ROAD, CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA 91739 Prepared For Owner/Developer MR. Richard & Rudy Macias & Mr. Guy Christensen (626) 806-5069 • Prepared By: W&W TECHNOLOGIES 1750 W. Andes Drive Upland, CA 91784 (909) 608-7118 0,0ESS/04, • Q40 "a l�i� ■ C 66242 m` , *. EXP., . 7 * CIVI . CITY OF t iANi: o CiCASY AGA August 24, 2011 SEP 2 9 2011 Project job No. 808 r T, ..y,. A yA3 1ING • A,B,C & D- 147 TABLE OF CONTENTS • Project Site Information Section 1 Introduction and Project Description 1.1 Permits 1.2 Project Description 1.3 Site Description 1.4 Best management Practices (BMPs) Section 2 Best Management Practice Selection Process 2.1 Site Design BMPs 2.2 Source Control BMPs Section 3 Operation and Maintenance 3.1 Operations and Maintenance Attachment A Back Pocket • Vicinity Map / Construction BMP Site Plan • A,B,C & D- 148 • A,B,C & D- 149 808-WQMP • City of Rancho Cucamonga DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN (WQMP) Non-Category Projects OWNER CERTIFICATION ALL RELATED CASE #'S: DRC2009-00010 To: City of Rancho Cucamonga From MR. Richard & Rudy Macias & Mr. Guy Christensen (626) 806-5069 Phone Project Site address: East end of Arapaho Road , Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 • City file number: SUBTT 18747 Brief Project Description: Five (5) single-family residences, a proposed 5-lot subdivision, located in very low (VL) residential district, Etiwanda Specific Plan. "I hereby certify that the information contained in this Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I hereby certify that I accept the provisions of the WQMP and that I will strive to have the Plan carried out by all future successors. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga." ?"-f-21-)1 MR. Richard & Rudy Macias & Mr. Guy Christensen • Owner (Signature) Print Name 8/z•5/%i Date • A,B,C & D- 150 808-WQMP WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN • (WQMP) Check Project Categories be/ow 1. All significant re-development projects. Significant re-development is defined as the addition or creation of 5,000 or more square feet of impervious surface on an already developed site. This includes, but is not limited to, additional buildings and/or structures, extension of existing footprint of a building, construction of parking lots, etc. Where redevelopment results in an increase of less than fifty percent of the impervious surfaces of a previously existing development, and the existing development was not subject to SUSMPs, the design standards apply only to the addition, and not the entire development. When the redevelopment results in an increase of more than fifty percent of the impervious surfaces, then a WQMP is required for the entire development(new and existing). • 2. Home subdivisions of 10 units or more. This includes single family residences, multi-family residence, condominiums, apartments, etc. 3. Industrial/commercial developments of 100,000 square feet or more. Commercial developments include non-residential developments such as hospitals, educational institutions, recreational facilities, mini-malls, hotels, office buildings, warehouses, and light industrial facilities. 4. Automotive repair shops (with SIC codes 5013, 5014, 5541, 7532- 7534, 7536-7539). • 5. Restaurants where the land area of development is 5,000 square feet or more. 6. Hillside developments of 10,000 square feet or more which are located on areas with known erosive soil conditions or where the natural slope is twenty-five percent or more. 7. Developments of 2,500 square feet of impervious surface or more adjacent to (within 200 feet) or discharging directly into environmentally sensitive areas such as areas designated in the Ocean Plan as areas of special biological significance or waterbodies listed on the CWA Section 303(d) list of impaired waters. 8. Parking lots of 5,000 square feet or more exposed to storm water. Parking lot is defined as land area or facility for the temporary storage of motor vehicles. The project does not fall into any of the categories described above. (If the project requires a precise plan of development[e.g. all commercial or industrial ✓ projects, residential projects of less than 10 dwelling units, and all other land development projects with potential for significant adverse water quality impacts] or subdivision of land, it is defined as a Non-Category Project.) • A,B,C & D- 151 808-WOMP Section 1 • Introduction and Project Description 1.1 Permits • Waste discharge identification numbers (WDIDs): to be determined (property will apply WDID number once planning approval and prior to obtain grading permit) • Site Approval No. DRC2009-00010 • City file number: SUBTT 18747 1.2 Project Description 1. Type of Project: X Residential ❑Industrial ❑ Retail/Office Center ❑ RestaurantsM/arehouse/Grocery ❑ Fuel Dispensing • ❑ Vehicle Repair/Maintenance ❑ Other Explain 2. Project Size (acres): 3.36 acre 1.3 Site Description • 1. Watershed: Santa Ana 2. Pre-existing water quality problem identified in the planning process? No. The project lies within the Santa Ana Watershed. Counties associated with this watershed are San Bernardino, Los Angeles, and Orange County. The majority of annual precipitation occurs between November and March. Surface flows begin in the San Bernardino Mountains and the San Gabriel Mountains, and discharge to the Pacific Ocean. 1.4 Best Management Practices (BMPs) WQMPs for Non-Category projects are required to: 1. Incorporate and implement Site Design BMPs, as determined to be appropriate during the site planning and approval process. These BMPs and the selection process are described below. 2. Incorporate and implement all applicable Source Control BMPs as listed in the Source Control BMP Selection Matrix below. • A,B,C & D- 152 808-WQMP Section 2 • Best management Practice Selection Process • 2.1 SITE DESIGN BMPS For listed Site Design BMPs, indicate in the following table whether it will be used (yes/no) and describe how used, or, if not used, provide justification/alternative. Provide detailed descriptions of planned Site Design BMPs, if applicable. 1. Minimize Stormwater Runoff, Minimize Project's Impervious Footprint, and Conserve Natural Areas Maximize the permeable area. This can be achieved in various ways, including but not limited to,increasing building density (number of stories above or below ground)and developing land use regulations seeking to limit impervious surfaces. No The site plan was designed with two stories building,driveway areas and necessary concrete sidewalks. All rest of areas was landscaping area that is maximum permeable area.This project will result in the creation of impermeable surfaces. As an alternative,several grass swales were utilized and constructed. • Runoff from developed areas may be reduced by using alternative materials or surfaces with a lower Coefficient of Runoff, or"C-Factor°. No No alternative materials or surfaces were designed to reduce the runoff with Lower C Factor.As an alternative, several grass swales were utilized and constructed. Conserve natural areas. This can be achieved by concentrating or clustering development on the least environmentally sensitive portions of a site while leaving the remaining land in a natural, undisturbed condition. No After the project construction is completed, there are no conserve natural areas or environmentally sensitive areas within the Project site.The site development will fully be constructed with proposed buildings, parking driveways and landscaping areas.There are no conserve natural areas were designed per architect's site plan. • A,B,C & D- 153 808-WQMP • Construct walkways, trails,patios,overflow parking lots, alleys, driveways, low-traffic streets,and other low- traffic areas with open-jointed paving materials or permeable surfaces,such as pervious concrete, porous asphalt, unit pavers, and granular materials. No No open jointed paving materials or permeable materials were designed for on site walkways surface. As an alternative,several grass swales were utilized and constructed. Construct streets,sidewalks, and parking lot aisles to the minimum widths necessary, provided that public safety and a pedestrian friendly environment are not compromised'. Incorporate landscaped buffer areas between sidewalks and streets. Yes 16 feet driveway width was designed per City Planning& Fire Department's requirement. All onsite sidewalk width was designed with 4 feet minimum concrete. • Reduce widths of street where off-street parking is available2. No The proposed Streets will meet all City Standards. 18 feet from street centerline to both side of curb faces for Arapaho Road. Maximize canopy interception and water conservation by preserving existing native trees and shrubs, and planting additional native or drought tolerant trees and large shrubs. No Most of existing trees on the project site will be removed.The landscaping will meet or exceed all requirements set by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Sidewalk widths must still comply with Americans with Disabilities Act regulations and other life safety requirements. • 2 However,street widths must still comply with life safety requirements for fire and emergency vehicle access. A,B,C & D- 154 808-WQMP Use one or more of the following features for design of driveways and private residential parking areas: • Yes No Design Feature Design driveways with shared access, flared (single lane at street) or wheel strips(paving x only under tires);or,drain into landscaping prior to discharging to the municipal storm drain system. Uncovered temporary or guest parking on private residential lots may be paved with a x permeable surface; or designed to drain into landscaping prior to discharging to the municipal storm drain system. Other comparable design concepts that is equally effective. • Not applicable to project. No special guest parking was designed. • Use one or more of the following design concepts for the design of parking areas: Yes No Design Feature • Where landscaping is proposed in parking areas, incorporate landscape areas into the x drainage design. x • Overflow parking (parking stalls provided in excess of the Agency's minimum parking requirements) may be constructed with permeable paving. x Other comparable design concepts that is equally effective. As an alternative, most of roof drains located in the south, east and west side of proposed buildings were designed to discharge to landscaping areas. • A,B,C & D- 155 808-WQMP • 2. Minimize Directly Connected Impervious Areas Where landscaping is proposed, drain rooftops into adjacent landscaping prior to discharging to the storm drain. Yes • Most of roof drains of proposed buildings were designed to discharge to landscaping area instead of connecting impervious areas. Where landscaping is proposed, drain impervious sidewalks,walkways,trails,and patios into adjacent landscaping. Yes 1 Walkways will drain to adjacent planters designed with a depression for infiltration. Increase the use of vegetated drainage swales in lieu of underground piping or imperviously lined swales. Yes I Grass swales will be designed for all proposed landscaping areas. See Construction BMP Site Plan for more • detail. Use one or more of the following: Yes No Design Feature • x Rural swale system: street sheet flows to vegetated swale or gravel shoulder, curbs at street corners, culverts under driveways and street crossings x Urban curb/swale system; street slopes to curb; periodic swale inlets drain to vegetated swale/biofilter. x Dual drainage system: First flush captured in street catch basins and discharged to adjacent vegetated swale or gravel shoulder, high flows connect directly to municipal storm drain systems. x Other comparable design concepts that is equally effective. Site flows will be conveyed through the proposed grass swales. • • A,B,C & D- 156 808-WQMP Other comparable site design options that are equally effective. None • Minimize the use of impervious surfaces,such as decorative concrete, in the landscape design. Yes No additional concrete design except necessary driveways and concrete sidewalks. Use natural drainage systems. No There were no natural drainage systems within the limits of the site. As an alternative, several grass swales were utilized and constructed. See Construction BMP Site Plan for more detail. Where soils conditions are suitable,use perforated pipe or gravel filtration pits for low flow infiltration. Yes Soil conditions are suitable per soil percolation report. Several vegetated grass swales were utilized and constructed. See Construction BMP Site Plan for more detail. Construct onsite ponding areas, rain gardens,or retention facilities to increase opportunities for infiltration, while being cognizant of the need to prevent the development of vector breeding areas. Yes Several grass swales were utilized and constructed.See Construction BMP Site Plan for more detail. • • • A,B,C & D- 157 • 808-WQMP • 2.2 SOURCE CONTROL BMPS Complete the following selection table for Source Control BMPs, by checking boxes that are applicable. All listed BMPs shall be implemented for the project. Where a required Source Control BMP is not applicable to the project due to project characteristics, justification and/or alternative practices for preventing pollutants must be provided. In addition to completing the following tables, provide detailed descriptions on the implementation of planned Source Control BMPs. • • A,B,C & D- 158 a (l z-as)sleuale{q 6u!Ppng en/lewall' c N N • (OZ-oS)luewened snowed > 7. o c m seamy `m uolemedwd pond.ol slaluoa meleM yseM -Co m (9E-cis)seamy 6ulssaoad moopino 't.) m 0 (5E-as)sea,'>poo moopina 0 r To aS)sew'e6efa Pl 0 a) is leualepy moo n (6E- -0 m (EE-OS)seamy 6oyseM aplyaq a o a (LE-as)s)poo pue sAeg aaueualoeyy o . c 0 e6eu/emo eamy.Qddng meleM/n' c m (OE-as)seamy 6ugand m a lwluoo 0 •• m Jaen pue(0E-as)sew'e6emolS ysea S a Q sialedissro AEJau3 5 c c u• U S)pael ysaml leju o O a a e ebeu6r u/em twos o (El-OS) S a G ° c m slauueyo pue sadojg loelad S d • E 0 o (ZPas)uope6wl luePY1.3 5 o o a) c L. (L frog)slaluoo bound food S n • 0 in t 6uldeospue7°pisJIH 5 c 6ouue adeos ue 3 (0 frog) Id P 7 1 c L_ uoloadsul oseg yojoo seamy uowwoo o- 2 m 5107 0 buoyed pue leans elenud 6wdeam5 pang c 0 0 weJ6ad uoyeonp3m6woea aafoldw3 u 0 meld Aoue5uguoa yids N t suogoulsaa Apnyo' 5 m . y sJaumo Apadad JO uogeonp3 5 `o c 0 o m -• ai a . a c Co ra lc 2 U D c•CO o U O , o a a m • A,B,C & D- 159 808-WQMP Justification for Source Control BMPs not incorporated into the project WQMP • Source Control BMP Used in Project Justification/Alternative* Implementation Description (yes/no)? Education of Property Owners Yes Copy to owner with educational brochures. City required restrictions will • Activity Restrictions Yes be enforced Spill Contingency Plan No Not part of a project Employee Training/Education Program •No Not part of a project Street Sweeping Private Street and No Not part of a project Parking Lots Common Areas Catch Basin No Not part of a project Inspection Landscaping involves native and drought tolerant Landscape Planning (SD-10) Yes vegetation to be maintained with efficient irrigation and landscaping maintenance Hillside Landscaping Yes See Precise Grading Plans All roof drain runoff will drain • Roof Runoff Controls (SD-11) Yes to surface curb drain and eventually to landscaping vegetated swales. Efficient Irrigation(SD-12) Yes See note*1 Protect Slopes and Channels No Not part of a project See Precise Grading Plans • Storm Drain Signage(SD-13) No Not part of a project Inlet Trash Racks No Not part of a project Energy Dissipaters No Not part of a project Trash Storage Areas(SD-32) and No Not part of a project Litter Control Fueling Areas(SD-30) No There is no Fuel Sites AirNVater Supply Area Drainage No There is no Air/NVater Areas Maintenance Bays and Docks (SD-31) No No Bays and Docks Areas Vehicle Washing Areas(SD-33) No No Vehicle Washing Areas Outdoor Material Storage Areas (SD- No Outdoor Material Storage 34) No Areas Outdoor Work Areas(SD-35) No No Work Area Proposed Outdoor Processing Areas(SD-36) No No Outdoor Processing Proposed Wash Water Controls for Food No Wash Water Controls for Preparation Areas No Food Preparation Areas Pervious Pavement(SD-20) No There is no Pervious Pavement Proposed Alternative Building Materials (SD-21) No Not part of a project • A,B,C & D- 160 . 808-WQMP *1. Irrigation systems shall include reducers or shutoff valves triggered by a pressure drop to control water loss in the event of broken sprinkler heads or lines. Timers will be used to • avoid over watering and watering cycles and duration shall be adjusted seasonally by the landscape maintenance contractor. The landscaping areas will be grouped with plants that have similar water requirements. Native or drought tolerant species shall also be used ( where appropriate to reduce excess irrigation runoff and promote surface filtration. • • A,B,C & D- 161 Section 3 • Operation and Maintenance 3.1 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE Operation and maintenance (O&M). requirements for all Source Control, Site Design, shall be identified within the WQMP. The WQMP shall include the following: 3.1.1 O&M DESCRIPTION AND SCHEDULE MUST: SD-10: Site Design & Landscape Planning Description of BMP: Landscaping has been incorporated into the project plan and will be designed to promote conservation of rainwater, irrigation water, fertilizer, and pesticides. There is no significant environmentally sensitive natural areas/vegetation to preserve. Landscaping will be suppressed 1-inch below top of curb to promote infiltration of the areas. Maintenance Responsibility: Owner Funding Source: Owner • Maintenance Schedule:The owner will maintain it weekly or more often if necessary. Start up date: Starting when landscaping is complete. SD-12: Efficient Irrigatiori/SC-73: Landscape Maintenance Description of BMP: Irrigation systems shall include reducers or shutoff valves triggered by a pressure drop to control water loss in the event of broken sprinkler heads or lines. Timers will be used to avoid over watering and watering cycles and duration shall be adjusted seasonally by the landscape maintenance contractor. The landscaping areas will be grouped with plants that have similar water requirements. Native or drought tolerant species shall also be used where appropriate to reduce excess irrigation runoff and promote surface filtration. Maintenance Responsibility: Owner Funding Source: Owner Maintenance Schedule: Irrigation system shall be inspected monthly by landscape contractor to check for over-watering, leaks, or excessive runoff to paved areas. Landscape maintenance will be inspected and maintained weekly by a qualified contractor and all landscape waste will be disposed of properly. • A,B,C & D- 162 Start up date: When landscaping is complete. TC-30: Vegetated Swale Maintenance • Description of BMP: The vegetated Swale is located on the north side of the site. A vegetated swale is a wide, shallow densely vegetated channel. Landscaped areas shall include small swales to promote conservation of rainwater, irrigation water, fertilizer, and pesticides. Landscaped areas will also be used to infiltrate and treat runoff from portions of the site. Fertilizer and pesticide usage shall be consistent with the instructions contained on product labels and with regulations administered by California's Department of Pesticide Regulation. The proposed vegetated swale is sized per CASQA guidelines. Maintenance Responsibility: Owner - Funding Source: Owner Maintenance Schedule: Landscaping shall be maintained weekly and maintenance contractor shall properly dispose of all landscape wastes. Typical maintenance activities are summarized as follows: • Inspect swales at least four times a year for erosion, damage to vegetation, and sediment and debris accumulation. Inspect at the end of the wet season to • schedule summer maintenance and before major fall runoff to be sure the swale is ready for winter. Debris and litter to be removed with weekly maintenance and prior to mowing. • Maintain grass to design height (approximately 4"-6"), remove unnecessary weeds and plant material. • Inspect swales for pools of standing water. Start up date: When landscaping is complete. 3.1.2 INSPECTION & MONITORING REQUIREMENTS THAT MUST: • Provide thorough descriptions of water quality monitoring (if locally required). Water quality monitoring is not currently required. • Provide self-inspections and record keeping requirements for BMPs (review local specific requirements regarding self-inspections and/or annual reporting), including identification of responsible parties for inspection and record keeping. Mr. Richard & Rudy Macias & Mr. Guy Christensen • A,B,C & D- 163 (626) 806-5069 • 3.1.3 IDENTIFICATION OF RESPONSIBLE PARTIES THAT MUST: • Provide the party or parties that will be responsible for each BMP O&M. For each responsible party, include the party's name, address, and contact name and telephone number. Mr. Richard & Rudy Macias & Mr. Guy Christensen (626) 806-5069 • • A,B,C & D- 164 Attachment A S Vicinity Map Construction BMP Site Plan • • A,B,C & D- 165 III I1 'GAV }SD] \ E 'aAV }SDI o co CD c o w E o � U m / Q I- E Q 'aAV DPUDMIf 'aAV DPUDMI13 E5 N • o Z f- p o c ) 6 z C > Q >, 0 0 C '- o O m° N L cn 'PA18 >iaaJ3 ADO \ 'mg >iaaio ADO f I I A,B,C & D- 166 ,-xa cn 1 n..nurw,m nu - — Jr .,,,, nue Mrid 311 V MOVIE lWi1B21100,_.,..., g i 1 1 h °"'°,'"° `—,a" t�'�8i t e, SLIM Vo vaeomroro olowu •" •~,.^••• MUM — `�. '�.;.�• one owdew do ua , g .$yY ay �I'M l�1 ., �.... . ai9NVldMflV11VAA1fle(b�Yd1YM .,.a. Ig$1 7 e 1 o V 5 r i ; qqg{ @' Y 9 { _i x: rf B 4 $ s g6 ;,1 m• s :u. y� I 8 a u d R 11 I- 7:w w a yis.$5 d a 0000 i i 1 f f r, . l;; M I W �i —�i F ale � i ; 0 , mQ II Z III III Ji ,. _ = 1T .I . . I II I a1— d :o, I ' I � l j II d o ° Z 4 oW � O � I � r� Q Z \\ . E . l• i, i;1', -:•:.....1 :::� I ffff , • O I c„iW us 0. ; t� , ,fi g •Q N) f i •,`•-•::,••,..Y• °} a Z0 I - , ZS W J I 1► i` a . a r 1 a ti I �I � 1 rr y/ 1 I - ice m liven n..,.,. ...O,.._,oto„„„\nn.-w..., n.-(0.\...r,w A,B,C & D— 167 1 q9 4. j City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Mitigated Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747,Variance DRC2010-00963 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00964 Public Review Period Closes: June 13, 2012 Project Name: Project Applicant: Philip Chung K.U. & Associates, Inc.650 Camino De Gloria Walnut, CA 91789 Project Location (also see attached map): Located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225-818-73 Project Description: A proposal to subdivide a vacant parcel of about 3.4 acres into 5 lots in the Very Low Residential District within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The application includes a requested Variance to allow a reduction in lot depth and the removal of 4 trees. • FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga,acting as the lead agency,has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is • proposing this Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted,the Mitigated Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. The factual and analytical basis for this finding is included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho . Cucamonga Planning Department at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration during the review period. • June 13, 2012 Date of Determination Adopted By A,B,C & D- 168 a, ? C) A' c y '+- O m ?'i tc; - a cE ,,,A, • 0 0 c c ca o t v ,a- to Z :W-.Rg? N N N N N R ?T a rzE•43 r._ 0 s4ia cu ca s > 0 L -I- C K < Q r o o fip, CL v .0 r J o c o N '�- o 423 423 a) ca Q 0 ._ f %s' `0 0 0 `o I- 5 0) u 3 423) 423 3 H 0 W It CC W CL H a) U) > a) >, •cc J;), r N C.) 0 c cr . o _ .a 2 u_ tin U 0 0 m c U as as 0 s T U C 6 o R Z . , _ o a ;' o O 0 a)c a a a m N o ° F. I- O re N , -O N co 2 a) a) 2,-0 0) C CO . C "0 op 0 u! ° c cc � � -oonsi, o - o , Z d ._-. y t". ,C 0 Y N U N 2 O 0.2 y 0.h N N N .)6C- )rC6 Q > w E � o � � � o ° aio ' _ o ¢ � •own a) o ca C7 w v Y '6 ci = ca o , a) oocn a) 0d E H d N rL h E � - oa) o coca- 112 EQ .o N a L 0_ o 0 0)o -°o c E m w O - 0 co Q - O f " 4'2E2) 2 a) °- >, °- G �., m °) m coi >, S) ° 0 5 ° c o -C oco0 u) o) �°65 N = d ° .. ftr' c O a) U) N U) > 0 U "O O -- N O °U _. Q) 0) C - a) X dy E >, a) 2 E c m a) r- • 5^rr'` U) C 0 O T 0 L 0 N Y t0 U! o •'f'g a o ac) V o o E O o N a a U) .n N -0 U) v) 0 ° Q- W C U N c .° °' C 3 0 o 2 O N N a) cc a) 3 C) 116'. -, o N .a °' 0 6 o ° 0 0 0 tea) O - 0 y 0 .0 0) 0. a) 0 Z d 1642 `. . a) aL- '0 N °) w 0.0 - ' oo -0 co m o .E 5 .- ° c 6) c a) v) r = ° w E c c6 d 0 a Y Q • lL 0 .�+ c c i'" 2 N .o a o o c E. O N E ° c -O E .+ 423 5. y O1C .5 c c6 o o o) m a) a) m a) E rn c ca a - - v v CO N - E w- c .- 0 2 '- ac 2 0 0.E E c E m ` lac .0 E w ° a - C as °' a ' 0WEC c `g > c 'a �o 0-II) at •- ma C ,i; - a E 0 c0 as 0 d a) g'> 0- > o o m m „prom. - o d Q 2E 1Q ¢ oa) oE2o daya) a) a) = UEta Qaat Qc A,B,C & D- 169 0 ` c O ° a c E O O - U • U c a) 0 C V V V V co Z N N N N N V V V V' O a) t6 V C N C F a) a) R > 0 C O w V 03 O V L E > a a a a 0 ¢ < a a Q N N N 0 N 0 co co co co co co c e a n a s o. n o o O o is `o `o `o `o `o `o c. v rn cf0i 3 3 3 3 3 3 o) 2 rn 2 a o) 2 C zi-• a) a) a) N N a) c - C N C V) c y E a) a) N a) a) a) a) C O O 0 a O O O F > O: a Q: Q: cc a m o O c> D O D o 0) T C c 'C c N O 0) .- +• .O E Cr 0 0 2 tI In U 0 U U 0 0 0 0 0 N • 0) c a `° C CC O O a2 ° O 0 O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 in 0 w m m m m CO m CO CO m m m O m O O C C N U 0I O a) .L' N ' N C L' N L_ N u N O o ta .5 `m � 3 w � co CD ti d N c0 La N c aci l0 w �- co >. °) U c ° a7 a7 d U P o .E O L V C ° O - 0) N c U O U @ O w d w La C O C C O LC C O N LU 2 0 O (0 7 c0.) o a) 3 E .o d V .N «) 3 m ti) a u) m a) E -o co E L O 14 � � d o c p a) = c V m o '° o L ,0 Lm v10 m Na) LE ma) NN m O_ 0 O 0 0 Q) ._. -co a) U) a) O 2 w O) C O C - N Q C a V) a a) C Q L c c . a 'y V .O C c O a) a V •N (a > C 0 a) a) O C L C N = a) N 'C T N 0 -F3 c . . o 'c, T ._.. c Cc x .0 OO co a NEE LV E __ mV .O - L O C Q) a) C a) E V N V O QI ` C O in N C O O .O N N V O > N O C X _ O m'c V = cN O - T V C E V 7) O O ° 0 O 'a N C O c 0 O) co-' •' (0 Y O a) m 0 C C < $ o a; L- v, o � vi `o v c�i Q O c N N a 2 °100 o N c E 0. c m > a 0 N N O. O U O0 N O O O N 00 > > -- a7 Q-c 0� .O .� � = O) m NCO 'j am N t 2 a) :N O � c x w _E ° to .L-. •L < m a en va < a) o)._ >. c w o L(.). La 3 a w > v a) S ca o)•3 U a) a- m c -0o Lai a :Oo a) x -0 w- a)w 'y Tc to coca .-EL -o a) 2c ° mo � w m and ONO cC y = 10 'O .0 aim cm6E o � � m < o O C 2 C) 0 y CO O) ° a) V' ' V w a 0 V` C 0 a) m co 2 N Val 0 co _` d C E V m 2 Q o N )n „,® a) O Y a 0 . a) L O . N a _C co a) f0 • m y o N '00 0 o > co O x 0 mu , 3 ?. o E 0 , .au a) N '5 __ _02280 0 :. a 0 a) 8 aE a a as co a) 3 D co a) ma EP o co 3co 2L u) ° tea acr0 ¢ � ._ . . • . hL- N '-C.) 0c_ c0 A,B;C & D- 170 a) 0 L. _ om a c E • O ' O U C o v v v v v v to Z V V N N N N N N W L a c I m .7.4; ✓ :: > 0 = o o a m o !? sw m y 0 0 2 > Q a a 0 U 0 0 0 N w w w 0 U) w C C C C C C C m m a) CO CO CO m c C a a a a a a a n. 0 2 O 7 .0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N a) N N� � cw 0 E5 is o > v > > > F > D o Et cC CC K CC CC K m a C 0 j 'i C i N .._._.0a) ! f I • p a�0i 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 `2 LL U U U U U U U U M 0) W C I O O Le w m CO m 0 m 0 m CO I C0 C 20 a) > � a � � m � o `o �a) co t D E ° p .n io 0 amoU' o_ o a E o 1 C Q _ a 5 c_ 0 c o w L- Lw w a m ° v o m E y ° < o o ` a) w C y (0 :0 f6 L C p C m J N o L i U U U ` N a) 7 w > "' o p o C U 2 N N t v> a) � a) v Ec 'NO 2 ai a o U oa I L@ L N 3 N C L O E 3 m co = > jn co = 0 -o .5 a) 5 N 'CO � N co co co-0 `O > E N � N= U a) N OC NON m a) C O o a7 fa E 'DL O` al a,- l6 2 O •` •C p O am a o 2O L aE O J 3 c -co E ° d L w L a) >'Q = a) a) + CU d w 'S c c `o °_ m ° U m m- CC U m m ° �° ` L- L.- a o a a) o) U Z w °) ->-' oo cCE rCE co >' m aa)) wmc s0oN .C .- c n N C N O N a @ J o .J w N ? L o N C L o L a) y N co O .N a3 �C O C a) m O' > C O` w U a a— J 3 J > CU n 0 a5 N0 m9 �� w o o 0a c o m 3 3 c � � c� D a `o Q C d o O a r V C J 'p C i.5 2 Id W C 'p L o o O J s L 3 a) • o C ( O a) l9 a) N > -p N Cn E. W U) ` ° C 3 ,(L,' .o a O C C J C C • G C 2 w > o -2 N d a) C Cn C C .p N E. Q N a� 0 C E mm� a c . o � ' mom m � a) o a -02 (00 = E ;, E � U m om p23 UJp oc ° mac ° m 3o pwna 61� 'E 8 w U U) w -O : -C w P co- w 0 U ,` co 0 = a o5mJ a) }T) aj3 2a) � ocN aLa a) E cm w �o > 2 Ucrco2 HCo IL-- 0ci ° ww 0_ 112 QECU CE C O O.. D A,B,C & D- 171 N F- Vtg 0 rem i C hs' 3 al e. µ . cE €, o � rer U .�i -.0 m 0 ? } 'SYR V V V fn 2 a�4 N (N el c+) c') N *J f" �'' TO pig 1 15 TO.T $. s'7' a r: K4 fix P1) �t' C q r "6 0 13 t.m ) a o U { .c x ',': C 0 0 0 0 igg. co a o c {< a a a c g a . d d ,4 . O 40 w w o . rn � 3 3 3 F— > CC A CC CL CC W c v `''}'reli .` C N Mme. �ti cu .a 401,g4 N Y' c ?ti k41 C C 0 0 � 3 O O O Fe* It ti m m m w 2 saiS 0 0 r "m. 0 a. O ... a a a a. a. aj O u) .c t - C a) m :; a) = C p a) 'O C Co O 3 m U) T,2 2 2 o a o :&�;# `m 3 2 2 °) 2 7_ 5 a) N w m 1 N L C nth O N m y ft) m *" a) ` w O = C U .N N m _ fit', 7-1 � h ti,, a) mt-" -p N N g"sir? a1 ° N O °) 3 .m u_ a a) J A o `s) rnfn a>> a) ° t E d c ao m a) o �° .o E = c a) > ret _ J > o c m -o a) 0 3 = NJ emu) a) n oo ... tt o � oocac cEa) c co C = �-' a) 2 E ++ fS of N N O J o U Q <. 20i6cccmo NC mLC. o � wm 0my c , — o .7 — a - ' ge _ C J m U N U ;_' 0 N m f6 45 t:e;.4> y a) 32 a rco c2 c' E myO ° CV maa)) am '"'# '° V tC a) �� D CD N c U .0 l," fT� O o Oa my O 01 N C ffax 3moou- NEa wa .rU op,- 2 c aoo oa) � o �' 2 U a) N D 1° C a N p .. L c o- cc a) m fa 2 a) O :F)°' m-o U ' o E O E o) N ;;{{0�,� ` o a > ._ J 2 c CL c to Z C ; T,, m o m - a) o a) > C7 E. N 7F as V co Q 2 O m ._ J J .- m N C m r6 to“• �# oO° wa) h -om -° cm2 20u-co `� 0 EEn > o18 0- 0L NQ Kg.= `o .c °"p co a) 70 .°)O E E U m O 2 v O E E 'O Oa U N oc C U € U a) o) r c) u) ! o � CO a •or 7 p1 ra co E - w E c o ° a) 2 a) o 5w * HI n full HO a) moa8 fi o o n� o. o m E v co > E m E� o o a) m I— ' z- U .c102 co 9_ 2 a) p C Q V) L o .Jj a) 2 U )^m, d v mUv E F E 3Uj; a m a `m . A,B,C & D- 172 0) 0 C 8 .s c E • O O U . N O ' V m 2 co Co c v v N . To a 'c me a) `a) m > 0 e o Ts It o u t »- 5 > °a° a 0 °a °a t o 0 o o o a a 0. a a c 2 2 2 2 a) w o O . O 0 0 O O C w N' N N N N . 5 '� > > 5 F > Q m m iM K O) a Co e -0_ m_ N 7 • eo d m m U O � tL U 0 m LO C) m c . n `o N -' C C O O Q.2 m a) et b- 0 0 0 0 C ° a a d c o .... „l N O) o 'C'O V c w C N N o " N c m m 17 L a) "O N m r O �' C m O C .0 O C m ' c a) L o 'N 'O O ° L C E N a) a) i) Q c) 0 o) c Y a m .0 > S c E ... 'C • 'o o)--> m >`.m '- m 3 `m m > c m 0dcNoa'm a) caaUE cEoco.O1Eo CL 6 mN . °i coiom a 5_ Uy) EL _ m ac) ° Y ,_ oca `o �2v ° a)) �.�°nE10aa) � o .(0-> � @0O2 3 `oc Evo) >, m = Emv � mwEOOm wE .N � � rn°% voim2 C O U m L a O) N C m cc) O N ao t m'- _ O m C Q-p czu N � aUit � Nm `° � Emo ai � o �-~ mrn.° o 'co a � n- o� E .° cot t d o N U E U o c a) - O > L .c cO .0 �O O E S CO :0 N v c o a 0- 03 a CO o = a) wU m o@ a'0 in E o c E d a� c = = E 0 _ N E - o .c c 2aea .2 mca E .5 v � rr . E = E -- `_ O. m ,00amN of c N co O � ON � Y � � VOn UN� N .3NCCtL.. co Ze pO ° - o `o omo0NO a' � � oE oo .°)2 o .cop orEN � o y o mow - ,- Y .0c mac m � mvi� rmpEc 3300 � > a) ..-n L O) m ia 'o p 0 c m c . _ •U C c m O c a) m a) O O m 'O a m 'O o V L > c c m L O) O W m m a C N - - C N U m a N U U 0 O m > Z N O m m N N m m V) d co C c C m '° C E z .E m w °: c E E rn o o m a) E a-c > > ° o o .E 'u) -o n -°- o c a) co m C .S] a N .O S O c c _ V N m > E N U N a) V U O E c Ifl' Uhll� C N m c O - O 0) O O N O N > N m V - 2O -0• em UIH4 @ -. aE c` ) Ec E En a_) m c y a0i o o .- 0 o a 3 CO CD E -=o CO `o d 4 o) o :. a my > C COC) amia. 2 Ec w ° '0 c0 au) 0 E m� ° • • • A,B,C & D- 173 d } ii, il4 A DA c n ,� 4 ty c c Xyr ci'ci CO 0 toZ M M 5(4. V C V' V Pte N u) iYm- a, P F d , 4 t 74 o 0 2d 0 SI o C O O a a m c E d $ c c a a a 2 ` o�m 0 0 0 o o . 0 o c 0) DI O) E O) 2 0) -2 d U t` d d f C f� .E In C N .c N .E V) N N E d d d F"" O it C O C O C O C = 0 = 0 0 1- > ❑ u ❑ 0 ❑ cc, ❑ o ❑ O r���5ry 41 as} .` c ce N -:� �- n u_ ❑ ❑ i U 0 0 0 U-.01 irtn up s o t, fi' �' To- c 0 0 O O En I•a � m 0 m m 0 w a o_ UI 0 0 O 0 a,+ 4t `- L d L co o— 4O -0 co -0 c 0 c d N -0 O)? 0 U I- c O ! - a O C E U C m <Q CO N V Z v Z N CO It 'O C d F d • r. O d as 7 0 C O O -0 is O U .c ii= .• 'C 2 > Q a ¢ a a U co C . It . C C a a C C Z. .r O O O O O O ,� O R 0 0 0 0 U O • U O) 2 0) = 0) s- O) 2 O)Y 3 C F C n. C y C N C N C y d E d J o = c J C J o a) F > ❑ o ❑ o ❑ U ❑ U ❑ o eC 0) T ' Co 're C (NI - --0 7- • O 0 O rn as C P o ro := C C C O o 0 0 O.5 m m ✓ ❑ 0 0 0 0 m 2 a m a m m m C -C O) as a) LU C 2 - -0 0 0).- T'O O m C .0 .0 a Q) 0 C C ., C • UL (6 - a7 0 = 3 O � 'U C O 'O 3 � t N 3 2 a 'O '0 d a C N L c 3 d � 0 a m d c 0 d d U U O 0 0 Q U o a) r C c TS d Ta- w N Fu o- a) O .c N .c . N d 0) ' do wa o r 3 m C o y C E 0O >, 2 c N d V) d d la W- N m 2 U = O d N a) 0 (a (6 IP o E c E m mud) d c E E m 3 c on o -0 2- 0 E -- (n ° 0 0 o Z C C 0 U c as _U d d d u) O 'O w 0)ci i o 0Oamm - :o d d 5 c O -o a m - C -°c o CO � Q od >. dma _ ad 0 -0 ., -0UiaE06 - w0rEo c � c c cd � � .c C - d 0) U N u) _ ca O) 0 U -0 .- C g . 0 C d .0 o C 0 C 0 0 >. d • C C fn C E d O = L d (a y .0 j @ N 0 O d C d d m C U V) ul ' °) d ` o' 0 E �0 -0 E mE oE > La u) d m ` _ in cd _ o .- a) >•--- 0)?) a c d C U 0 E O y Y d uJ N U -0 U 5 _ H a) a)aa)) o_2, E f`- E < a" $2 U a M c U m2 2 = ? A,B,C & D- 175 O 0 c O m CD.r - C E O O U • V C C @ O fA Z N • N N F. '0 C O i- O O W > 0 C Y 0 r '0 l6 O 0 v , 0 E > U U Ls) 0 C C co co c a a .. O 0 • O O co mc, 3 3 C w O > > a) F > W It 0) >. Co .` C N O O O • r2 it m m co •• 0) O C a O u! w C c O 0 U CL m O " O 3 Q O co Q • O >. 'O ..: >. C O O O 'O 0) 0) 0 0 om � aciO o o d ._ owm � � 0 Ifi° E r o n mc E- o m c w ao = 3w =' �o2 O 6 O @ 3 O O C U d O) C 037E .oc = L ,, =ia0 @c@ c .- N c m c 021 0 2 s' @ > a c @ . CC to co— o .0. '¢ O 0 p_ ¢ UO Ua0 00 p. V O O 'O U @ g C U O N @ 00 .C-.� O U N U O @ a, O m L @ C O V U C C C O O` co U .mac °) U °)`° o m c _ .E a) •:o 0, 0 •• `o v) > ; @ .-=. c -o —03 O U C L O) @@ > m O 0 3@ C U c O@ -O in O 0@ 0 O C O L -O 'O @ - O Q) O ... > U C @ '@ O O 'O Q O Z aa'• '2 0 W m co c v > (-),d � L � 3 � 8 m viO cm C f0 N 0 - m O -O .0 O > N O � 'O C a W C O '_ a) ¢ O .0 C O O N '.C� C V @ C «� c @ a a) O 3 w�-. L (Lb' L s a) 2@ a) E ... 7 . .a) c o a m@ -o @ _ am 0) c _m d a) @ @cc a .5 '- r c _u ca @' c cc i co @ a C y a) ` O U U = O 0 - O N osE 3 N _ co U ? E 3 •3 `- o 2 c 3 m O N @ ¢"00 ` -o > @ c) @ O To O O .O @ a) O 'O ` O N O O @ 03 0 1 C C -0 C .c U E OU c :2 = co v) 1) V) > v) U a) N O C N O @ O@ 3 C O@ Om fl J � 3 'O) .ten _ uu) � a � o @@ � VTiUJ � a.E3 D3 ° c O3 • E c V C d CD O)N • • •• • • • • 0. `O . a U O) E O a 2 E 0 - o a co A,B,C & D- 176 cisil C) dJ It ' • o O L mZ N i{ N :VA N N a `E N �. ? is = -:f; =if_:,. w C e} t ,yN3 :C w .',}'�'" by c,', o � S{{. t.=.�.0 Y 6 m 4 O U l,nr. -'g .0 LiC w y 2 U , 2 U U 5 > Q v E• ,a , a a a to % to a m m 2 m m 'C a a) i a Iri a O . - OR Oy O ry ,�xs' O O �:t N O o N 3i- ti N a) I- > it m2 .' cc Et 0 4 • T lR bli sw wW .. r CV A a11))` U 0 m As Um s U m O o 0) CI C , 'T. C C �� �' N CL 5 m O W iu t r _ a; o � m al E � E > oco capao .cc - .°n nE V) U ,C °�'y,�� 'D 2 w .c m .r.�^,.. U O v _+ ' E VW N C =2.2 1:10 U f0 Na >` X'i o a) a) , f. a U0VN aO U O/a) 'O .ItNO m .CV) 3O— co o@ W o f a N LL C N ° m v Q 2 - Li) C d o w a U a C w0 o owmo ��� r- a) a . v . oE N e 7 Q.0 'C o) w o .) f . }Eo ••_ 2l Q 0_0- to -o N " w L L o_ co a) o) U N O oo. � � x mLw � E '« 'i � ma � nE Q� � ymN � NUo3 � v) o m m U L C O C m N :T.,' , b y b m w a Q m a) E E m m E N a o o m aw -c moi � > ami mcagw wcEo � d E .E � cwi 'in � o o ° E '� -_o c ma E0 m � � -a ° vo = Eom2NC � a) a) 3 yy 3UDw Td `', wa0ac mm WI a) - - a) ° a m m :Z' O w o . c m m o Nw3ED 'ap o.Uc E0o .=7 co c NEvaio .5UEo ; Emo0 ,(2a Z m c m c w m v idm E w o 1 � a c mp; ca C 0• 12C =o d 2j 00 = ff ° o rn '-. ._ w m ._ w a mow c m o E m ° w -. p wwa , 0cw .c N_u. > > cw2 dcw m — o ... « ._ mEd a.); Us = o) o_ u• °) m w m ;c d w w N E 3 5 a) m,., lift- N o) w U N a N vm... O 0 a 2 o = d O .N a) O` N co N w c o m o W Q >. O =mq = C y w w ? ; a) y ? a) C a) .= W O a a) U O U O p: V) 'o N .0 p_,.,: U C a) U w C "O '> 3 U X (7, 1- 0) 0 3 .c pi 2 C V c w y `ate U m O m m .O N as `cm o O O m j p D C o). a V, .c- 613 m -8 .O w d L o tr)• O w C - w w 145 COI a) m N 'C N w 0 ".T N E O O) - E O E ..L., m o) E O).0 w . V N 0 a) m w N >. sue,', O C 2 0 o) O Cali .C7) O .0 a C CI j X W@ c O) o) C w 0--to o a)) m m w w — O 4v. O- Q V) C U . -.AZ( V) Z` m O U N C .- "o a C "O U C C w > T a ko w c w '` O -o 122u — w ._. — N E W w :u) « -0 3 m T.. O w N ._ 2 = cCaEaa)) M2 1- Uas— Ea �a2' `) ?_ si- o � yco -2 Q .=w- o_ o '-N-orn° o@QSS ° 3 A,B,C & 0- 177 d ° :O. C N C— c E O I •U N- ets O V R \1 V U) Z N N N Cr) N N m F. 'O C d I- d c w d m . > D • C O 0 -O m O 0 L w � 'c a > a a 0 Q a N N IA a) N . C C C C C ca m m m ' m c a a a d o a O.O .r O O O O 'V O• °� .a 3 a) a 3) (D O W a) a) `d a> a> a> a> co m I- > CC CC cC CC mc CC co >, c c) • C N •" = a 0 0 0 "- o d 0 U W U O •E LL m m m 0 m r 0) d C a `o N C C . O O a2 N ` CC .2 m m m m m co C d N o O ,C 0 U C • ,CO U C 0 0 .2 O m 0 d N d m d V J m 'O J � .c '� C ,C d �' V/ 4/ 'O In N 0- d -o w Q N N In m C ry C N OL N > ,c � a0 p C10 O O W N ›..- N a) ca • d _ E 'O a^ N to — d.- v1 > 'm0 L L .N p ° E udiN � E � o a � m� a � oY CI- a) = c a -0 .0 0 cc> 2 ,2 — co 2 ..„ � � m 0) d m V C C '.0 m 5•c cn d N - d Iw a E O C c d c . ._ U d C N C U 'O C N a O) E In •a• O > O V c m U N (a .c CO N a) m J m m C ' @ ? O `O U N d N d n. J C a C mJ 0 0 0 0 , a E N E a w O d N o N N N Q C ._ '_ N N .0 .0 O E d E a �e ,a Eas „ X E E g x Ea c m O _ 6 .d., d V O d (pc d > U d d d L C Um O) E L O Y d .2 d 0. J U m Cn Vl . Z c rLa ° E .. � Em >•EE ECIn2E tnE - c a a) o O d O ` C 'C U 4- — CO d C En E — o Cn c E a L E > -° `� m O U .-U N c ° ct- an d Cu. rp U 'x .c O O 'x N V N -O U V N p d Q 2 a a`) 3 °i In `N rn m CO � 2 U m a c p c d c >' w rn mdt 2 .n `° m m cE 'm = � E mums • ca C N ti O in _ .c d J v d N J U d IA -o J S m c L O• ° ° O O N O a N 'JO O 0 H m L.+ C a N O "O O d U N d — U 3 J "O d N y O d co O °- c N Q C W dm c o m m 01 cn •2 8 C m.c -c N m m E .� m oa co E y p d N 22 d J N m � . E 2E 0w P CDccooa H � oaco IL- ... nato CO w .0d � E9' a A,B,C & D- 178 0 s_ _ O IS c O c E , s • o 0 U „ c m o v v iM7 fA Z N asssis- -t, N v a c > 0 K yw o O a O ..,. 1. .c• W N a > a a N N :v • C C co cv C 0. O. k-=M1: C . ._ O O O .. O p V 3 Xn..: C T ' •. L c ,iy'.l,+ N t -O-3- Yr"n°. r • O O 0-- 0 O LL 00 m ,, a 0 r h.4: r CD CD c 3. p 0 0 a0 • .° m m "�' m (a ,- U C O@ 0 0 O o T C 1- C N �T, N N O L o C L d o N N O -° E W J C E J C O)� C C al O C Co co c ma) Flo' d al a> O_ o ° C7 m m r E O ,rh;:�': o - m o J w� E E Eon. � L o co •c m -° nma _ m aoi ° aO aCO 'J� s0 -OD a 3 o m > J = > o�Z ° W L ... 0 0- j coi o co o0 vwJof c m0 c + tZ *'.z ca c co c OF 2 o o aa) ZZ o m a E N m � o o a" o > ai D- a y Z y. c -c 4- c N N N N - --- o0O_ - m ° o >, ° o aa) E -oo -c -3. o °M >. 0. fa U Na co "O N a1 > J r it c (O C OC)0 N N E V O J co o L To c() L "O l0 o -o0a, oCD o Zo w cncm Z = � �n- .�` ca :4Qo rnomciacaa. a4 0ita O0 aEca � C1U` -0m o .Eit ' � mo .o o ..: _. *. ado W < o 5 E O al J n /D ' o -0 O C O ° N = o E 4:A o� 0_ @ as Cm 0)-C d ENL N .E NOO>WCno . NO. `o0 = m � c cv caa7oJO3 N15E C0 °. C ° c G' c ti• • c c N (a C -J° .E .L+ d 01 .N N E O O y � 0 '.0 O "�`,,. , O � (n O N W O O C O C (a o O4{ L m y ° �, no 1° y > E ° U o m` 2 cc0u_ o' J fi ° °�@ 0 a E _ U E w y a) Co L o p ._ "O 0 4,'!.i y ` -0 0 :r a `o a T a a) o aci o m ( .O- a._ .N o a o '5 o eko o o c°i 'm 5E d (7) Nw :0 o o a co 300CC O O] 0 Zf 0 .c E c • A,B,C & D- 179 u C g4 N C T U O m I;-xi' N C w a VA c c EL n _ rn E c c u • O O ,.w LL a 8 w u V C m `o c o al 0 m = co m GO c Q c c o m o . " ._: Y° U U w -C,2 . N o U a a)y a y+ v a a 0 p to> U o o 0 ° c: 333v rCU 0 is £N: > 0 '(As N M v u) r ar- w O_ '' c 15 R 0 p v a tw ! w 0 y 3-b1 V ,`- ri > 14 4 o r a a n C C C a O9 G (Y .- 0 O o 2 0 U U U ' �u o N co 00 rn2 rn2 v) 2 a E C w C N C V ` N 4a' 0 U 2 C C a > a C Y N E y O 0 O O O O w _ a H > D o O U O U " Q U 5 y •Ou 'y d C 2 C U +t•)■ O O a N ,` Cd N 1, Q co U p w 0 - n1-+ � E 0 �; O • 2 it U U U 3 c r E c d C 501t 0 0_ 2 CR@ > 0 0 4 0 ?75 d ._ 2 C 'C CF p 2 C n 0 O LL"Si z c U o CO o d ay) O o O air e, 0 oo a o) cc '.o-, m d 0- =3€ o o m E 5 CX w H o o m k c o U a) w Qj >,-- >C C a) a. 0 '0 0 Z. a) uj to p 0 N C a N ',,ck > c .c CO.cr_.. O C a) y L 0 .... O U _ O " T i- L L la 15 to Fl Oe + I 40 - d Ear o o IT a Lt 1] O a) O U o E y > ; CO CO 0 C a) co o ` '2- S,PL. Q ro U O w n y CO y Y w o .,a.r, m �' 3 o T >• ma a) rn 0 ° ° c y a) o �' > a) a) to a c o ,�a x aE a) E o '- � a: t > 22 3 c rno . c '-`: coo - 0 m Y a) c a) — O c o N CE ,DO 2mUa) daiaE a 0ab05 V0x ° � rn - o-- o- - o <no) oE * 0 U a o tDcc : u o ° E x E x v) w to O T- 0 a) .c v .c a io a a) . a) v) c aE > ccw a) 0 > toc aO) - y .2 a) o dto on y3 rx 5 o a) -0 la . c .`"1171.) -C= y m a : x@ E L o a o o y.',�+• I- I a) D 0 U > ,> O a) O t H 53 > o > y O w O - 3 U O a) a) N - T�' N CO y m Nc � o " omo � mycE To- 0 = om > V °= ow - a) c p d a) y ' C ... w O O y y _ to y@ > > '0 - C C al d O E U J O U to _ C O 0) `O CO .- !d �i lr 0 cl) C C ci,Z C y a 0 O.'O 0) c C ,.. ` O la a L CO j O _O ._ — L 2 d Pg. O. U O) f t o y C a)0) t .0 r m E :4= 0 - 3 y o a -o 0 E m .'� o a .N a a) v ` O :0 . p � o y , 2 y -o w 2 _coo a %O d `o m v g) 2 2 O . — O N O C " a) C > '0 U IC m E 5-;•:t Q) O C y d Ei f a) -O O U 0 O C . O . ` a) .- O 8 a) a) O 0 a CO U c y 0 a) a) Q [.o7; p t O m C W 1; W la Q tT N r y O r >,'0 0 C t C to O .> O ° 0 _ ' y 41°' . N u 9 al C O N w E c .0 o 0 O a) o 'C d ,c N O .0.. '00 -p U .'.• (a -o uai C O C 0 a o wr 471 C CO y O D (U U 2 O L in- co-P. 0)l O a) Y O (n L O r 0 0 N N c 0) o c .� m u U • o w .0 a) ( a) a vi'o a -o y To EL U `D cn 3 ° c d L E c w 'v_ u l"'' E 2 to c N — co Q a) a N .= W c a O. N 2 C C ! 0 2 la > U ONt U to «_ 'j p N °-) 0. C C o O 0OA -0 ' -C C °' C C C CL/ 0-D J 0 J O j � C n C r P p+ ) U m Cl- i ._ O m a) L O 0 m L V ai o :o - ct n y O O U la to C L O D a) >. Wl. O O W O O U 5a- U co co H e U .o y N y w y Sy Hm 1c _ cr a) ao ~ y m kiZj4UaU maa A,B,C & D- 180 RESOLUTION NO. 12-27 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CALIFORNIA,APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE A VACANT PARCEL OF APPROXIMATELY 146,000 SQUARE FEET (3.4 ACRES) INTO FIVE (5) LOTS IN THE VERY LOW (VL) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, WITHIN THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE EAST TERMINUS OF ARAPAHO ROAD BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND CHOCTAW PLACE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 0225-181-73. A. Recitals. 1. K.U. & Associates filed an application for the issuance of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution,the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of June 2012, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. • NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting on June 13, 2012, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a vacant parcel of land located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place; and b. The project site is a vacant parcel with an area of approximately 146,000 square feet (3.4 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 442 feet (east to west) by approximately 331 feet(north to south); and c. To the north, south, and west, and of the project site are single-family residences. To the east are a single-family residence and a telephone company facility; and d. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan; and e. The proposal is to subdivide the property into five (5) lots for single-family residential development; and • f. All lots will comply with the development standards applicable to this zoning district as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, except for lot depth. The lot depth of A,B,C & D- 181 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-27 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 2 • Lots 1 and 5,which will be approximately 135 feet in depth and will not comply with the minimum lot depth of 200 feet as required per the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The lot depths of Lots 2 through 4 will be at least 200 feet. The width of each lot will meet the required 90-foot dimension. Individual lot areas will range between 20,494 square feet to 30,051 square feet, which are in excess of the minimum of 20,000 square feet that is required. The minimum average lot area is 25,835 square feet, which is in excess of the minimum 25,000 that is required; and g. This application is in conjunction with Development Review DRC2009-00010, Variance DRC2011-00963, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00964. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specificliindings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed development is in accord with the General Plan,the objectives of the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The proposal is to subdivide a property with an area of approximately 146,000 square feet(3.4 acres) into five (5) lots for single-family residential development. The underlying General Plan designation is Very Low Residential. b. The proposed development,together with the conditions applicable thereto,will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The project site is vacant;the proposed land use is consistent with the • land uses within the vicinity where it is located and the expectations of the community. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. c. The proposed development complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan except for the proposed lot depth of Lots 1 and 5 that will be approximately 135 feet in depth and will not comply with the minimum lot depth of 200 feet as required per the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The applicant has submitted a Variance request for consideration by the Planning Commission. The proposed development, otherwise, meets all standards outlined in the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that,with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative • Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A,B,C & D- 182 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-27 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 3 b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it,finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. • 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the subdivision of a parcel of approximately 146,000 square feet (3.4 acres) with overall dimensions of approximately 442 feet(east to west)by approximately 331 feet(north to south) located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place -APN: 0225-181-73. 2) Development of all lots shall be in accordance with the standards and requirements applicable to the Very Low (VL) Residential District as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 3) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, Etiwanda Specific Plan,State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 4) Prior to recordation of the Final Map, all lots shall be rough graded to include building pads and interim improvements (for example, drainage) as deemed necessary by the City. • 5) Prior to construction, all future homes and associated improvements shall require the review and approval by the City and the issuance of applicable Building Permits by the Building and Safety Department. A,B,C & D- 183 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-27 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747— K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 4 • 6) All setback lines shall be shown on the Final Map. 7) Equestrian uses and improvements shall be in accordance with the standards and requirements applicable to the properties within the Equestrian Overlay as described in Development Code Section 17.08 and the Trail Implementation Master Plan. 8) Drainage concrete V ditches shall be no more than 6 inches deep and a minimum of 5 feet wide with a medium broom finish. 9) A culvert shall be provided where water must be conveyed from one side of the trail to the other side, i.e. at the concrete swale/tail intersections located at the southwest and southeast corners of Lot 4. 10) The slope along the west side of the trail on the west side of Lot 4 shall be landscaped with ground cover for erosion control; the use of decomposed granite on the slope is not permitted. 11) Provide trail signage for the Community Trail at all trail intersections per City standards. 12) All trail surfacing shall be of decomposed granite with 4-inch minimum base. Remove rocks and debris and grade surface smooth. The • decomposed granite shall be the complete width of the trail up to the property boundary. 13) Provide City Standard "Unauthorized Vehicles Prohibited" signs at each street trail connection. The minimum dimension between the wood posts for a step-through detail is 18 inches clear minimum between posts and maximum 14 inches above grade. 14) A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions, fencing, and weed control in accordance with City Master Trail drawings shall be submitted for City Trails Coordinator review and approval prior to approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map and prior to approval of street improvement and Grading Plans. The developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including fencing and drainage devices in conjunction with street improvements. 15) All Conditions of Approval for Development Review DRC2009-00010, Variance DRC2011-00963,and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00964 shall apply. • A,B,C & D- 184 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-27 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747— K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 5 Building and Safety .1) Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall provide a letter from the property owner to the east (Verizon) accepting the proposed drainage structure on their property. 2) Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines, and prior to constructing walls along common lot lines, the applicant shall provide a letter from the adjacent property owner(s) allowing work on the adjacent property. 3) Prior to the issuance of a grading permit a Water Quality Management Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building and Safety Services Director or his designee. 4) Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, the applicant shall provide to the Building and Safety Services Director a copy of the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Memorandum of Agreement for Storm Water Quality Management Plan for review prior to recordation of the document. The Memorandum of Agreement for Storm Water Quality Management Plan shall be recorded prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. • 5) Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, the applicant shall obtain a drainage easement or letter from the downstream property owner accepting the concentrated drainage flows in excess of the pre-developed storm water drainage flows. 6) In the equestrian trails, water bars shall be spaced accordingly: Equestrian Trail Slope Water Bar Interval Spacing 4% to 5.99% 50 feet • 6% to 8.99% 40 feet 9% to 11.99% 30 feet 12% and greater 20 feet 7) Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). 8) A Grading Bond will be required to be submitted to the Building and Safety Services Director or his designee for review and approval prior • to the issuance of a grading permit. A,B,C & D- 185 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-27 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747— K.U. &ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 6 • Engineering Department 1) Acknowledgement of Development Impact Fee Form must be signed and notarized prior to Building Permit issuance (fees subject to change/periodic increases). 2) Development Impact Fees are due prior to Occupancy Release (subject to change/periodic increases). a) Drainage impact fees were collected under PM 16969. 3) For pads below streets, the first 6 feet of the driveway should slope away from the right-of-way(back of sidewalk)elevation at no more than 6 percent. 4) Drive approaches must comply with City Standard 101. 5) Final Map shall label proposed trail easement as "15-foot Private Equestrian Trail Easement." 6) Provide written approval from the property owner to the east to construct a 5-foot wide concrete swale on their property prior to issuance of Grading Permit. • 7) Remove the existing parkway drain along East Avenue and replace with City Standard #107-B Medium Capacity Drain Outlet. Environmental Mitigation Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good 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. 2) Prior to the issuance of any Grading Permits, the developer shall submit construction plans to the 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. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied • either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. A,B,C & D- 186 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-27 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 7 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • 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 activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public 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.,wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB])daily to reduce Fine Particulate Matter(PM10)emissions,in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 10) Landscape with native and/or drought-resistant species to reduce • water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. A,B,C & D- 187 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-27 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747— K.U. &ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 8 • 11) Provide lighter color roofing and road materials and tree planning programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources MSC-01 measure. 12) All residential structures shall be required to incorporate high- efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning,appliances,and water heaters. 13) All residential structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. 14) All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood buming devices (i.e.fireplaces/hearths)in new development on or after March 9, 2009. Biological Resources 1) Prior to grading or other ground disturbance of the site, the applicant shall conduct a final focused survey to determine the - presence/absence of this species following protocols established by • the United States Fish and Wild Life Services(USFWS). In the event that CAGN is detected or observed within the area of disturbance, avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures shall be developed and implemented. 2) The removed Blue Gum Eucalyptus tree shall be replaced with a matching species (or equivalent)of a minimum 24-inch box size. Cultural Resources 1) 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 sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments,using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of • the area. • Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project A,B,C & D- 188 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-27 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 9 effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind mitigation fee. • Prepare a technical resources management report, 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. 2) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal 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 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 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 documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository(i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. Geology and Soils 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB)daily to reduce PKo emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule • established by the City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. A,B,C & D- 189 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-27 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747— K.U. &ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 10 • 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10 emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. Greenhouse Gases 1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAWMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or other soil-stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 2) The construction contactor shall select construction equipment based on low-emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the grading plan that ensures all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufactures specification. 3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes. • 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline-or diesel-powered engines where feasible. 5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak-hour traffic. 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for construction crew. 7) Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials" such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low-volatile-organic-compound (VOC) materials. 8) Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy standard including but not limited to any combination of: • Increased insulation, • Limit air leakage through the structure, • Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances, • • Landscape and developed site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping, A,B,C & D- 190 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-27 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747— K.U. &ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 11 • Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems, • Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements, • Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED's)for outdoor lighting. 9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following: • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available and/or install the infrastructure to deliver and use reclaimed water. • Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets, and waterless urinals/water heaters. • • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non- vegetated surfaces. 10) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. Hazards and Waste Materials 1) The project shall comply with Chapter 7A of the California Building Code(CBC),which includes building standards for the Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. The standards call for the use of ignition-resistant materials and design to inhibit the intrusion of flame or buming embers projected by a vegetation fire and help reduce losses resulting from repeated cycles of interface fire disasters. Hydrology and Water Quality 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval a 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. • 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, 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. This A,B,C & D- 191 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-27 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747 — K.U. &ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 12 • Erosion Control Plan 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. 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street 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. 5) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), prepared on August 24, 2011, by W&W Technologies to reduce pollutants during construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 6) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water • Quality Management Plan (WQMP), prepared by W&W Technologies on August 24, 2011,to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for 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. 8) Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying 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. 9) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice 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 Dischargers Identification Number)shall be submitted to the A,B,C & D- 192 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-27 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747— K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 13 City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Noise 1) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 2) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D,as measured at the property line. The developer shall hire a consultant 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. • 3) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in the first phase. 4) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, 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. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2012. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Luis Munoz, Jr., Chairman ATTEST: • Jeffrey A. Bloom, Secretary I, Jeffrey A. Bloom, 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 A,B,C & D- 193 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-27 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18747— K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 14 • by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of June 2012, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: • • A,B,C & D- 194 tt a COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: SUBTT18747 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP APPLICANT: K.U. & ASSOCIATES LOCATION: EAST TERMINUS OF ARAPAHO ROAD BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND CHOCTAW PLACE- APN: 0225-181-73. ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: General Requirements Completion Date 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. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 12-27 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 activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 3. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The _/_/ project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning Director hearing: a) Mitigated Negative Declaration -$ 2,151.50 X B. Time Limits 1. This tentative tract map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a _/ /_ complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. • 1 A,B,C & D- 195 Project No.SUBTT18747 Completion Date C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include _/_/_• site plans,architectural elevations,exterior materials and colors,landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department,the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon,all Conditions / /_ of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and / /_ State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be _/_/_ submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. _ All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and.street improvement plans shall be coordinated for _/_/_ consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.)or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision,or approved • use has commenced,whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all / /_ other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions,fencing, and weed _/_/_ control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map and prior to • approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements. 8. Local Feeder Trail entrances shall also provide access for service vehicles,such as veterinarians / /_ or hay deliveries,including a 12-foot minimum drive approach. Entrance shall be gated provided that equestrian access is maintained through step-throughs in accordance with Engineering Department Standard Drawing 1006-B and 1007-B. 9. Local Feeder Trail grades shall not exceed 0.5%at the downstream end of a trail for a distance _/_/ of 25 feet behind the public right-of-way line to prohibit trail debris from reaching the street. Drainage devices may be required by the Building Official 10. Provide a 24-foot by 24-foot or 12-foot by 48-foot corral area in the rear yard adjacent to the Local /_/_ Feeder Trail. Grade access from corral to trail with a maximum slope of 5:1 and a minimum width of 10 feet. 11. For single-family residential development within the Equestrian/Rural Overlay District,at least one /_/_ model home shall be provided with a constructed 24-foot by 24-foot corral with appropriate fencing. 12. Where corner side, interior side or rear yard property lines are adjacent to local equestrian trails, / /_ construct minimum 6 foot high decorative masonry walls. Decorative masonry shall mean split- face double sided block,'slump stone'or an alternative material that is acceptable to the Design Review Committee. • 2 A,B,C & D- 196 Project No,SUBTT18747 Completion Date 13. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions(CC&Rs)shall not prohibit the keeping the equine _/_/_ animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot • owners in subdivisions shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing to boards of directors of homeowners' associations for amendments to the CC&Rs. 14. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property _/_/_ owner, homeowners'association,or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department • review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 15. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double wall / / condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/ fences along the project's perimeter. 16. Construct block walls between homes(i.e.,along interior side and rear property lines),rather than _/ / wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency. 17. Access gates to the rear yards shall be constructed from a material more durable than wood _/_/_ gates. Acceptable materials include, but are not limited to, wrought iron and PVC. 18. For residential development, return walls and comer side walls shall be decorative masonry. _/_/_ 19. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured _/_/_ • products. D. Building Design 1. For all residential development, provide conduit from each unit/lot and a pull box to connect to the _/ / • street. Provide interior structured wiring for each house/building with minimum Category 5 copper wire, Radio Grade 6 coaxial cable, and a central distribution panel, prior to release of occupancy (fiber-to-the building, FTTB). Plans shall be submitted for Planning Director and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. E. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in /_/_ the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 ! / slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. • 3 A,B,C & D- 197 Project No.SUBTT18747 Completion Date 3. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater / /_ slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq.ft.of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size • shrub per each 100 sq.ft.of slope area,and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 4. For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously /_/_ maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Department to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. 5. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development _/_/_ Code and/or the Etiwanda Specific Plan. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 6. The final design of the perimeter parkways,walls,landscaping,and sidewalks shall be included in _/_/_ the required landscape plans and shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Services Department. 7. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the _/_/_ perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 8. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas,the _/_/_ design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department. 9. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water /_/_ efficient landscaping as defined in Ordinance 823 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code • F. Environmental 1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of _/_/_ implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the Planning Director in the amount of$ 557 prior to the issuance of building permits,guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. G. Other Agencies 1. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location / /_ of mailboxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mailboxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. • 4 A,B,C & D- 198 Project No.SUBTT18747 Completion Date APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT, (909)477-2710, AOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: OTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S) H. General Requirements 1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: _/_/_ a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan; c. Floor Plan; d. Ceiling 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 line diagrams; f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics,underground diagrams,water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air conditioning; and g. Planning Department Project Number(i.e., SUBTT18747)clearly identified on the outside of all plans. 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils 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. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. _/_/_ 5. Developers wishing to participate in the Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP) can _/_/_ contact the Building and Safety Department staff for information and submittal requirements. I. Site Development . 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be /_/_ marked with the project file number (i.e., SUBTT18747). 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 Building and Safety Department for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential project or major addition,the applicant _/_/_ shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include,but are not limited to: Permit and Plan Check Fees, Construction and Demolition Diversion Program deposit and fees and School Fees. The applicant shall provide a copy of the School Fees receipt to the Building and Safety Department prior to permit issuance. 3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building and Safety Official after tract/parcel map /_/_ recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday _/_/_ through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. • 5 A,B,C & D- 199 Project No.SUBTT18747 Completion Date J. New Structures 1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances _/ /_ • considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness. 2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. / /_ 3. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's "high wind" instructions. / /_ 4. All structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers / /_ 5. All structures must be constructed in accordance with Chapter 7A of the California Building Code. /_/_ K. Grading 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building _/_/_ Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s)shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to / /_ perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. • 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or engineering geologist and / /_ submitted at the time of application for Grading and Drainage Plan review. 4. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be /_/_ completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. A separate Grading and Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for _/_/_• existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place /_/_ a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for / /_ review,that plan shall be a separate plan/permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 8. A drainage study showing a 100-year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site drainage shall be / /_ prepared and submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review and approval for on-site storm water drainage prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. All reports shall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record. ' 9. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage easements _/_/_ prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. 10. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage acceptance _/ /_ letter(s)from adjacent downstream property owner(s)or discharge flows in a natural condition (concentrated flows are not accepted) and shall provide the Building and Safety Official a drainage study showing the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. 11. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain written permission from the adjacent /_/_ property owners to construct walls on property lines or provide a detail(s)showing the perimeter wall(s)to be constructed offset from the property line. • 6 A,B,C & D- 200 Project No.SUBTT18747 Completion Date 12. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on-site construction where _/_/_ possible, and provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. • 13. All slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way or adjacent private _/_/_ property. 14. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted _/_/_ California Plumbing Code. 15. The maximum parking stall gradient is 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be _/_/_ constructed per the current adopted California Building Code. 16. The final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet _/_/_ beyond the project boundary. a) The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. The grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official. b) Provide documentation for CVWD sewer offset program to the Building and Safety Official for review prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. 17. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California _/_/_ Building Code. 18. The precise Grading and Drainage Plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho /_/_ Cucamonga handout"Information for Grading Plans and Permit." • • 7 A,B,C & D- 201 Project No.SUBTr18747 Completion Date 19. Grading Inspections: / /_ a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading • contractor shall request a pre-grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a pre-grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations,the Grading Permit may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector; b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Department at least 1 working day in advance to request the following inspections. prior to continuing grading operations: i. The bottom of the over-excavation H. Completion of rough grading,the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and-Safety front counter)an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record; iv. The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. c) Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) best management practices (BMP) devices. • L. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN 1. A Storm Water Quality Management Plan shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official _/_/_ and the City of Rancho Cucamonga's"Memorandum of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT,(909)477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: M. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, / /_ community trails,public paseos,public landscape areas,street trees,traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities(cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 2. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or /_/_ noted on the final map. • • 8 A,B,C & D- 202 Project No.SUBTT18747 Completion Date N. Street Improvements • 1. All public improvements(interiorstreets,drainagefacilities,community trails,paseos,landscaped _/_/_ areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter,AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 2. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source / / of energy,fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council,except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. 3. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: / /_ Curb& AC. Side- ' Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other Arapaho Road X X X X X X (a) (b) East Avenue (c) Notes: (a) protect/replace as necessary existing community trail adjacent to Lots 2 and 5(b) provide traffic signing and striping as required where directed by Traffic Engineer(c) upgrade existing curbside drain to City Standard•107-B Medium Capacity Drain Outlet. • 4. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans,including street trees,street lights,and intersection safety lights _/_/_ on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements,prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a / /_ construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking,traffic signing,street name signing,traffic signal conduit,and /_/_ interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with /_/_ adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required e. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to submittal for first plan / /_ check. 5. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in /_/_ accordance with the City's street tree program. • 9 A,B,C & D- 203 Project No.SUBTT18747 Completion Date 6. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed /_/_ legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction • legend stating: "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on sheet (typically sheet 1)." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. The Engineering Services Department reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field conditions and other variables. For additional information, contact the Project Engineer. Min. Grow Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spacing Size Qty. Arapaho Road Lagerstroemia Crape Myrtle 2' 20' 15 Gal Fill tuscarora Pink/Red O.C. In Construction Notes for Street Trees: 1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans. 2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Services Department. 4) Any private landscape plans that show street trees: "All improvements within the public right-of-way, including street trees,shall be installed per the public improvement plans." If -, there is a discrepancy between the public and private plans,the street improvement plans will govern. 0. Drainage and Flood Control • 1. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the / /_ property from adjacent areas. P. Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system,water,gas, _/_/_ electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. / /_ 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the _/_/_ Cucamonga Valley Water District(CVW D), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District,and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVW D is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits,whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. / /_ Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. • 10 A,B,C & D- 204 Project No.SUBTT18747 Completion Date Q. General Requirements and Approvals • 1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all _/ /_ new streetlights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. 2. Prior to the issuance of building permits,a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees shall _/ /_ be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully refundable if at least 50% of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills,and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department when the first building permit application is submitted to Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. 3. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting _/_/_ Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: None. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: • SEE ATTACHED • 11 A,B,C & D- 205 RESOLUTION NO. 12-28 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010, A REVIEW OF FIVE (5) SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES THAT WILL BE CONSTRUCTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IN THE VERY LOW (VL) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT,WITHIN THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE EAST TERMINUS OF ARAPAHO ROAD BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND CHOCTAW PLACE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF— APN: 0225-181-73. A. Recitals. 1. K.U. & Associates filed an application for the issuance of Development Review DRC2009-00010, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of June 2012, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. • NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting on June 13, 2012, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a vacant parcel located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place; and b. The project site is a vacant parcel of land with an area of approximately 146,000 square feet(3.4 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 442 feet(east to west) by approximately 331 feet(north to south); and c. To the north, south, and west of the project site are single-family residences. To the east are a single-family residence and a telephone company facility; and d. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan; and e. This application is in conjunction with Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747,Variance • DRC2011-00963, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00964. A,B,C & D- 206 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010— K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 2 • f. The proposal is to construct a single-family residence on each lot of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, a subdivision comprised of five (5) lots, for a total of five (5) single-family residences; and g. The proposed houses will comply with the development standards applicable to this zoning district as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The architecture of each house will be consistent with the general design requirements outlined in Section 5.42.600 of the • Etiwanda Specific Plan; and h. The houses on Lots 1 and 5 will be one-story,while the houses on the remainder of the lots will be two-story. The mix of one-and two-story homes is consistent with the policy adopted byihe Planning Commission requiring that 25 percent(minimum)of the proposed houses must be single-story; and i. The two-and three-car garages of all of the houses will be side-on, i.e. the front of the garages will not dominate the front of the house as seen from the street, in compliance with Section 5.42.606 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and j. There will be four (4) distinct footprints — Plans A, B, C, and D — and a reverse footprint of Plan B (B1) for a total of five (5)footprints. Plans A and D will be one-story, while the others will be two-story. The number of available footprints will 'comply with Figure 5-4 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. • 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed development is in accord with the General Plan,the objectives of the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The proposal is to construct a single-family residence on each lot of a 5-lot subdivision (Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747)that is simultaneously being reviewed by the City, for a total of five(5)single-family residences. The underlying General Plan designation is Very Low Residential. b. The proposed development,together with the conditions applicable thereto,will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The project site is vacant; the proposed land use is consistent with the land uses within the vicinity where it is located and the expectations of the community. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. c. The proposed development complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan except for the proposed lot depth of Lots 1 and 5 which will be approximately 135 feet in depth and will not comply with the minimum lot depth of 200 feet as required per the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The applicant has submitted a Variance request for consideration by the Planning Commission. The proposed development, otherwise, meets all standards outlined in the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the • design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City. A,B,C & D- 207 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 3 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it,finds:(i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (H)that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission furtherfinds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the • Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the development of 5 single-family residences with an average floor area of 4,310 square feet in conjunction with a proposed subdivision in the Very Low(VL)Residential District, Etiwanda Specific • Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place - APN: 0225-181-73. A,B,C & D- 208 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 — K.U. &ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 4 • 2) Development of all lots shall be in accordance with the standards and requirements applicable to the Very Low (VL) Residential District as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 3) The decorative trim around the windows and doors shall be constructed of real wood, not foam. 4) The molding along the top of the stone veneer wainscots shall be stone, not foam. 5) Walls along interior property lines that exceed 6 feet in height(but are less than 8 feet in height) shall require the submittal of a Minor Exception application for review and action by the Planning Director prior to submittal of documents for plan check and construction. 6) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, Etiwanda Specific Plan, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 7) Model homes shall require the review of a separate Temporary Use Permit(Model Home)and fee prior to submittal of documents for plan check and construction. Note: Parking in the street will not be • permitted for this purpose. A temporary off-street parking area that complies with all applicable parking requirements will be required and must be shown on the plans for this permit. 8) All Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Variance DRC2011-00963, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00964 shall apply. Building and Safety(Grading) Department 1) Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, the applicant shall provide a letter from the property owner to the east (Verizon) accepting the proposed drainage structure on their property. 2) Prior to removing fences or walls along common lot lines, and prior to constructing walls along common lot lines,the applicant shall provide a letter from the adjacent property owner(s) allowing work on the adjacent property. 3) Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, a Water Quality Management Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building and Safety Services Director or his designee. 4) Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall provide to Building and Safety Services Director a copy of the City of • Rancho Cucamonga's Memorandum of Agreement for Storm Water Quality Management Plan for review prior to recordation of the document. The Memorandum of Agreement for Storm Water Quality A,B,C & D- 209 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010— K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 5 Management Plan shall be recorded prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. 5) Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a drainage easement or letter from the downstream property owner accepting the concentrated drainage flows in excess of the pre- developed storm water drainage flows. 6) In the equestrian trails water, bars shall be spaced accordingly: Equestrian Trail Slope Water Bar Interval Spacing 4% to 5.99% 50 feet 6% to 8.99% 40 feet 9% to 11.99% 30 feet 12% and greater 20 feet • 7) Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number(WDID). 8) A grading bond will be required to be submitted to the Building and Safety Services Director or his designee for review and approval prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. Engineering Department 1) Acknowledgement of Development Impact Fee Form must be signed and notarized prior to Building Permit issuance (fees subject to change/periodic increases). 2) Development Impact Fees due prior to Occupancy Release(subject to change/periodic increases). a) Drainage impact fees were collected under PM 16969. 3) For pads below streets, the first 6 feet of the driveway should slope away from the right-of-way(back of sidewalk)elevation at no more than 6 percent. 4) Drive approaches must comply with City Standard 101. • 5) Final Map shall label proposed trail easement as "15-foot Private Equestrian Trail Easement." A,B,C & D- 210 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 — K.U. &ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 6 • 6) Written approval from property owner to the east to construct a 5-foot wide concrete swale on their property prior to issuance of Grading Permit. 7) Remove existing parkway drain along East Avenue and replace with City Standard #107-B Medium Capacity Drain Outlet. Environmental Mitigation Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good 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. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits,the developer shall submit construction plans to the 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. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • 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 activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a A,B,C & D- 211 • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 —.K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 7 result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds(i.e.,wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB])daily to reduce Fine Particulate Matter(PM10)emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading • plans include a statement thatwork crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 10) Landscape with native and/or drought-resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. 11) Provide lighter color roofing and road materials and tree planning programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources MSC-01 measure. 12) All residential structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 13) All residential structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. 14) All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning devices(i.e. fireplaces/hearths)in new development on or after March 9, 2009. Biological Resources • 1) Prior to grading or other ground disturbance of the site, the applicant shall conduct a final focused survey to determine the A,B,C & D- 212 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 — K.U. &ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 8 • presence/absence of this species following protocols established by the United States Fish and Wild Life Services(USFWS). In the event that CAGN is detected or observed within the area of disturbance, avoidance, minimization, and/or mitigation measures shall be developed and implemented. 2) The removed Blue Gum Eucalyptus tree shall be replaced with a matching species (or equivalent)of a minimum 24-inch box size. Cultural Resources ) 1) 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 sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • • Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special • qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public approximately the archaeological heritage of the area. • Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind mitigation fee. • Prepare a technical resources management report,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. 2) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal 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: • A,B,C & D- 213 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 9 • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and 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 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 documentation in -the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository(i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. Geology and Soils 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent • (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB)daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM1a emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. Greenhouse Gases 1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAWMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or other soil-stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible. • 2) The construction contactor shall select construction equipment based on low-emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the grading plan that ensures all construction equipment A,B,C & D- 214 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 10 • will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufactures specification. 3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes. 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel-powered engines where feasible. 5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak-hour traffic. 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for construction crew. 7) Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials" such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low-volatile-organic-compound (VOC) materials. 8) Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy standard including but not limited to any combination of: • Increased insulation, • • Limit air leakage through the structure, • Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances, • Landscape and developed site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping, • Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems, • Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements, • Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED's)for outdoor lighting. 9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following: • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available • and/or install the infrastructure to deliver and use reclaimed water. A,B,C & D- 215 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 11 • Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets, and waterless urinals/water heaters. • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non-vegetated surfaces. 10) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees approximately reducing waste and approximately recycling. Hazards and Waste Materials 1) The project shall comply with Chapter 7A of the California Building Code(CBC),which includes building standards for the Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. The standards call for the use of ignition-resistant materials and design to inhibit the intrusion of flame or burning embers projected by a vegetation fire and help reduce losses resulting from repeated cycles of interface fire disasters. • Hydrology and Water Quality 1) Prior to issuance of Grading Permits,the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval a 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. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, 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. This Erosion Control Plan 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. 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. • 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street 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. A,B,C & D- 216 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010—K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 12 • 5) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP), prepared on August 24, 2011, by W&W Technologies to reduce pollutants during construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 6) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan(WQMP), prepared by W&W Technologies on August 24, 2011, to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for 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. 8) Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying 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. 9) Prior to issuance of Grading or Paving Permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice 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 1) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 2) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. The developer shall hire a consultant 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 A,B,C & D- 217 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-28 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2009-00010 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 13 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. 3) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in the first phase. 4) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, 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. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2012. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • BY: Luis Munoz, Jr., Chairman ATTEST: Jeffrey A. Bloom, Secretary I, Jeffrey A. Bloom, 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 13th day of June 2012, by the following vote-to-wit: ' AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: • A,B,C & D- 218 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT it* DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: DRC2009-00010 SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICANT: K.U. & ASSOCIATES EAST TERMINUS OF ARAPAHO ROAD BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND CHOCTAW PLACE- LOCATION: APN: 0225-181-73. ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: General Requirements Completion Date 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. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No.12-28, 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 activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 3. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The _/ /_ project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning Director hearing: a) Mitigated Negative Declaration - $ 2,151.50 X B. Time Limits 1. Development/Design Review approval shall expire if building permits are not issued or approved / /_ use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. • 1 A,B,C & D- 219 Project No.DRC2009-00010 Completion Date C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include _/_/ • site plans,architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors,landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department,the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Z Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon,all Conditions /_/_ of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and _/_/_ State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be _/ / submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for / /_ consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.)or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all _/_/_ other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. Street names shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval in accordance with the _/_/_ adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map. • 8. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, _/ / including proper illumination. . 9. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions,fencing, and weed _/_/ . control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map and prior to approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements. 10. Local Feeder Trail entrances shall also provide access for service vehicles,such as veterinarians / /_ or hay deliveries,including a 12-foot minimum drive approach. Entrance shall be gated provided that equestrian access is maintained through step-throughs in accordance with Engineering Department Standard Drawing 1006-B and 1007-B. 11. Local Feeder Trail grades shall not exceed 0.5%at the downstream end of a trail for a distance / /_ of 25 feet behind the public right-of-way line to prohibit trail debris from reaching the street. Drainage devices may be required by the Building Official 12. Provide a 24-foot by 24-foot or 12-foot by 48-foot corral area in the rear yard adjacent to the Local / /_ Feeder Trail. Grade access from corral to trail with a maximum slope of 5:1 and a minimum width of 10 feet. . 13. For single-family residential development within the Equestrian/Rural Overlay District,at least one /_/_ model home shall be provided with a constructed 24-foot by 24-foot corral with appropriate fencing. • 2 A,B,C & D- 220 Project No.DRC2009-00010 Completion Date 14. Where corner side, interior side or rear yard property lines are adjacent to local equestrian trails, / /_ construct minimum 6 foot high decorative masonry walls. Decorative masonry shall mean split- • face double sided block, 'slump stone'or an alternative material that is acceptable to the Design Review Committee. 15. The Covenants, Conditions,and Restrictions(CC&Rs) shall not prohibit the keeping the equine _/_/_ animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot owners in subdivisions shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing to boards of directors of homeowners' associations for amendments to the CC&Rs. 16. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property _/_/_ owner, homeowners'association,or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 17. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double wall _/_/_ condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/ fences along the project's perimeter. 18. Construct block walls between homes(i.e.,along interior side and rear property lines),rather than _/ /_ wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency. • 19. Access gates to the rear yards shall be constructed from a material more durable than wood _/_/_ gates. Acceptable materials include, but are not limited to, wrought iron and PVC. 20. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. / /_ 21. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured /_/_ products. It Building Design 1. For all residential development,provide conduit from each unit/lot and a pull box to connect to the _/_/_ street. Provide interior structured wiring for each house/building with minimum Category 5 copper wire, Radio Grade 6 coaxial cable, and a central distribution panel, prior to release of occupancy (fiber-to-the building, FTTB). Plans shall be submitted for Planning Director and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. E. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in / /_ the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 / /_ slope, shall be,at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. • 3 A,B,C & D- 221 Project No.DRC2009-00010 Completion Date 3. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater _/_/_ slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq.ft.of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size • shrub per each 100 sq.ft.of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition,slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 4. For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously _/_/_ maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units,an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Department to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. 5. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development _/_/_ Code and/or Etiwanda Specific Plan. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 6. The final design of the perimeter parkways,walls,landscaping,and sidewalks shall be included in _/_/_ the required landscape plans and shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Services Department. 7. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the / /_ perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 8. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas,the _/_/_ design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department. 9. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water /_/_ efficient landscaping as defined in Ordinance 823 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code • F. Environmental 1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of _/_/_ implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit,or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the Planning Director in the amount of$557 prior to the issuance of building permits,guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. G. Other Agencies 1. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location _/ /_ of mailboxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mailboxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. • • 4 A,B,C & D- 222 • Project No.DRC2009-00010 Completion Date APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT, (909)477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1E: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S) H. General Requirements 1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: / /_ a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan; c. Floor Plan; d. Ceiling 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 line diagrams; f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams,water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air • conditioning; and g. Planning Department Project Number (i.e., DRC2009-00010) clearly identified on the outside of all plans. • 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils 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. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. / /_ 5. Developers wishing to participate in the Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP) can _/_/_ contact the Building and Safety Department staff for information and submittal requirements. I. Site Development —/ /— 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number (i.e., DRC2009-00010 and SUBTT18747). 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 Building and Safety Department for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential project or major addition, the applicant _/ /_ shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: Permit and Plan Check Fees, Construction and Demolition Diversion Program deposit and fees and School Fees. The applicant shall provide a copy of the School Fees receipt to the Building and Safety Department prior to permit issuance. 3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building and Safety Official after tract/parcel map • / /_ recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday _/_/_ through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. • 5 A,B,C & D- 223 Project No.DRC2009-00010 Completion Date J. New Structures —/ /— 1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances _/_/ • considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness. 2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. / /_ 3. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's "high wind" instructions. _/_/_ 4. All structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers / /_ 5. All structures must be constructed in accordance with Chapter 7A of the California Building Code. / /_ K. Grading —/—/— 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s)shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to _/ /_ perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or engineering geologist and _/ /_ submitted at the time of application for Grading and Drainage Plan review. 4. The final Grading and Drainage Plan, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be /_/_ completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building permits. • • 5. A separate Grading and Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for / / existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place _/ /_ a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for _/_/_ review,that plan shall be a separate plan/permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 8. A drainage study showing a 100-year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site drainage shall be / /_ prepared and submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review and approval for on-site storm water drainage prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. All reports shall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record. 9. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage easements _/_/_ prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. 10. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage acceptance _/_/_ letter(s)from adjacent downstream property owner(s) or discharge flows in a natural condition (concentrated flows are not accepted) and shall provide the Building and Safety Official a drainage study showing the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. 11. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain written permission from the adjacent / /_ property owners to construct walls on property lines or provide a detail(s)showing the perimeter wall(s)to be constructed offset from the property line. • • 6 A,B,C & D- 224 Project No.DRC2009-00010 Completion Date 12. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on-site construction where /_/_ possible, and provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. • 13. All slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way or adjacent private /_/_ property. 14. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted _/_/_ California Plumbing Code. 15. The maximum parking stall gradient is 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be constructed per the current adopted California Building Code. 16. The final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet / /_ beyond the project boundary. a) The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. The grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official. b) Provide documentation for CVWD sewer offset program to the Building and Safety Official for review prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. 17. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California _/ /_ Building Code. 18. The precise Grading and Drainage Plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho / /_ Cucamonga handout"Information for Grading Plans and Permit." • • 7 A,B,C & D- 225 Project No.DRC2009-00010 Completion Date 19. Grading Inspections: / / a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading • contractor shall request a pre-grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a pre-grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations,the Grading Permit may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector; b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Department at least 1 working day in advance to request the following inspections prior to continuing grading operations: i. The bottom of the over-excavation ii. Completion of rough grading,the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety front counter)an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record; • • iv. The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. • • c) Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality • management plan (WQMP) best management practices (BMP) devices. L. WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN —/ /— 1. A Storm Water Quality Management Plan shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official and the City of Rancho Cucamonga's"Memorandum of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be recorded prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT,(909)477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: M. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, _/_/_ community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas,street trees,traffic signal encroachment and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map. 2. Private drainage easements for cross-lot drainage shall be provided and shall be delineated or /_/_ noted on the final map. 8 A,B,C & D- 226 Project No.DRC2009-00010 Completion Date N. Street Improvements • 1. All public improvements(interior streets,drainage facilities,community trails,paseos,landscaped /_/_ areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter,AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 2. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source _/ / of energy,fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council,except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. 3. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: / /_ Curb& AC. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other Arapaho Road X X X X X X (a) (b) (c) Notes: (a)protect/replace as necessary existing community trail adjacent to Lots 1 and 5(b) provide traffic signing and striping as required where directed by Traffic Engineer(c) upgrade existing curbside drain to City Standard #107-B Medium Capacity Drain Outlet. • 4. Improvement Plans and Construction: a.. Street improvement plans, including street trees,street lights,and intersection safety lights _/_/ on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements,prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits,whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a / /_ construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking,traffic signing,street name signing,traffic signal conduit,and _/ /_ interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. d. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with _/ /_ adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. e. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to submittal for first plan _/ /_ check. 5. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in _/ /_ accordance with the City's street tree program. . • 9 A,B,C & D- 227 Project No.DRC2009-00010 Completion Date 6. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed /_/_ legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction • legend stating: "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on sheet (typically sheet 1)." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. The Engineering Services Department reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field conditions and other variables. For additional information, contact the Project Engineer. Grow Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spacing Size Qty. Arapaho Road Lagerstroemia Crape Myrtle 2' 20' 15 Gal Fill Tuscarora Pink/Red O.C. In Construction Notes for Street Trees: • 1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans. 2) Prior to the commencement of any planting,an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Services Department. 4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. 0. Drainage and Flood Control 1. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the /_/_ property from adjacent areas. P. Utilities • 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system,water,gas, _/_/_ electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. / /_ 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the _/_/_ Cucamonga Valley Water District(CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District,and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits,whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. _/_/_ Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. Q. General Requirements and Approvals 1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City,covering the estimated operating costs for all /_/_ new streetlights for the first six months of operation,prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. • 10 A,B,C & D- 228 Project No.DRC2009-00010 Completion Date 2. Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees _/ /_ shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully • refundable if at least 50%of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department when the first Building Permit application is submitted to Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. 3. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting _/_/_ Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: R. Security Lighting 1. Lighting in exterior areas shall be in vandal-resistant fixtures. / / S. Security Hardware 1. A secondary locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors. / /_ 2. One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doors. If windows are within /_/_ 40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used. 3. All garage or rolling doors shall have slide bolts or some type of secondary locking devices. / /_ • Windows 1. All sliding glass windows shall have secondary locking devices and should not be able to be lifted / /_ from frame or track in any manner. • U. Building Numbering 1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime _/ /_ visibility. • V. Alarm Systems 1. Alarm companies shall be provided with the 24-hour Sheriffs dispatch number: (909)941-1488. /_/_ APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: SEE ATTACHED • 11 A,B,C & D- 229 r EUCgMt";'4 �, 7.4 fie „ Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection ,. .;-,i 4.1- r NM,7. fie . • k District _ FIRE e) ,..H �. Fire Construction Services STANDARD CONDITIONS January 19, 2012 KU & Associates, Inc. East End of Arapaho Road (5) Lot Subdivision SUBTT18747 & DRC2009-00010 THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROJECT. FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply The design for Fire Hydrant spacing and location shall comply with the RCFPD Standard 5-10 and CVWD's current standard. FSC-2 Fire Flow 1. The required fire flow for this project is determined in gallons per minute at a minimum • residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This requirement is made in accordance with Fire Code Appendix B, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances. 2. Public Water plans are required for all projects that must extend the existing water supply to or onto the site. Building permits for the construction of the homes will not be issued until the public water plans are approved by FCS and CVWD. 3. On the site plans to be submitted for plan check, show all fire hydrants available to the proposed site. FSC-3 Requirement for Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems The 2010 California Residential Code and/or any other applicable standards require an approved automatic fire sprinkler system to be installed in the dwelling units in accordance with the 2010 edition of NFPA 13D. FSC-5 Hazardous Fire Area This project is located within the "Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone" (VHFHSZ), City of Rancho Cucamonga "Hillside District", and/or within the area identified on the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, Exhibit V-7 as High Probability-High Consequence for Fire Risk. These locations have been determined to be within the "Hazardous Fire Area" as defined by the Fire District. The Hazardous Fire Area is based on maps produced by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. FCS-6 Fire Protection Plans: A fire protection plan is not required for this subdivision. The • applicant shall prepare the architectural plans for the construction of the buildings in accordance with the approved Alternative Method & Materials Application #06148, the RCFPD Ordinance FD50, the 2010 California Building Code chapter 7A and RCFPD Standard 49-1. A,B,C & D- 230 FCS-7 Mobile, stationary or portable power-operated equipment in the Hazardous Fire Area shall not be used without the Fire Safety Division's written approval. Specific fire protection measures that may be required to mitigate the hazard include, but are not limited to: • 1. A stand-by water tender, equipped with a pump, fire hose and nozzle. 2. Pre-wetting of the site to avoid the production of sparks between blades or tracks and rocks. 3. Conducting a fire watch for a minimum of one-hour following the cessation of operations each day. 4. For welding, cutting or grinding work, clear away all combustible material from the area around such operation for a minimum distance of 10-feet. A "hot-work" permit must be obtained from Fire Construction Services prior to cutting, welding or grinding work. 5. Maintain one serviceable round point shovel with an overall length of not less than forty-six (46) inches and one five (5) gallon backpack water pump-type fire extinguisher fully equipped and ready for use at the immediate area during the operation. FCS-8 Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, all fire prevention requirements shall be installed, inspected and accepted by the Fire District staff. Schedule the inspection with Fire Construction Services at 909-477-2713. FSC-9 Alternate Method Application A fire protection plan is not required for this subdivision. The applicant shall prepare the architectural plans for the construction of the buildings in accordance with the approved • Alternative Method & Materials Application #06148, the RCFPD Ordinance FD50, the 2010 California Building Code chapter 7A and RCFPD Standard 49-1. (Currently 47-1). FCS-10 Fire Access Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire access roadways must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and acceptable to Fire Construction Services. FCS-11 Address: Prior to the granting of occupancy, single-family dwellings shall post the address with minimum 4-inch numbers on a contrasting background. The numbers shall be noncombustible internally or externally illuminated during periods of darkness with non combustible fixtures. The numbers shall be visible from the street. FCS-12 Landscaping: The lots must landscaped with the required vegetation in accordance with approved landscape plans, all portions of the lots' landscaping are considered Zone 1 per the approved AMM. • A,B,C & 13- 231 RESOLUTION NO. 12-29 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE DRC2010-00963 A REQUEST TO ALLOW A REDUCTION IN THE LOT DEPTH (FROM THE REQUIRED 200-FOOT MINIMUM TO APPROXIMATELY 135 FEET) FOR TWO (2) LOTS OF A PROPOSED 5-LOT SUBDIVISION IN THE VERY LOW (VL) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, WITHIN THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE EAST TERMINUS OF ARAPAHO ROAD BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND CHOCTAW PLACE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0225-181-73. A. Recitals. 1. K.U. &Associates filed an application for the issuance of Variance DRC2011-00963 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution,the subject Variance request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of June 2012, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. • B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on June 13, 2012, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application is related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00964; and b. The application applies to a vacant parcel located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place; and c. The project site is a vacant parcel with an area of approximately 146,000 square feet (3.4 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 442 feet (east to west) by approximately 331 feet (north to south); and d. To the north, south, and west of the project site are single-family residences. To the east are a single-family residence and a telephone company facility. The only street access to the property is via Arapaho Road that terminates at the midpoint of the west property line of the site. • Adjacent and parallel to the north property line is a Community Trail of approximately 20 feet in width, while adjacent and parallel to the west property line is a local equestrian trail of 15 feet in width; and A,B,C & D- 232 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-29 VARIANCE DRC2011-00963— K.U. &ASSOCIATES • June 13, 2012 Page 2 e. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan; and f. The applicant is requesting a Variance to allow a reduced lot depth for Lots 1 and 5 (the subject lots)of the proposed 5-lot subdivision; and g. Per Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, the required minimum lot depth for residential lots within the Very Low (VL) Residential District is 200 feet; and h. The-proposed lot depth of the subject lots will be approximately 135 feet; and i. The proposed lot width of the subject lots will be approximately 190 feet,while the lot area of the two lots will be 25,910 square feet(Lot 1)and 24,309 square feet(Lot 5). 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. The proposed residential subdivision is an in-fill project with limited • reasonable lot configuration options. The overall north to south dimension of the project site is approximately 331 feet. If it was possible to not have a public street serve the subdivision, Lots 1 and 5 would still be only approximately 165 feet in depth and an associated result would be that Lots 2 through 4 would have no direct access to a public street which is not a permissible condition. The project site is bound on all sides by existing development. Therefore, there is no opportunity to acquire additional land, specifically to the north or the south, which would allow Lots 1 and 5 to be greater in depth. Reducing the number of lots to allow for greater lot size is not reasonable as most of the proposed lots are already significantly larger than the minimum required for this development district. b. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district. The project site is located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road approximately 200 feet east of the intersection of that street with Choctaw Place. It is bound to the north, south, and west by existing residential development and associated improvements. The extension of Arapaho Road will generally bisect the project site. Alternate alignments of the proposed extension such as shifting it further south or north are not possible because of the limits imposed by technical standards for street design including minimum dimensions for street width, curve radii, and cul-de-sacs. The project site was part of a larger parcel that was partially developed with a telephone switching facility on the east side. In May 2006, the larger parcel was subdivided into two(2)parcels. The part of the property that was developed with the telephone switching facility became a separate parcel,while the larger, undeveloped part of the property was sold to the current owner (the applicant). As the telephone facility occupies the entire smaller parcel, it was not possible at the time of the subdivision, nor is it possible now, to consider the option of a street • connecting the project site with East Avenue which, in turn, could have provided the applicant the opportunity to propose an alternate subdivision design. A,B,C & D- 233 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. xx-xx VARIANCE DRC2011-00963 — K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 3 • c. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. The overall dimensions of the project site are approximately 442 feet(east to west)by approximately 331 feet(north to south). Requiring that all lots be 200 feet in depth would necessitate a re-design of the subdivision. This would cause a different set of challenges. All lots must have public street access and the extension of Arapaho Road will be an east to west direction. In order for the depth of each lot to be 200 feet, the long axis of all lots, i.e. the axis along which lot depth is measured, also would have to be in an east to west direction. The only way to reasonably accomplish this would be to eliminate one of the lots. However,the result would be excessively large lots relative to the existing properties in the neighborhood and the development district in general. Furthermore, the orientation of the long axis would not match the long axis of the other properties within the existing residential development to the west that have primary frontage along Arapaho Road. This will affect the location of, or preclude altogether, improvements such as room additions and accessory structures as the setbacks would be oriented differently as well. d. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. The proposal is an in-fill project. The principal purpose of the minimum lot depth standard is to allow horse keeping, while still maintaining a minimum separation of 70 feet between horse corrals(or similar equestrian facilities) and dwellings on neighboring properties per Section 17.08.030(E)(2)(b) of the Development Code. The reduction in the depth of the subject lots from 200 feet to 135 feet will not be in conflict with this requirement as it will be off-set by the width of each lot. Each lot will be an • average of approximately 190 feet wide;the minimum lot width in this development district is 90 feet. Also,the potential homes on the subject lots will be required to comply,and will comply as proposed by the applicant, with all applicable minimum setbacks. Similarly, the opportunity to have horse keeping will continue to be available. Horse corral locations are proposed at the northeast and southeast quadrants of Lots 1 and 5, respectively, and will be at least 70 feet from the nearest existing neighboring dwellings and the proposed dwellings on Lots 2 through 4. Lastly, Lots 1 and 5 will be 25,910 and 24,309 square feet in area, respectively,which will exceed the minimum lot area of 20,000 square feet applicable to the development district of the site. e. That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health,safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The reduced depth of the subject lots will not affect neighboring properties and/or property owners. Practical differences in the physical attributes/characteristics between the lots in the surrounding area and the subject lots will be limited. All proposed structures on each lot will comply with the applicable setbacks; the applicant is not requesting any modifications to the rear or front setbacks. Although the subject lots will be approximately 135 feet in depth, they will be approximately 190 feet in width. Therefore, the separation between structures and common property lines will be consistent with the existing residential development within this development district. The floor area (including the garage) of each of the proposed one-story homes on the subject lots will be generally equal to the floor areas of the surrounding homes. The overall floor area of the homes on Lots 1 and 5 will be 5,198 and 3,870 square feet, respectively. Similarly, the overall area of Lots 1 and 5 will be 25,910 and 24,309 square feet, respectively; the lot areas of the neighboring properties to the west at 13186 Arapaho Road and at 6323 Choctaw Place are 22,165 and 21,168 square feet, respectively. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative • Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and A,B,C & D- 234 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. xx-xx VARIANCE DRC2011-00963— K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 4 Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the • findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that,with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it,finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii)that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. • d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program, and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the reduction in the lot depth(from the required 200 feet minimum to approximately 135 feet) for Lots 1 and 5 of a proposed 5-lot subdivision in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place -APN: 0225-181-73. 2) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. • A,B,C & D- 235 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. xx-xx VARIANCE DRC2011-00963— K.U. &ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 5 • 1) All Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00964 shall apply. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2012 PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Luis Munoz, Jr., Chairman ATTEST: Jeffrey A. Bloom, Secretary I, Jeffrey A. Bloom, 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 13th day of June 2012 by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: • A,B,C & D- 236 ,( COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 44 DEPARTMENT la 1 Ill In r STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: DRC2010-00963 SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT: K.U. & ASSOCIATES EAST TERMINUS OF ARAPAHO ROAD BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND CHOCTAW PLACE LOCATION: APN: 0225-181-73 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: • General Requirements Completion Date 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. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 12-29, 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 activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. B. Time Limits 1. Variance approval shall expire if building permits are not issued or approved use has not _/ /_ commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include / /_ site plans, architectural elevations,exterior materials and colors,landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. • 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon,all Conditions / /_ of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 1 A,B,C & D- 237 Project No.DRC2010-00963 Completion Date 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and _/_/ State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety • Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be _/ /_ submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for /_/_ consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.)or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all _/ /_ other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. • • • • 2 I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2012 Res &Stf Rpt\DRC2011-00563 6-13.doc A,B,C & D- 238 RESOLUTION NO, 12-30 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2010-00964 A REQUEST TO REMOVE ONE (1) TREE IN CONJUNCTION WITH A 5-LOT SUBDIVISION AND CONSTRUCTION OF FIVE (5) SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES ON A PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE VERY LOW (VL) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, WITHIN THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE EAST TERMINUS OF ARAPAHO ROAD BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND CHOCTAW PLACE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 0225-181-73. A. Recitals. 1. K.U. & Associates filed an application for the approval of Tree Removal Permit DRC2010-00964 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tree Removal Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of June 2012 the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. • 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on June 13, 2012, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application is related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010, and Variance DRC2011-00963; and b. The application applies to a vacant parcel located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place; and c. The project site is a vacant parcel with an area of approximately 146,000 square feet (3.4 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 442 feet (east to west) by approximately 331 feet (north to south); and d. To the north, south, and west of the project site are single-family residences. To the east are a single-family residence and a telephone company facility. The only street access to the property is via Arapaho Road which terminates at the midpoint of the west property line of the site. Adjacent and parallel to the north property line is a Community Trail of approximately 20 feet in width, while adjacent and parallel to the west property line is a local equestrian trail of 15 feet in • width; and A,B,C & D- 239 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-30 DRC2011-00964— K.U. &ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 2 e. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is Very Low (VL) • Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan; and f. The tree is not designated as historically significant; and g. The tree is not specifically noted in the Etiwanda Specific Plan per Figure 5-13;and h. The applicant has submitted an arborist report assessing the health of the tree. The report observes that the tree is a Blue Gum Eucalyptus and is in good health; and i. It is necessary to remove the tree in order to grade the property, construct a single-family residence, and associated improvements on Lot.1 of the subdivision that will allow economic enjoyment of the property; and j. It is not necessary to remove the tree to construct required improvements within a flood control or utility right-of-way; and k. There are a significant number of mature and newly planted trees within the surrounding residential neighborhoods;the removal does not affect the established character of the area and the property values; and I. The tree cannot be preserved by pruning and proper maintenance or relocation rather than removal; and m. The tree does not constitute a significant natural resource of the City. • 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. The proposed project is in accord with the objectives of the Municipal Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and c. The proposed project is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and d. The proposed project, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: • A,B,C & D- 240 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-30 DRC2011-00964— K.U. & ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 3 • a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that,with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record • before it,finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. • d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the removal of one (1) tree in conjunction with a proposal to subdivide a vacant parcel with an area of approximately 146,000 square feet (3.4 acres) into five (5) lots in the Very Low(VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the east terminus of Arapaho Road between East Avenue and Choctaw Place; APN: 0225-181-73. 2) Section 19.08.100 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code requires that all Heritage trees be replaced on a one-for-one basis,not less than 15-gallon size. 3) The removed Blue Gum Eucalyptus tree shall be replaced with a • matching species (or equivalent)of a minimum 24-inch box size. A,B,C & D- 241 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-30 DRC2011-00964— K.U. &ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 4 • 4) This permit shall be valid for a period of 90 days, unless an extension is requested in writing at least 14 days prior to the expiration date. Where this permit is associated with development, the effective date begins and the 90 days shall start from the date of final map recordation or Building Permit issuance, whichever occurs first. 5) All Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18747, Development Review DRC2009-00010,and Variance DRC2011-00963 shall apply. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED-THIS 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2012. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Luis Munoz, Jr., Chairman ATTEST: _ • Jeffrey A. Bloom, Secretary I, Jeffrey A. Bloom, 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 13th day of June 2012, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: • ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: • A,B,C & D- 242 , .. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT it DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: DRC2011-00964 SUBJECT: TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPLICANT: K.U. & ASSOCIATES LOCATION: EAST TERMINUS OF ARAPAHO ROAD BETWEEN EAST AVENUE AND CHOCTAW PLACE— APN: 0225-181-73. ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. • APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: General Requirements Completion Date 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 attorneys 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. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 12-30, 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 activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. B. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include /_/_ site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors,landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department,the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions / /_ of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. . 3. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all _/ /_ other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the • time of building permit issuance. 1 A,B,C & D- 243 • STAFF REPORT �� PIANNINGDE'ARFMENF L • Date: June 13, 2012 • RANCHO To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA From: Jeffrey A. Bloom, Interim Planning Director By: Mike Smith, Associate Planner Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826 — RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. - A request to subdivide a vacant parcel of about 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre) into eight (8) lots in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of Interstate 15 - APN: 0227-012-24. Related file: Variance DRC2012-00127 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927 and Stockpile Permit PMT2011- 02122. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VARIANCE DRC2012-00127 - RBF ASSOCIATES, INC - A request to allow walls in excess of 6 feet, the maximum wall height permitted in residential districts, for noise attenuation and soil retaining purposes along the perimeter of a • proposed subdivision of a property of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre) into eight (8) lots in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of Interstate 15 - APN: 0227-012-24. Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826, Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927, and Stockpile Permit PMT2011-02122 - APN: 0227-012-24. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2011-00927 - RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. - A request to remove six (6) or more trees in conjunction with a proposed subdivision of a parcel of 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre) in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of Interstate 15. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826, Variance DRC2012-00127, and Stockpile Permit PMT2011-02122 - APN: 0227-012-24. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826, Variance DRC2011-00927, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00127 by adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval with conditions and issuance of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Single-Family Residences; Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan • South - Vacant; Office Professional (OP) District, Etiwanda Specific Plan East - Condominium complex; Medium (M) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan West - Single-Family Residences; Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan Items E F 4, G . PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 - RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 2 • B. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Low Medium Residential North - Low Medium Residential South - Office East - Medium Residential West - Low Medium Residential C. Site Characteristics: The project site is a parcel of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre) located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of the Ontario Freeway (1-15) (Exhibit B). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 645 feet (east to west) by approximately 124 feet (north to south). The site is vacant and until very recently was a drainage basin with an approximate depth of 15 feet. The site is currently being filled by the applicant with soil (Related file: Temporary Stockpile Permit DRC2011-00927) that was excavated as part of storm drain improvements that are being constructed by the City at a location south of the project site. There are numerous trees along the north perimeter of the project site along the Lima Avenue street frontage. To the north and west of the project site are single-family residences (Tract 15912), while to the east, across East Avenue, is a condominium complex (Tract 16335). To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from the southbound Interstate 15 Freeway to Base Line Road. The zoning of the property and the properties to the north and west is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the property and the properties to the east is Medium (M) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the south • is Office Professional (OP) District and is currently owned by the City. The subject property and all surrounding properties are within the Etiwanda Specific Plan (Exhibit C). As previously noted, the subject property was a drainage basin; the surrounding topography is generally level with a southerly slope; the elevations at the north and south perimeter are approximately 1,312 feet and 1,308 feet, respectively. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into eight (8) lots for single-family residential development (Exhibit D). Development/construction of the homes following the subdivision of the property will be by others, as it is not the intent of the applicant to do so. All of the lots will comply with the development standards applicable to this zoning district as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Individual lot areas will range between 8,649 square feet to 16,526 square feet, which are in excess of the minimum of 7,200 square feet that is required. The minimum average lot area is 10,281 square feet, which is in excess of the minimum 10,000 square feet that is required. The depth of each lot will be at least 100 feet, and the width of each lot will meet the required 60-foot dimension. All of the lots will be conventional, i.e. rectangular in shape, which will allow conventional house plotting. The proposed subdivision has two major design issues that are driven by technical considerations. The first issue is the finished pad elevations of each lot. Because of the need for surface water to drain, i.e. flow to, and the sewer lines of each lot to connect to the existing sewer line beneath the surface of Lima Drive, the finished pad elevations of each lot must be higher than the finished surface at the street. To accomplish this, the average pad elevation will be approximately • 1,313.9 feet. These raised pad elevations will result in a difference in elevation between the project site and the properties to the south and west. The project site will be at least 4 feet higher than the properties to the south and between at least 4 to 6 feet higher than the properties to the west. E, F&G- 2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 - RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 • Page 3 The second design issue is the overall height of the combination walls along the south, east, and west perimeter of the project site. The combination walls will be comprised of a lower retaining wall and an upper screen/garden or noise attenuating wall. The overall height of these walls will be in excess of 6 feet, the maximum height that is permitted in residential districts. The applicant has submitted a Variance request to allow for the increase in wall height (Related file: Variance DRC2012-00127). The higher pad elevations and increased wall height will have an aesthetic impact on the properties to the west at 7185 and 7195 Acorn Place. The house located at 7185 Acorn Place is single-story with a pad elevation of approximately 1,311 feet, while the house located at 7195 Acorn Place is two-stories with a pad elevation of approximately 1,309 feet. Lot 1 of the proposed subdivision will have a pad elevation of 1,314 feet. As seen from 7185 Acorn Place, the combination wall will have an overall height of up to approximately 10 feet. As seen from 7195 Acorn Place, the combination wall will have an overall height of up to approximately 12 feet but will only extend to approximately half the length of the rear property line of that property. These same conditions will have a relatively limited impact on the property to the south. It is vacant and there is pending reconstruction of the interchange of the Interstate 15 Freeway and Base Line Road. Future practical development of this property will be precluded by the improvements associated with the interchange (roadway, overpass, embankments, etc.). Also, although the property is owned by the City, as part of the interchange reconstruction project, Caltrans will acquire the property from the • City. Two alternative solutions that were considered which would have minimized the differences in pad elevation between 7185/95.Acorn Place and Lot 1 were a) allow water to drain from Lot 1 directly onto the property to the south, or b) allow the construction of a drainage pipe across the property to the south that would then connect to a storm drain at Base Line Road. These solutions would have provided the opportunity for both the finished grading at Lot 1 and the combination wall along the common property line to be modified to have a lower height. To address the height of the walls between 7185/95 Acorn Place and Lot 1, the applicant independently proposed having a slope along the west side of Lot 1 that would have allowed for a set of terraced walls. This solution was dependent on drainage being allowed to the south. Similarly, the applicant proposed a slope along the south side of the project site, within the limits of the property to the south that would have allowed for the elimination of the retaining portion of the combination wall along the south perimeter of the site. Staff requested that the Engineering/Public Works Department (the lead department coordinating the interchange project) discuss these solutions with Caltrans as they will be the ultimate owner of the property to the south. After several meetings, Caltrans responded that they would not allow drainage on or through the property, nor any grading on the property. Neighborhood Meeting: A neighborhood meeting was conducted to gather input and comments from the owners of the surrounding properties within 660 feet of the project site. This meeting was held at Comfort Inn located at 13500 Base Line Road in Fontana (approximately 0.25 mile from the project site) on March 1, 2012 (Exhibit F). The only attendees from the neighborhood were the owner/residents of the properties located at 7185 Acorn Place (Mr. and Ms. Patrick Apodaca) and • 7195 Acorn Place (Ms. Roxanna Rivera). The applicant discussed with the owners of the properties the project including, more specifically, the perimeter wall along the common property lines and the pad elevation of Lot 1 as described above. Both property owners understood the E, F&G- 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 - RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 4 • background of these issues and that they cannot be resolved by modifying the proposal. They understood the rationale for the grade differences and the height of the combination walls, and they also recognized the conditions that will be present once the subdivision is completed. Mr. and Ms. Patrick Apodaca (7185 Acorn Place) stated a preference for a combination wall (as opposed to terraced walls) as he wanted to maximize his privacy and eliminate the potential for maintenance problems in any gaps between walls that would be visible from his side. Ms. Roxanna Rivera (7195 Acorn Place) stated that she wanted the wall to step-down, i.e. gradually lower in height, from its maximum height to the height of her existing wall instead of ending abruptly at the midpoint of her rear property line. Both of these property owners' requests have been incorporated as conditions of approval in the Resolution of Approval. Staff has also incorporated a condition requiring that a 10-foot interior side yard setback along the west property line of Lot 1 to ensure that the future home on that lot will be as far as practically possible from the property line. B. Grading and Technical Review Committees: The Grading Review Committee (Addington and Miller) and Technical Review Committee reviewed the application on March 20, 2012. The Committees accepted the proposal and recommends approval. Their conditions have been incorporated into the Resolution of Approval. C. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee (Munoz, Wimberly, and Granger) reviewed the application on March 20, 2012 (Exhibit G). The Committee reviewed the proposed subdivision and accepted it as submitted after concluding that the design/layout of the tract is standard for the zoning district and area of the project site. The Committee noted that the house • product would be reviewed later when the developer of the site submitted the plans and that the opportunity for additional comments would occur at that time. Staff identified the finished pad elevations of each lot and the height of the combination walls as major design issues and explained the technical reasons that warranted these solutions. The noise attenuating purpose of these walls was understood by the Committee as generally typical for residential projects along the freeway corridors. Similarly, they understood the need for the subdivision to have adequate drainage and sewer connections. However, the Committee had reservations about the height of the wall and pad elevation of Lot 1 along the west perimeter and the corresponding aesthetic impact both conditions would have on the properties to the west; the matter was discussed extensively with Staff and the applicant. Staff explained that the owners of those properties were both in attendance at the neighborhood meeting and that the issues were fully disclosed to them. Staff indicated that these property owners accepted the walls and pad elevation of Lot 1 subject to conditions that would address their concerns regarding maintenance, aesthetics, and privacy. The Committee accepted that there were no practical alternatives available. The Committee recommends approval and their conditions have been incorporated into the Resolution of Approval. D. Variance DRC2012-00127: The applicant submitted a Variance to allow the construction of combination walls along the south, east, and west perimeters of the proposed subdivision that will be in excess of 6 feet in height (Exhibit I). Per Section 17.08.060(K) of the Development Code, the maximum height of walls permitted in residential districts is 6 feet. The combination walls will be comprised of a lower retaining wall and an upper screen/garden or noise attenuating wall. These combination walls are necessary because a) the finished surface elevation of the proposed subdivision requires the importation of fill that will need to be retained at the project perimeter and b) because.noise impacts generated, principally, by traffic on the Ontario Freeway (Interstate 15 Freeway), need to be mitigated as discussed in an acoustical analysis prepared by the applicant's • consultant. The height of the combination walls will be approximately 10.5 feet along the east property line (3 feet retaining, 7.5 feet noise attenuating) parallel to East Avenue, approximately E, F&G- 4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 - RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 • Page 5 14 to 17 feet along the south property line (up to 8 feet retaining, 6 to 9 feet noise attenuating), and between approximately 10 to 12 feet along the west property line (4 to 6 feet retaining, 6 feet screening). Staff notes that the final overall height of all walls may be slightly higher than proposed by the applicant (no more than one foot on the south perimeter and 6 inches on the west perimeter) depending on the review of the precise Grading Plan and associated improvements (such as drainage) during plan check. Facts for Findings: The purpose of a Variance is to provide flexibility from the strict application of development standards. In order to grant a request for a Variance, the Planning Commission must make a series of findings. Generally, these findings focus on unique or special circumstances applicable to a specific property. The following are facts to support the necessary findings: 1. Finding: That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objective of this Code. Fact/s: The proposed walls along the east and south perimeters of the project site are for noise attenuation purposes to reduce the exterior noise levels at the lots along the perimeter of the proposed subdivision. The height of the walls is necessary to mitigate the noise impacts to a level that is less than 65 dBA CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) as specified in the Development Code. If the walls were • limited to 6 feet as specified in the Code, or if the walls were absent altogether, the exterior noise levels would not comply with the Code, nor be consistent with Public Health and Safety policies relating to noise (Goal PS-13 of the General Plan). The retaining portion of these walls is necessary to retain soil that will need to be imported in order to raise the finished surface elevation at the project perimeter to allow for adequate surface drainage to Lima Drive and accommodate sewer connections. There is no practical alternative to these walls. 2. Finding : That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone. Fact/s: The project site is located generally adjacent to the Ontario Freeway (Interstate 15 Freeway) and the southbound off ramp that links the freeway to Base Line Road. As a result, it is exposed to noise generated by traffic that is generally not present near other residential properties in the City that are screened by existing development and/or sufficiently distant from these principal noise sources that noise impacts are negligible. 3. Finding: That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same zone. Facts: The purpose of the walls is to attenuate traffic noise. The exterior noise levels • generated by traffic exceed the maximum limits established by the Development Code and would negatively affect a future homeowner's ability to enjoy and use the outdoor areas of his property in the absence of these walls. Furthermore, the effectiveness of noise attenuating materials used in the construction of the homes E, F&G- 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 - RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 6 • is augmented by the presence of the noise attenuating perimeter wall. The absence of the wall would reduce the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures and expose the occupants of the homes to elevated interior noise. 4. Finding: That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same zone. Fact/s: The Ontario Freeway (1-15) corridor within the City is adjacent to numerous residential properties. Traffic noise impacts along the corridor must be mitigated to levels as described in the Development Code and consistent with the General Plan. The freeway corridor abuts various residential zoning districts including the Low Medium (LM) Residential District. Walls of this height or similar are common along the freeway corridor for noise attenuation purposes where residential properties are adjacent to the freeway. 5. Finding: The granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to the properties or improvements in the vicinity. Fact/s: The wall segment along East Avenue will be generally similar to existing walls for other residential development along East Avenue and in the general vicinity of the freeway that were constructed for noise attenuating and/or grading related purposes. This segment, and associated landscaping, will be constructed per the decorative design shown in Figure 5-28A of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The wall • segment as seen from the Ontario Freeway (1-15) will be similar to the height of other noise attenuation walls along the freeway corridor within the City. This segment will be constructed per the decorative design established by Caltrans. The property adjacent to the wall along the south perimeter of the proposed subdivision is vacant. There is pending reconstruction of the interchange of the freeway and Base Line Road. Future practical development of this property will be precluded by the improvements associated with the interchange (roadway, overpass, embankments, etc.). Also, although the property is owned by the City, as part of the interchange reconstruction project, Caltrans will acquire the property from the City. This segment also will be constructed per the decorative design established by Caltrans. The wall segment along the west property line will have the most impact on the properties at 7185 and 7195 Acorn Place. At the request and acceptance of the owners/residents of both properties, the applicant will design and construct the wall in a manner that will be the least disruptive to them including leaving the existing property line wall in place, i.e. constructing the new wall parallel and immediately adjacent to the existing wall; constructing the new wall with decorative block; and visually integrating the new wall with the existing wall by gradually lowering its height from its maximum height to the height of the existing wall instead of ending abruptly at the midpoint of the rear property line at 7195 Acorn Place. E. Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00127: The proposed project includes the removal of twenty-nine (29) trees that are located along the north perimeter of the project site adjacent to Lima Drive. The applicant has submitted a Tree Removal Permit for the removal of these trees. The applicant has • submitted an arborist report assessing the health of the trees. The report observes that the trees are Eucalyptus that range between poor and good health and are infested with a variety of insects E, F&G- 6 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 - RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 • Page 7 including beetles. It is necessary to remove the trees because of their condition and in order to grade the site, construct future single-family residences, and associated improvements, which will allow economic enjoyment of the property. Replacement trees of the same species or similar and of a minimum size of 15-gallons will be required to be planted on a one-to-one basis elsewhere within the project site. F. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, Staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to, for example, air quality.(including greenhouse gases), biological resources, hydrology/water quality, and noise, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the mitigation measures for the project. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. No correspondence has been received. • Respectfully submitted, f rey •. - oom, Interim Planning Director JAB:MS/ge Attachments: Exhibit A - Location Map Exhibit B - Aerial Photo Exhibit C - Site Utilization Map Exhibit D - Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826 Exhibit E - Grading Plan and Sections Exhibit F - Neighborhood Meeting Sign-In Sheet and Summary Exhibit G - Design Review Committee Action Comments, dated March 20, 2012 Exhibit H - Figure 5-2 (Etiwanda Specific Plan) Exhibit I - Site Plan for Variance DRC2011-00927 Exhibit J - Initial Study Parts I and II Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826 Draft Resolution of Approval for Variance DRC2012-00127 Draft Resolution of Approval for Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927 • E, F&G- 7 $ 91' any 4 5 S„A 4, € ! En € 'p4tm .• t '1 wm"w I '3' E a".. Y....��. 5 . u. i 6 ti E m Y " ! h C P TE I s, 5S � • a Ol w ! ,..mod. °� € ! € ""'' I >e. ”! ...� I v. 6r IT£ FIRE STATION¢` ; � 'yc E NO6 PROJECT SITE 4' y lc 2 �� NW AZ '' im ! pRU . 4Y1 'ky IN ' Z r'F 7,i't y �%Y P k��, ang4 Fy i PYIR b I l'Y of iii a A tel tT gn .. �.0 t ¢ 9 ''.a, i I ".... ti t i€gym .t,i 9' a t rai pa „ , k . .cig S °6 d S :� £ ' is '.3 nos �� °.£ E gv, \' s _ .a i 'i € ° # ice !� 1 ww.> �. QR � � � � L ' 3 �H ( fl p'n 'J EtEME A Y dj:, I R ar, A y S♦ 3 C g gy .+^k [ 9 "i(. NE aI> ci9c; 3 4 a - ? 9 ,.ttx p3 ( F { E kg e / ■ HRE SOTA310N )(k .. - J >/ I ✓ ',/ jj q9 RN t F 6 47E C >t fi g & sE'� t tF EM A. f w f e b .. } r >->ia'"f a �, s. 8 H 4 �i ? i . . .. R k ^ i ' uun.na ti> u� >� E ^tLIIAFFEV GAFCIA " [ 'Leo��oyy�'.'+�..—.._.__ a --; n, g II.HE ,,,--- _ p9 F e.u.rv�no t ti > rc t m;: MM p i i _ ! WINERY !! I .�" fnd ✓a lit, £ I 1 ¢ �I ( < �' -'u "... > c----, s a Xw.✓ i -' "` ..L t`yrW jj R, _ £ FO N1 l 5 'Sryry EIEMFNi F f, ""'n—a.,',,, ' r \ a71 f! ' e - rv' 1"� g m rcR.. . F F GT f k 11: `/, VICTORIA GARDENS"--•�-- ! [ ,.... ay jj CENTER [� rcEN drti f ' CULTURAL�� LIBRARY 9AeS j EIEAE R :� •RN F � o� . �bF m". i .,3 s I 1 PRO 1 � i4 l ".@ 8 Sd i L( ROP o RcuR 9 IHOTELbs m tI[ I e ii i d j . I 1 EXHIBIT �4 1 �® E, F&G 8 i ! rc 6719.970 T wt' ! Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826, Tree Removal Permit DRC2011 -00963, and Variance DRC2012-00127 R $+•. a � g�c% .fvr,�c,�� "F' 'F tt yy„„��S1Mk�,�t�tite'- �3 tr ! �W 1 v.��"y r:w..fra ' u a`e .W.3].... {ft7�4&14"$ 3p .✓ � ) 4»(.. e,4 _.'.,._-Ja1 " c S� entity■ r } '' tr a' . yT'✓ ��Y li a i iu:F 4 M X44 },,.,�,'F' C h'f• .,ry11� It .>r � .�A- +'' t�4 d+l lC r„,, �j1 �`tst... xk Fy, ^%,,,§u�.ye � xx• s ,.: W7y§t xk 4'41 Y,: red A t. r� !III Ty r# -'4' r" y,�. 4 ,...., . a, L r• •h -"+' + . 5 A '�..u'.c(t es, lc-. , • , t i'4 7' ,N-1 -'S-. y } �. ,''4'4' 2• Y✓ l`e1wl L� - r•4, . l ii,pwa t. r J y ) r It:u44�,.-, 4.'..er e. y k i 'lark t '�y * -nr�: ' �F.Sihre r l t''4+ s w x ,. i+...'.,.,,, 4..s a o-F. ' ps e„-',”. r � ° i tIs&; rt 3 . l 4 r /wt-.6' ; r •,� t'xay x. 4yr < a e",c11 " �> 4 ,22.;11";;;* y .�4•t.'71 -.4..rr,�.$'' ,. ... . iQ Y CSy. { ' e..-1 f�x(zFee �1 ,ejry , �<Y:*-'5:„.i— � �� , 'd-} i9! 1"!` ''II t'` ^• , fK n ,t4'�S'�a, „P . ° ry>, G`t4x.. aa a ';f$'l 4 e, T+9., y ': r<4+ p,, ° �. H391 ,+&a .. + r r at._ ^Kira l'M..J a 0 c^M ' ..6r Jlr i.7,%.-74:4:',1", . �b a' a,,* �'•j #3itlq 4 "C .. y, S �^s e9 (gjtL"* � Y s .T.:.- .t� -u� t`' u . ,y„^'tkil� ▪ Fop[[::jj g 1� trsi .we+� r, t v.�1`z,. a.. �y1 t ,-eµl'•k � ° � ��"'+�" ?�" � ,3+✓�p �1....�� 14Y' -�"a,� 4 � � 1 iGl�.ss�`S A:ia�-- 'h '. " f j e-7-- '*-s_,"•+�,.. .a. - 3s'r- -,-w---v 5 C l S n�"$ �'� T .IV t=P. ,...,,...,. ..:-,-7,..-' 0,7:-.....-..,_..,„-., c1"0:i° r R E '; „ � l..,er e,4. � Y'Pro ect 'kr • ... " l c4� It irw ••e� , '!G ]e e .4;-,4.--. .1^ fi. sir,4 f. .,tFu's,sn +.'+.-yPx� a y7 i v� 3 . ..,e "" i y' .2:-:1- 1� r x • vt g. ,�,J,i dl"d r'7 's.',r imbra kl.'' �'" �^�' s-.m • i , i 3 4' {,x F ,". z,+'. + ' 4 .�zr^Ik' xS �u. %d+'.w , . ..?' µ "''' a r x:-N l�v``.....,...r+ � :. r ii "'a l r 1,,. t,:•r. E 'Q ,^ `Yrr,4s'x'i.-r ., 'JC ro ,, G " y v xy r n s 'l'' fi G> • v L -t .�. l �r - s , -7 ,.s fix.. c 2' r✓ « v ?-:r'` :"i'. �. 9"� ..a.. x E ,i 1? L arT y,;„;•, 'a' ft,„.4,%c,t "Y JS' ..,'''', ,..,},a .nu♦-.-�s S�`E� # , t a r! ar • Yy -7 qr x ..80-^.rT,� � �^y:: v' yly4fj s�'' Y` ,Zc�k 5 �. ra . '.. k� ,V`e"-I eta.�>c� .. ' sXt c, y, ,{ v 4 r , f + r 11. �,, , �: � � ,,y, •&•:',r2 ieai(P. 5 nn cr+a'7• p� .x' ,1 rNr' y. �ifir rF 4 �4,e?:1;? c t ,.R{• X f� 4 3ql.'� c, 7y T. "i'? ,.. t. CM�� i.t 140;i 1, t•'i ,ea+,fFr " �'"'x pis. h,,,I �'k"."�^ .�`.ri -r?z, cfisr�"' 1 f nF'�urs a' '`` y y "'- ° ^i Y+" "� * {" 'al t}l+`� '4" j v °r, �.�e��,Y,qq' s }�'k�{ r:' p�„`'Ti F 4,7 1`+ .r y yu S. '�a' a z'°'1 •n ,rr 4+t44+x �.,--�,..*' -A, + 't t"r..r:F»+.:(( 4rk ' _.: rMK.rr4"/ ? s .°',� w , ;' +,y ''e. g ... i„.1 sdy,uW'" + 5.� " 6 y e r,i,.�✓5, !'idCY&' 'u^,li�sa t.x+et, &�i n,a +��5� e' =ate' r' dr. r L ° Cy ,,mss 1, v r Y, u v^i a M 'n�}r y,, ti z,c; x ( , v pi S # x S P"v+4 13Z 14.... F i e . . ,.W'"e ,. e' A"y^r9 r ;L 7 A''�'9:44:i'�^' l ! r'l R3; 1 "+�. ,,T s .t� R.'� F r a +' '`y J n e_Y V3 7z&'^^ �^fy�. �« 5 as. .1 `w` Bs,:+Sr'+Yas rS Ie "' x i'" • e„ n�.1',� 'r��.��qq. 4JSy3'•r '*' .. 7-t .+9' -..,.i.1:115-Pr ch rt 5 k wr' >tv v r�•S 'Y n r rva ,4e L "m'Vr~' ,uya; . r c., a.. `ba - l k,"*" ry Y d�. c acjVk r ';;..41$'1,4./,,;S+v � yi x axx e t 3 a x d "atrr.: , '� .r'1 �. r ^ v µfi, x d liq,,:. +7 ; e rg .. ` S ` ..,,myC , 1 Y'^ 4 G e ti x+M t rr l r?Te n "Val a .A A'. ,�i`�{1 +y yr" Trm"4L t [ I k f'L Y{ N^ r� 6 9 Vi wr?Y• fh a , 1 r" r "�YkER .,' w3 k TT y� Jtii ,' ' 4 s -#k�j+ r .,to tM4�(4?..i cj kN , r! k x?ti n i �''�yyF - + yy�ex' .- ,.. , 4eYw. Y� �' ':' x.4b� J � -$;� r� �.+� ' �"r + ! �rcc a T"l7 a w s +�.a` :te `� :"' 4 .�! X i1 • . ,yxxedy tl � }� 0 '�."? ilio,e 4-,14 v ,. e �1r L.' y i✓ .`�� -,Ii,� w ,gb," F.Y 4 ',- .- r t : ✓ 4 y ..-r.+."'.' , !� 4 �4y�'v y r . k 'm r 4�f' } � v S ,d J r4 .� a, rt a.ti^ya,-• IS. ,,,v,,{,,; rC ^etfw � .tt 6�� ctt ,me S>1:: n� ��r n A' uc 'l+uw*rm 7-44,i, �f:dM>,y S a y �6 �,,e�^to )Jr.�,�"y�'b'4Y�ub7.�'f."S r 6: fee -*.`�.•al‘C f � l j"C4 1, a^� �� l EXHIBIT • aq z a f„ 4 '4b d,,u •+u. M,2-LePAN•gA -- . °$ - _ . �p0.,'astr 7.., � R p v� 9 �ye•y r p'2v 'p L7 {4 � :it4 f y "'� Tu e .. +}Y., #i9yF ¢`le4', W Z k yt ''" ''., 4.4.44r..-,,,.,r+ , .' t ,h m . ✓, s ,.7..r.V Rg"Z JL" __- ^.:' 5'�ew w r` ` i �:d�''' fGC,J w :it igt � Q a a , // 4/// • ��, @�/ asp �p`�' �2 2 i a =$ ifi€k.� i. 3� ! Q ti! s �� �_ Q tali s ai a q. o aE Q;m q4 1 ti€ a p B �pg1 Li 2 � i 33 a .. .�u��9 1 L2 WH L: h < 11 1 'I j .1 Q N 86Ca l&I � 6 r pso L e , ICI j M k67 7/iii " 's z <I2 i C i 26 c£ @ e €€ a _:le f 1 I I \ . J w �; T Si ,� ,QQ • ry N I �_1 • _ 3/d✓3/4 1SV3 �� ,\ \\----‘,..,, :v.___, 1 \ \ 19 N379 N33L'9 ` I „VN W. I \ 1I I a— d' j Y I �' 11 I � 1 i / ! . LaIHt N \ lar75VS/ B - 4 , LL O e . _ a° .--,), punt I � ii_` 37417'N21094' . EL .I IIflI *i��� \ OWt = Wp 1 tirF e 11111 - �_,,,a173L%lLSbd % 1 - J 37V7cl 23153a =1 • ,i� II EXHIBITC E, F&G— 10 r4 z g. .8 q I`ti:" ; f t_.11e % A 1,14 t a f", §@& it F A 4g 1! �"'f� re4 �pe 9 y a F3p d ft 1. F S t¢ II S6.1 Epp 1 i pi n6 I tt pp st ; Ea I�� �£ g � &iII S o S y 4 t4 @ � Ill9• a L .y p X883 r e "y qq g t ]]Eqi � k @ @@¢¢ & w !1[F � l� I {: till pcd6 M 5 $ � 6 �' pCa 0 Y ft ; 1 z• 1.---1- 'i4 is 45 / ill g 4 i/i/qqY @ § E ba Bt C x [t 2 ?ia 1 \ @ i d Hlb ; J.ci l \3/N3/1k'1� j@' J � ,I W @ Lr!\1 a ,I, I. 1 9@ oe \ q I C n Al.... S � ; 9c 5 Q I I � ip w ' 114 I� ,,,... P W O , k am i n •"o II e c Ct k. ..x P;I a .�.ax a 8 . % air r r ® :y .. ' 1 a ! &'0°39 0 ),:: a ' d 'n0J YSl>3 g 4 it .I-p tt . . ' 0 ry ll Et; i- sy 6Pc a rp � asf, j eppy E + i9F Y hi g • Rf • 1 Pi r= .. . - aOu r q,aow nt III, ors rooa . _ ' . 9�91P EXHIBIT D t, -&b— 11 •Lt i ; �' e1Rpp-e°I ii !lie itgq sue. w e N rge kF6 faei�, .4"9 ? z . :, �z t d1 m a ( 5 F �wti gg a • k a v \, D V E e R. I WI U �Q� ts$s3 S _p 1N ,It �A Pi ,- e; i Iii. Z1. Ids Wozz):Alit N } k' i ail \ e , ag--`I �: id i �� a +T `^ a w Sala fr it, �� Q vQ OW e" y 2 4 p 44 ' i .„„ , l9 aR � J � Bi, 4ll E4 al le§<s il I , k e Q € a id tg BF 3/7�3/�N 15Nd pjp ... 3i ' s . ii •• � — f J �' ��- _ P ie ° Y Q _ Q ,w 4 11 I. a sixes 1 I n U. I ux a i l tl6 - Q 1 s al�� , ® � j , J I"r. (31 d ' I '1)"t‘„ i _ Q _ia�02 N379 N33a9 , - v.. ti ki I '1' �i l (e∎ - iv 4 i o-, er @.. . / 4 it ._�� � �. Q �, i 0 i.ee I III o' V ' �_ i �w Ilk ° r�l ▪ J : I n _ ,� J I . (1 v I ti > i' 1 b I �y t 1 E r Q .�.4'N I I SI .1 0 ■ 1 n I ■ J F $ lit I v B o - � ,',1-1 _I tiri , %_o p �y ,, , 1 a Po 'Lp I' Ie ... j_ 1p `V ' aw If'rill v k § >� 1 i 8 It ,� tt1 i 'I I I I` P ,06 00 sNcln'3 p e ' �' Z — .�I -1 , l ai II .ail c . .__ = 4i I CI\?:, I .11 e ,9II II 'di a - a a I e e Q, q EXHIBIT E E,F&G— 12 O: S€ , AT yp e � �_ �i gg�'99 aaA d U Q no tt Q • 14 i- zh ro g ii$ '1 Ups ' �� 8 @e Iq - lS Q §e —:1-.55. a ill ag1l( 1 $ ice' m-iV -- ' k ' 1 ✓pima/3 k, — I — g cri Q a =,iCk 1 W I a I I W psi QI I d e1' lad hi& @e m Nr All a $ $ 4 ! g $g �I g R g 5a ..a>mca • E, F&G- 13 • RBF Associates - Tract 18826 Neighborhood Meeting, March 1, 2012 Name Street Address [oAc no Zr ' 1 ,s 11-(pin PE. MT-44g V th.- ^I AO° c-a— 4 c 'Lit1 P • • EXHIBIT F E, F&G 14 RBF Associates • Tract 18826 Neighborhood Meeting March 1, 2012 Attendance: 1. Jonathan Friedman, Applicant 2. Mike Smith, City of Rancho Cucamonga 3. Mr. & Mrs. Pat Apodaca 4. Mrs. Rozana Rivera & daughter The.meeting started at 6:35 with a brief presentation to both families. The 2 neighbors represented.both live adjacent to the site at the west property line. 'I have spoken with both families some over the past month. The proposed-concept along with Alternative A-were explained to the neighbors. Both neighbors appear to support the proposed concept being some kind of wall on.the common line rather than Alt. A. (slope up and then-second wall). Suggested conditions: • Lot 1 shall be restricted to a 1—story home. • Lot 1 house shall be set as far to the eastas:reasonably possible. The other.issue discussed was how to physically construct the retaining and garden wall, 1 • agreed to research with the City the history of the existing wall as it appears it may have some retaining characteristics. The neighbor's preference into maybe just add height to their wall for both retaining and garden, but am not sure if the existing foundation will support that. If it would support more height but not additional retaining we would build:a separate retaining wall adjacent. The situation of the slope versus retaining wall on the south property line was explained but neither family.expressed concern either way. The meeting was adjourned at 7:25 -J' onathan Friedman, RBF Associates • E,F&G- 15 • DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:40 p.m. Mike Smith March 20, 2012 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826 - RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. - A request to subdivide a vacant parcel of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre) into eight (8) lots in the Low-Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of 1-15 Freeway - APN: 0227-012-24. Related file: Variance DRC2012-00127. Site Characteristics: The project area is parcel of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 645 feet (east to west) by approximately 124 feet (north to south). The site is vacant and recently was used as a drainage basin with an approximate depth of 15 feet. The site is currently being filled by the applicant with soil (Related file: Temporary Stockpile Permit DRC2011-00927) that was excavated as part of storm drain improvements that are being constructed by the City at a location south of the project site. There are numerous trees along the north perimeter of the project site along the Lima Avenue street frontage. To the north and west of the project site are single-family residences (Tract 15912), while to the east across East Avenue, is a condominium complex (Tract 16335). To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from the southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. The zoning of the property and the properties to the north and west is Low-Medium (LM) Residential *District. The zoning of the property and the properties to the east is Medium (M) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the south is Office Professional (OP) Residential District and is currently owned by the City. The subject property and all surrounding properties are within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. As previously noted, the subject property was a drainage basin; the surrounding topography is generally level with a southerly slope; the elevations at the north and south perimeter are approximately 1,312.feet and 1,308 feet, respectively. The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into eight (8) lots; the applicant does not intend to construct the homes at this time. All lots will comply with the development standards applicable to this zoning district as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Individual lot areas will range between 8,649 square feet to 16,526 square feet, which are in excess of the minimum of 7,200 square feet that is required. The minimum average lot area is 10,281 square feet, which is in excess of the minimum 10,000 that is required. The minimum lot depth is 100 feet and the minimum lot width is 60 feet. All lots will meet these dimensions. In order to develop the property, the removal of trees is required (Related file: Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927). The proposed subdivision has two major design issues that are driven by technical considerations. The first issue is the finished pad elevations of each lot. Because of the need for surface water to drain, i.e. flow, to Lima Avenue and the sewer lines of each lot to connect to the existing sewer line at the street, the finished pad elevations of each lot must be higher than the finished surface at Lima Avenue. To accomplish this, the average pad elevation will be approximately 1,313.9 feet. These raised pad elevations will result in a difference in elevation between the project site and the properties to the south and west. The project site will be at least 4 feet higher than the properties to the south, and between 4 to 6 feet higher than the properties to the west. • EXHIBIT G E, F&G- 16 • DRC ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18826— RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. • March 20, 2012 Page 2 The second design issue is the overall height of the combination walls along the south, east, and west perimeter of the project site. The combination walls will be comprised of a lower retaining section and an upper screen, or noise attenuating wall. The overall height of these walls will be in excess of 6 feet, the maximum height that is permitted in residential districts. These combination walls are necessary because a) the finished surface elevation of the proposed subdivision requires the importation of fill that will need to be retained at the project perimeter and b) because noise impacts generated, principally, by traffic on the 1-15 Freeway, need to be mitigated as discussed in a Noise Study prepared by the applicant's consultant. The height of the combination walls will be approximately 10.5 feet along the east property line (3 feet retaining, 7.5 feet noise attenuating), approximately 14 to 17 feet along the south property line (up to 8 feet retaining, 6 to 9 feet noise attenuating), and between 10 to 12 feet-along the west property line (4 to 6 feet retaining, '6 feet screening). The applicant has submitted a Variance request to allow for the increase in wall height as described (Related file: Variance DRC2012-00127). The higher pad elevations and increased wall height will have an aesthetic impact on the properties to the west at 7185 and 7195 Acorn Place. The house located at 7185 Acorn Place is one-story with a pad elevation of approximately 1,311 feet, while the house located at 7195 Acorn Place is two-stories with a pad elevation of approximately 1,309 feet. Lot 1 of the proposed subdivision will have a pad elevation of 1,314 feet. As seen from 7185 Acorn Place, the combination wall will have an overall height of up to 10 feet. As seen from 7195 Acorn Place, the combination wall will have an overall height of up to 12 feet but will only extend to approximately half the length of her rear property line. These same conditions will • have a relatively limited impact on the property to the south. It is vacant and there is pending reconstruction of the interchange of the 1-15 Freeway and Base Line Road. Future practical development of this property will be precluded by the improvements associated with the interchange (roadway, overpass, embankments, etc.). Also, although the property is owned by the City, as part of the interchange reconstruction project Caltrans will acquire the property from the City. Two alternative solutions that were considered that would have minimized the differences in pad elevation between 7185/95 Acorn Place and Lot 1 were a) allow water to drain from Lot 1 directly onto the property to the south, or b) allow the construction of a drainage pipe across the property to the south that would then connect to a storm drain at Base Line Road. These solutions would have provided the opportunity for both the finished grading at Lot 1 and the combination wall along the common property line to be modified to have a lesser impact. To address the height of the walls between 7185 Acorn Place and 1795 Acorn Place and Lot 1, the applicant independently proposed having a slope along the west side of Lot 1 that would have allowed for a set of terraced walls (this solution was dependent on drainage being allowed to the south). Similarly, the applicant proposed a slope along the south side of the project site (within the limits of the property to the south) that would have allowed for the elimination of the retaining portion of the combination wall along the south perimeter of the site. Staff requested that the Engineering/Public Works Department (the lead department coordinating the interchange project) discuss these solutions with Caltrans as they will be the ultimate owner of the property to the south. After several meetings, Caltrans responded that they would not allow drainage on or through the property, nor any grading on the property. At the Neighborhood Meeting held on March 1, 2012, the applicant had the opportunity to discuss the 9 9 PP PP Y project with the owners of the properties at 7185 Acorn Place and 7195 Acorn Place. Both property • owners understood the background of these issues and that they cannot be resolved by modifying the E,F&G- 17 DRC ACTION AGENDA •SUBTT18826 — RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. March 20, 2012 Page 3 proposal. They understand the rationale for the grade differences and the height of the combination walls, and they also recognize the conditions that will be present once the subdivision is completed. The homeowner at 7185 Acorn Place stated a preference for a combination wall (as opposed to terraced walls) as he wanted to maximize his privacy and eliminate the potential for maintenance problems in any gaps between walls that would be visible from his side. The property owner at 7195 Acorn Place stated that she wanted the wall to step-down from its maximum height to the height of her existing wall instead of ending abruptly at the midpoint of her rear property line. Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee discussion. Maior/Secondary Issues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion regarding this project. 1. Staff recommends the following conditions of approval to ensure that the impacts of the above-noted major issues are reasonably mitigated: a. Per Section 5.42.608 the Etiwanda Specific Plan, two-story structures should not be planned for corner parcels. Although there are no actual corner lots proposed, to minimize privacy concerns between Lot 1 and the existing residences at 7185 Acorn Place and • 7195 Acorn Place, the single-family residence at Lot 1 shall be a one-story. b. Although the property at 7175 Green Glen Court (at the easterly side of the project site) is not affected by these issues, the single-family residence at Lot 8 also shall be a one-story. This will ensure that a minimum of 25 percent of the subdivision will be single-story structures consistent with the policy of the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission. c. Double-wall conditions shall be avoided, if possible. If a double-wall condition cannot be avoided, the gap between the existing and proposed walls shall be minimized as much as technically practical. d. The portion of the screen/noise attenuating wall that is proposed at the rear of 7195 Acorn Place, but not shared in common with the proposed subdivision, shall progressively step down from its maximum height until it matches the height of the existing wall. e. The combination wall shall be constructed of block units that match the interior faces of the existing walls at 7185 and 7195 Acorn Place. f. The applicant shall coordinate the construction of the combination wall with the property owners at 7185 and 7195 Acorn Place. g. The side yard setback on the west side of Lot 1 shall be a minimum of 10 feet (measured from the common west property line and the structure). • h. Vine planting for backyard landscaping shall be required and designed to grow over the south wall to minimize future graffiti. E, F&G- 18 • DRC ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18826— RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. • March 20, 2012 Page 4 Policy Issues: The following items are a matter of Planning Commission policy and should be incorporated into the project design without discussion. 1. The combination wall along the south perimeter of the project site shall be constructed per Caltrans standard. 2. The East Avenue combination wall, landscaping, and associated improvements shall have a design consistent with the East Avenue Parkway concept as shown in Figure 5-28A of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. • Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: The Committee approved the project as presented subject to the Major, Secondary, and Policy Issues identified by staff. Members Present: Munoz, Wimberly, Granger • Staff Planner Mike Smith • • E, F&G- 19 Etiwanda Specific Plan Part II, Chapter 5 • BASIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Fig 5-2 - yt .tee 4 : ,1-N„11 VL 0::°j LM LM** „,:r.,-.,.;: ::,...,,,,.,."* Lot Area: , y' :0A: w= x P minimum average F,',..4..2 .91.0060-:,• 25,000 ,3', 15,000:= 10 000 ;, '1%000 6,000 y, �6A000 (in square feet) i�„ abF * �,' "�7M p �I s ;c;1 y• . 9(p j COSY; vAI `!t y' YYM minimum a a s 20,000 �a aiG 7 200 w� , a0 5 000 f �x ; (in square feet) `,�.; : , t Number of DU's �s ®� 5. 1/20,000 rs 4 x r m. ,� t 1/7,200 s .b� 1/5,000 �S D��i 1k.+Pn'� ran�n (per lot area in square Ad o Y 2 max/lot $ r ,a ',,.I A: ,cYt feet) � rli ;;'mow k 4 max/lot � r .. �p I �i4 e a :1" `f �1 ti4 Y fi''wi�:0M' ,, i`x 7t r. ,`f '- }- x :' °� ' ?' V a Nv" .Lot Dimensions: ,T • 4 gfi t�; � W 7� E ` minimum depth d1 dk t 4Kfi j� �� 200' � hf} 100 kk E '� 90' ! � Y ir�^, x„,":,*,,,,„.r,„:,,,, r+,�i �.£," � ti{� r�5. 5.yt =,s" yr y+ Xr'57 � •minimum width , . 90' ,}i, 60' -'...5 e _ r ° 1 V� ,W, 50'min P -so t M 1 • (at required t; . .. . 1 � yet ti x 50% front setback) , ;` c , lots 55 `'�lo t d .� 4 $ �'� " 4R min -� wu y}w� "' ' minimum frontage ,� 41'i' �? 40' �� � Y' 40 " '" 30' s"� r ,v, v (at front p.l.) s 'i,t�`.i 3 r �: Setbacks: ,.� � � 5,1 K , , 0t 4 "25 , � d t, 20'avg. i f a 0 r 30' yk -front 4 y n� Vary t5' r w ,n� V� A �4 } a£ .a AA '040-**% at 9! 4 % 15 � f� b 25 ' s side(street) ` 25 x R'r ° • ; 4 ,r i s o 0'/15 � 4 `s To0'a/15 `-"6 srik 10/20 � " 'side 3 . ,c tl 15 A•• building separation 3 r'° --� '' 15' mm 10.:44'11 4 _ h y, 3 !Atfl' z'' '� �' t s a i except � ? 0 e i x ° P Y� X k.c .1 ,�7. 6... -x� � adjacent adaa • *Y; � 2 stories 2 s10 e 20'mm. 20'mm-'- " �: rear ....,4:::.;; 60' � 20' 20' 15' 15' xk rN, A 3Z$ ^ Lot Coverage ti.., l . ,.;; 25% e o 40% 4121%.- 50% 50% . (maximum %) �<,; x:�t� • 5-9 11/01 EXHIBIT H E, F&G- 20 • _J/INS\ V 1Sten' . . . . .t. . . 1 \ .,\ ::: . . , • \ rrnizirin, tc.. .. : . 1 •� • 2 9 \ � ; 3 ; ' , . - . 79N979Na319 . t. 4 .6- i i . . c 4i 4=7 \.% ...\ \ i ) 51 ,.. 1 .• . 1-. ' A PS Lc, --.; . • 1 ./ 70Q 5't-/5/ i9 7. C.) '' v � O Q 1 .....----- & id: FIN- •k■ IC 4. i tL cc 2 r ,c�--f 4 I .In V HIB11T ; 32V 70 Ne ./6 9V . ' E ' &G- 21 I . PnntForm - ,f� ENVIRONMENTAL ' INFORMATION FORM 5�:jj (Part I - Initial Study) Ciry of Rancho Cucamonga (Please type or print clearly using ink. Use the tab key to move from one line to the next line.) Planning Department (909)477-2750 The purpose of this form is to inform the City of the basic components of the proposed project so that the City may review the project pursuant to City Policies,Ordinances, and Guidelines; the California Environmental Quality Act; and the City's Rules and Procedures to Implement CEQA. It is important that the information requested in this application be provided in full. Upon review of the completed 'Initial Study Part I and the development application, additional information such as, but not limited to, traffic,.noise, biological, drainage, and l geologica reports may?be;required The'projectapplication will not be deemed complete unless.the identified special studies/ieports are submitted for review and accepted as complete and adequate:` The project application will not be scheduled for Committees' review, unless,„all required! 'reports' are submitted :.and deemed complete for staff to prepare the lnitial;Study,'Pert II as required byCEQA.,.In addition to.the filing fee, the applicant will responsible to pay or reimburse the City, its agents, officers, and/or consultants for all costs for:.the preparation, review, analysis,' recommendations, mitigations, etc., of any special studies or reports - • GENERAL INFORMATION: INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at the time of submittal; City staff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing information. Application Number for the project to which this form pertains: j / / ?!5 ' r Project Title: Name&Address of project owner(s): RBF Associates, 1435 Reynolds Ct, Thousand Oaks, CA 91362 RBF Associates, 1435 Reynolds Ct, Thousand Oaks, CA, 91362 Name&Address of developer or project sponsor • Contact Person&Address. Jon Friedman, same as above I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Panl.doc Page 1 of 10 EXHIBIT J • E,F&G- 22 Name&Address of person preparing this form(if different from above): same as above • Telephone Number 805-373-2860, cell 805-338-1151 PROJECT INFORMATION & DESCRIPTION: Information indicated by an asterisk(').is not required of non-construction CUP's unless otherwise requested by staff. "1) Provide a full scale(8-1/2 x 11)copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s)which includes the project site, and indicate the site boundaries. 2) Provide a set of color photographs that show representative views into the site from the north, south, east, and west; views into and from the site from the primary access points that serve the site;and representative views of significant features from the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph. - 3) Project Location (describe): fronting Lima Dr., south side, west of East Ave, north of Baseline Rd • 4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers(attach additional sheet if necessary): 0227-012-24 • "5) Gross Site Area(ac/sq. ft.): 1.91 Ac "6) Net Site Area(total site size minus area of public streets&proposed 1.91 Ac dedications): 7 Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary): NA 8 Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and other governmental • (:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Parll.doc Page 2 of 10 E,F&G- 23 agencies in order to fully implement the project: Tentative Tract Map, Development Design review • 9, Describe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the project including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals,mature trees,trails and roads,drainage courses,and scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on site(including age and condition)and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of significant features described. In addition,cite all sources of information(Le.,geological and/or hydrologic studies,biotic and archeological surveys,traffic studies): Temporary drainage basin constructed in 2000 as part of Tract 15912, (Ryland Homes). Manufactured 2:1 downslopes with non-native grasses and debris. Inlet and outlet drainage structures. • 10 Describe the known cultural and/or historical aspects of the site. Cite all sources of information(books,published reports and oral history): None • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.doc Page 3 of 10 E, F&G- 24 • 11. Describe any noise sources and their levels that now affect the site(aircraft, roadway noise, etc.)and how they will affect proposed uses: Interstate 15 - southbound off-ramp, noise levels to be constant with respect to existing housing and • proposed housing. FEVcW f►Clxisnc41, An1AWstr ano RDawt-1 Ta pcovrneg- Aay4t; frc? piEwr A , ()am Assocra+fs csu OwsitM 2s to/ pro )sij ( 1?f 2012. 12 Describe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms of ultimate use that will result from the proposed project. Indicate if there are proposed phases for development, the extent of development to occur with each phase, and the anticipated completion of each increment. Attach additional sheet(s)if necessary: Construction of 8 single family homes very comparable to the existng tract 15912. Likely to occur in one phase. No additional street improvements. • • • 13. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use(residential,commercial, etc.),intensity of land use(one-family,apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.)and scale of development(height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.): North -Tract 15912 single family homes, 10,000 sq. ft average East- East Ave with multi family adjacent to the east of East Ave. South - City owned property, vacant with south bound off-ramp within West- Single family homes, 10,000 sq. ft. average 14. Will the proposed project change the pattem, scale, or character of the surrounding general area of the project? No • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMSICOUNTERIInitial Study Partl.doc Page 4 of 10 E, F&G- 25 15 Indicate the type of short-term and long-term noise to be generated,including source and amount. How will these noise levels affect adjacent properties and on-site uses? What methods of soundproofing are proposed? Minor construction noise for period of time. Limit work hours to City approved hours. • Long term no noise different than existing community. •16, Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees: ?EYtet1 J.itruR15i gEmfr '{ PF(>av r1 SMS TAE P A-Ln 1 Sir-WWMKi5 , roc. StiTh4e11 7 , 2011 17, Indicate any bodies of water(including domestic water supplies)into which the site drains: San Sevine wash 18 Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification, please • contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at 987-2591. a. Residential(gal/day) 705 Peak use(gal/Day) b. Commercial/Ind. (gal/day/ac) 0 Peak use (gal/min/ac) 19 Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. ❑ Septic Tank GI Sewer. • If septic tanks are proposed, attach percolation tests. If discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification,please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at 987-2591. 270 a. Residential(gal/day) 0 b. Commercial/Industrial(gal/day/ac) RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20, Number of residential units:8 Detached(indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size: Min -8,000 sq. ft. Max. - 15,000 sq. ft. • Attached(indicate whether units are rental or for sale units): NA • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.doc Page 5 of 10 E,F&G- 26 21. Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents: Sale Price(s) $market to $ Rent(per month) $ to $ • 22, Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: 3, possibly 4 per unit 23, •Indicate anticipated household size by unit type: Single Family Detached -2.8 24, Indicate the expected number of school children who will be residing within the project Contact the appropriate School Districts as shown in Attachment 8: 3 a. Elementary: 1 b. Junior High: 2 •c. Senior High COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25, Describe type of use(s)and major function(s)of commercial, industrial or institutional uses: 26, Total floor area of commercial, industrial, or institutional uses by type: 27, Indicate hours of operation: 28) Number of employees: Total: Maximum Shift: Time of Maximum Shift: • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.doc Page 6 of 10 E, F&G- 27 29 Provide breakdown of anticipated job classifications, including wage and salary ranges, as well as an indication of the rate o hire for each classification(attach additional sheet if necessary): • • 30, Estimation of the number of workers to be hired that currently reside in the City: *31. For commercial and industrial uses only, indicate the source, type, and amount of air pollution emissions. (Data should bt verified through the South Coast Air Quality Management District, at(818)572-6283): • ALL PROJECTS 32, Have the water,sewer,fire, and flood control agencies serving the project been contacted to determine their ability to providt adequate service to the proposed project? If so, please indicate their response. • No • 33. In the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials: Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCB's;radioactive substances;pesticides ant herbicides;fuels,oils, solvents, and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above Please list the materials and describe their use, storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use, i known. No known use • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.doc Page 7 of 10 E,F&G- 28 34, Will the proposed project involve the temporary or long-term use, storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials including but not limited to those examples listed above? If yes, provide an inventory of all such materials to be used am proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses, along with the storage and shipment areas, shall be shown am labeled on the application plans. • No 35 The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fee. The project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission/Planning Director hearing: . I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for adequate evaluation of this project to the best of my ability, that the facts, statements,and information presented are true and correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Date: C1211 Signature: / Title: �/ 1P, I%F 45.5°Q S5°Q • • • • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\FORMS\COUNTER\Initial Study Partl.doc Page 8 of 10 E, F&G- 29 QUASTI QUADRANGLE CALIFORNIA �E 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TOPOGRAPHIC) ti"�E�° SE/4 ONTARIO 15' QUADRANGLE V� 4 451 45�—_—. 2 75 '0 0 FEE 3 r - r.. 1 - 32 % SOUTHERN III -...i� PACIF /_� �, - I ul)7 3C)n ROAD ••I� NASE IiM 'i�. ! B L)'``/ f • l IN sri \ -! /,- LINE .,nom Iitis and. /r I . ay c if PROJECT SITE /f- / . j c--4- 11 3115 /7/ \� q II RIB •--—. .. / • ter' / ° - P- ., ., •`_-� ILLER AVE ,N a 011 J � 1I i F INTANA . d. 1 1 Q0 p b . y o ' `. ..y I . I f. k . _-1 U El _ "'• 1 ('� -- I _5c� /- I A 22 l 1: FOOT I� e i C BLVD I '\ CORP -L?O°Y_DY . bb ,208 L& y D fLAMEp 'zoo 7 / ` �l � �I n /-- I �/ zl n /� p1 b I al 220000 ,,Fl L / •\_, . II��"ai/ Wm'0t 1 I• a .. -. a er d II o /�' �`I. Tan ( ) / ---�ui . � //6.0-- ..✓ 'o Park FEET 5 L I '..1 �_ /1 ARROW ( Ia..—ROUTE . Q•• ,n —_— / : o //so wi �„ JIB :°�`— l _ / \ r ` /y ••WTMAM• •• L �∎ Etiwanda c 1 /\ E _. ' II -n1\ _ '1(Siding) i ANTA,.. FE —— _ —=�.. e--.'•'y,a a P� 21- '1.x..,1• L,— _ I -_ ' a Water Tank i`5 ?__c., '� "g. . —et, 9t-xS pit .. - • • Power pla 40 �r I VD T / \ VP3ER. • • / 0 1 FEEDER 1 q �� 3172 • 1100---,_ _ >E I - -_--------- 1t `1 • f 1� 1i_I �� EEL P L A-N_ '► -1 -;-°/,I , 1`l vJ vI Im I —� u� . °> --Eli' _ --. 1 17 1./1..._4080--.. nit / L /I -i1 �q y 1 I n{ II Imo" /'w... / Water I 11( ' 1 f 1 _ J .� _ l r `l I < a % 1 ' ,ems erT'-,A I. 1050 �r CORP /1 _ %Dg; . lant _ , sAN B---_, INr / .._, FS1G 30 Avcl o / -A,-, / •:' .:: SLAG 0 , ealme r spopal ___ 1 - oao--� � 111L011,- tt E a d o r - a' ;.E3 o d 7 Q d L p $P:. gfi?w�'.wre5,{y;tit, r�'.f,�¢i -$ ii�u: o in O if 0 ro f{ tr WN•,,, [ ti "4 Yii— o 'y. F 'Ji ▪ 6 x o ry ,_y} `�1i - a. 1+3 4,. ,71g� a . 1''-e4`yLc33 a 12P. .t,;- �• 1t 1..' g t 6 Y—1.,' '� Y£ f'rry o 14 t 14 'M1I ,Y‘t•. O ..- _ _ --12,17% -,•:, �.i ; yew W " t u„r.,S•` ,e.� 7 a ?idle t 'r'1t K, !�i--w n• of 0 V I / /seer Kt ¢I #f' ( n_n•ro.o¢fr. al --Itw>q ° N w ri-vet lc. —2,1,1=4; 6 n 'y"r ��04. x' .a '. J t r T� tE v u at' w-- \ t 4::, it� f "fil-kr2 y r 11.101114--/,'I d T 1� N3l'J 7J.33tiJ I -.a m- \ ��n „p rn w ......:7.4e.NAM.' x7 t a A `�°, m YS3 4 v d >• to y '�"ti�t9 .2- I 4 ' \ y p ki ^,10 AeS1r1 wire a � 4„0.' ,�,��„ q. r0? fi Y p C 1 �" p 7 t¢ }J. C edk F�TM^e"^ �al&1N n coprs 4.=.4,,,,, 4 its' o 145"� ` '4.+jenei c a .GE . y r' \� ”" �'i,.ctsx.' N 141IC!;5C r `a O h w :'. W` r > f x 5' m '^ Y''i 'kq..'Ill+?t' .4`44-0,a rt / I y^ > n r 'sir rr..l!EiiSSSS r"t, �i rn6 °'ya'w. l y*e�' 'i; o lt/IOJ SVSI&9 o �_© tr C. o b. 1 0. d l !'� to if ' o eh ' m\ P r 0. n i rr ri I C m L0. ,}' 'r akltta r: c r el t•¢ Y ! Y r73 ti.}e� i i a N i i .,.r,# * c .;. I 1 s+ 'F t 5.•t o E C ,l$ RJY o "sl o. i>.co.my of ft)1 tiZ,Z '�'{ I :zIct 1/ '_ ads . 1 f t T a• 1 lA- M1 1 k i ut 6 "� ° ..n ray -, °. x•$1'3 , Ord x `{{{'°. c w +1' 1%; I I *Ci4.1 - pt Y.}'v' _ 2 k M6R /. ai i E'a43S ; 7' 1 ZaC i • E, F&G- 31 • City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826, Variance DRC2012-00127, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927 2. Related Files: n/a 3. Description of Project: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826 - RBF ASSOCIATES - A request to subdivide a vacant parcel of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre) into eight (8) lots in the Low-Medium (LM) . Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of 1-15 Freeway - Related files: Variance DRC2012-00127, Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927, and Stockpile Permit PMT2011-02122 - APN: 0227-012-24. • VARIANCE DRC2012-00127 - RBF ASSOCIATES - A request to allow walls in excess of 6 feet, the maximum wall height permitted in residential districts, for noise attenuation and soil retaining purposes along the perimeter of a proposed subdivision of a property of approximately • 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre) into eight (8) lots in the Low-Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of 1-15 Freeway-APN: 0227-012-24. Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826, Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927, and Stockpile Permit PMT2011-02122 -APN: 0227-012-24. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2011-00927 - RBF ASSOCIATES -A request to remove six (6) or more trees in conjunction with a proposed subdivision of a parcel of approximately 83,000 square feet(1.91 acre) in the Low-Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of 1-15 Freeway. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826, Variance DRC2012-00127, and Stockpile Permit PMT2011-02122 -APN: 0227-012-24. 4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Jon Friedman RBF Associates, Inc. 1435 Reynolds Court Thousand Oaks, CA 91362 5. General Plan Designation: Low-Medium Residential 6. Zoning: Low-Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project area is a parcel of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 645 feet (east to west) by approximately 124 feet (north to south). The site is vacant and until very recently, was a drainage basin with an approximate depth of 15 feet. The site is currently being filled by the • applicant with soil (Related file: Temporary Stockpile Permit DRC2011-00927) that was excavated as part of storm drain improvements that are being constructed by the City at a location south of the project site. There are numerous trees along the north perimeter of the project site E, F&G- 32 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 Page 2 along the Lima Avenue street frontage. To the north and west of the project site are single-family • residences (Tract 15912), while to the east, across East Avenue, is a condominium complex (Tract 16335). To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. The zoning of the property and the properties to the north and west is Low-Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the property and the properties to the east is Medium (M) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the south is Office Professional (OP) Residential District and is currently owned by the City. The subject property and all surrounding properties are within the Etiwanda Specific Plan. As previously noted, the subject property was a drainage basin; the surrounding topography is generally level with a southerly slope; the elevations at the north and south perimeter are approximately 1,312 feet and 1,308 feet, respectively. 8. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 9. Contact Person and Phone Number: Mike Smith, Associate Planner (909)477-2750 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): GLOSSARY—The following abbreviations are used in this report: • CV W D—Cucamonga Valley Water District EIR— Environmental Impact Report FEIR—Final Environmental Impact Report FPEIR- Final Program Environmental Impact Report NPDES—National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NOx—Nitrogen Oxides ROG—Reactive Organic Gases PM1p—Fine Particulate Matter RWQCB— Regional Water Quality Control Board SCAQMD—South Coast Air Quality Management District SWPPP—Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan URBEMIS7G — Urban Emissions Model 7G ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated,"or"Less Than-Significant-Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. (x)Aesthetics (x)Agricultural Resources (x)Air Quality (x) Biological Resources (x) Cultural Resources (x) Geology&Soils (x) Greenhouse Gas Emissions ( ) Hazards &Waste Materials (x) Hydrology&Water Quality (x) Land Use & Planning ( ) Mineral Resources (x) Noise ( ) Population & Housing ( ) Public Services ( ) Recreation ( ) Transportation/Traffic ( ) Utilities &Service Systems (x) Mandatory Findings of • Significance E,F&G- 33 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 3 • DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: (x) I find that although the proposed proj- ould have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this c:• because revisions in the project have been made by, or agreed to, by the project proponent. A I GAT:I NEGATIVE DECLARR T N ill be prepared. Prepared By: _ I Date: d 1 '7 IP Date: l j Z Reviewed By: • .� �.��- t ' 4 • • • E, F&G- 34 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 4 • Than Less • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Significant corporate Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impatt EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, ( ) ( ) (7) ( ) which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? • •Comments: a) There are no significant vistas within or adjacent to the project site. The site is not within a view corridor according to General Plan Figure LU-6.. b) The project site contains no scenic resources and no historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway. There are no State Scenic Highways within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. • c) The site is located at the located at the south side of Lima Drive between East Avenue and Acorn Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, east, and west. To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from the southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. The visual quality of the area will not degrade as a result of this project. The property will be developed with single-family residences, similar to those in the surrounding area. The architecture of the homes will be required to be consistent with the design standards and policies established by the Planning Commission and City Council. They will also be required to comply with technical requirements including maximum building height, minimum setbacks, and maximum lot coverage as described in the Etiwanda Specific Plan to ensure that the site is not overbuilt. Although homes are not part of this application, they must be submitted for review and approval by the City at a future date. Approval by the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission will be • required prior to approval of the homes. Also, City standards require the developer to underground existing and new utility lines and facilities to minimize unsightly appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-96, unless exempted by said Resolution. Lastly, existing trees will be required to be preserved in-place to the maximum extent possible. d) Homes are not part of this application. However, when the project site is developed with houses, the project will increase the number of street lights and residential lighting used in the immediate vicinity. The design and placement of street lights will be required to comply with City standards including requirements for shielding, diffusing, or indirect lighting to avoid glare. Residential lighting is generally not a source of substantial glare as such lighting is limited to within the confines of the home. Exterior residential lighting will • be required to comply with City standards for maximum height and setbacks for light poles. The impact is not considered significant. E, F&G- 35 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927— RBF ASSOCIATES Page 4 • Less Than Significant Less Th Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With an Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but ( ) ( ) ( ) (1) not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, ( ) ( ) (1) ( ) which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: a) There are no significant vistas within or adjacent to the project site. The site is not within a view corridor according to General Plan Figure LU-6. b) The project site contains no scenic resources and no historic buildings within a State Scenic Highway. There are no State Scenic Highways within the City of • Rancho Cucamonga. c) The site is located at the located at the south side of Lima Drive between East Avenue and Acorn Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, east, and west. To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from the southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. The visual quality of the area will not degrade as a result of this project. The property will be developed with single-family residences, similar to those in the surrounding area. The architecture of the homes will be required to be consistent with the design standards and policies established by the Planning Commission and City Council. They will also be required to comply with technical requirements including maximum building height, minimum setbacks, and maximum lot coverage as described in the Etiwanda Specific Plan to ensure that the site is not overbuilt. Although homes are not part of this application, they must be submitted for review and approval by the City at a future date. Approval by the Design Review Committee and Planning Commission will be required prior to approval of the homes. Also, City standards require the developer to underground existing and new utility lines and facilities to minimize unsightly appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-96, unless exempted by said Resolution. Lastly, existing trees will be required to be preserved in-place to the maximum extent possible. d) Homes are not part of this application. However, when the project site is developed with houses, the project will increase the number of street lights and residential lighting used in the immediate vicinity. The design and placement of street lights will be required to comply with City standards including requirements for shielding, diffusing, or indirect lighting to avoid glare. Residential lighting is generally not a source of substantial glare as • such lighting is limited to within the confines of the home. Exterior residential lighting will be required to comply with City standards for maximum height and setbacks for light poles. The impact is not considered significant. E, F&G- 36 • • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 5 Than Less hin • Lssnt Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP 9 Significant Incorporated Significant pa Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220 (g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government • Code Section 51104 (g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest ( ) ( ) • ( ) (✓) land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) which, due to their location or nature, could result in • conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? • Comments: a) The site is not designated as Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The site is located at the south side of Lima Drive between East Avenue and Acorn Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, east, and west. To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from the southbound 1-15 •Freeway to Base Line Road. There are approximately 209 acres of Farmland of Local Importance, Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City of Rancho Cucamonga according to General Plan Table RC-2. Concentrations of Important Farmland are sparsely located in the southern and eastern parts of the City that is characterized by existing and planned development. Farmland in the southern portion of the City is characterized by industrial, residential, and commercial land uses and Farmland in the eastern portion of the City is within the Etiwanda area and planned for development. Further, a large number of the designated farmland parcels are small, ranging from 3 acres to 30 acres, and their economic viability is doubtful; therefore, they are not intended to be retained as farmland in the General Plan Land Use Plan. The General Plan FPEIR identified the conversion of farmlands to urban uses as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. b) There is no agriculturally zoned land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no Williamson Act contracts within the City. c) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that is zoned as forest land or • timberland. Therefore no impacts would occur related to the conversion of forest land to non-forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. No mitigation is required. E,F&G- 37 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 6 • Leas Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially we an Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land or timberland. Therefore no impacts would occur related of the loss or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. e) The site is located at the south side of Lima Drive between East Avenue and Acorn Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, east, and west. To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from the southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. There are no agricultural uses within one mile of the project site. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. Furthermore, there are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land. Therefore, there is not potential for conversion of forest land to a non-forest use. 3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute ( ) (V) ( ) ( ) substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? • c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of ( ) ( ) ( ) (•/)any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) number of people? Comments: a) As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.3), the proposed project would not interfere with the ability of the region to comply with Federal and State air quality standards for Criterion 1 Increase in the Frequency or Severity of Violations (local air quality impacts) or Criterion 2 Exceed Assumptions in the AQMP (consistency with the 2003 AQMP). Therefore, the project is consistent with the 2003 AQMP and is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. According to the Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Analysis prepared by Albert A. Webb Associates on October 7, 2011, the project will not exceed the SCAQMD regional significance emission thresholds during construction or operation and the construction emissions from the project would not exceed the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD localized significance thresholds. The project is consistent with the Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP); the project would not result in a cumulative impact; and the project would not create objectionable odors that affect sensitive receptors. • • E, F&G- 38 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 - RBF ASSOCIATES Page 7 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Both the State of California and the federal government have established health-based ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for seven air pollutants. These pollutants include ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (S02), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PM10),fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PM25) microns in diameter and lead. Among these pollutants, ozone and particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5) are-considered regional pollutants, while the others have more localized effects. In addition, the State of California has set standards for sulfates, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), vinyl chloride, and visibility reducing particles. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safety. + a Emissions(pounds-per day)a1 ;u a f , Source : `- w i t - xi >• x_ v R 4z, i ROGNOC NO. ;, +,CO SO.pn PMto t q PMas r Site Preparation 3.32 26.97 15.40 0.02 8.47 4.63 Soil Hauling 7.20 66.98 35.37 0.07 113.68 6.64 Site Grading 4.58 36.52 21.52 0.03 8.41 5.18 Building 5.97 32.76 21.63 0.04 2.28 2.22 Construction Architectural 5.55 3.95 2.66 0.00 0.38 0.36 • Coating/Painting Maximum Daily 4.3 41.9 20 0 59.6 13.8 Emissions Significance 7.20 66.98 35.37 0.07 113.68 6.64 Threshold Significant No No No No No No Impact? Note:The maximum daily emissions refer to the maximum emissions that would occur in one day; it was assumed that the grading activities do not occur at the same time as the other construction activities;therefore, their emissions are not summed. ROG = reactive organic gases; NOx=oxides of nitrogen; CO =carbon monoxide; SOx= oxides of sulfur; PM10 and PM2.5= particulate matter Source: URBEMIS output,Appendix A. The City of Rancho Cucamonga area is within the South Coast Air Basin, which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) provides the SCAQMD with the authority to manage transportation activities at indirect sources. Indirect sources of pollution are generated when minor sources collectively emit a substantial amount of pollution. Examples of this include motor vehicles at an intersection, a mall and on highways. SCAQMD also regulates stationary sources of pollution within in jurisdictional area. Direct emissions from motor vehicles are regulated by the Air Resources Board (ARB). The combination of topography, low mixing height, abundant sunshine, and emissions from the second largest urban area in the United States gives the Basin the worst air pollution problem in the nation. The Basin experiences a persistent temperature inversion • (increasing temperature with increasing altitude); this inversion (coupled with low wind • E,F&G- 39 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 8 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pignifi ant wh Than PP 9 Significant corporate Significant pa Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • speeds) limits the vertical dispersion of air contaminants, holding them relatively near the ground. Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (FCAA) of 1970, the EPA established national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for six major pollutants, termed criteria pollutants: ozone (03), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PM10), fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PM2.5) microns in diameter, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead. Criteria pollutants are defined as those pollutants for which the Federal and State governments have established AAQS, or criteria, for outdoor concentrations in order to protect public health. Data collected at permanent monitoring stations are used by the EPA to classify regions as "attainment" or "non-attainment" depending on whether the regions met the requirements stated in the primary NAAQS. Nonattainment areas have additional restrictions as required by the EPA. The EPA has designated the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) as the Metropolitan Planning Organization • (MPO) responsible for ensuring the compliance of the Basin with the FCAA. The South Coast Air Basin is in Non-Attainment Status for Ozone, PM10 and PM2.5. Specific criteria for determining whether the potential air quality impacts of a project are significant are set forth in the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The criteria • include daily emissions thresholds, compliance with State and national air quality standards, and consistency with the current AQMP. As prescribed by SCAQMD, an Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Analysis was prepared by Albert A. Webb Associates on October 7, 2011, that utilizes the California Emissions Estimator Model CalEEMod Version 2011.1.1 methodology and CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 1993 to evaluate short-term construction emissions and short-term construction emissions for localized significant thresholds, long-term operational emissions, operation emissions for localized significant thresholds, and Green House Gas Emissions. Short Term (Construction) Impacts Equipment Exhausts and Related Construction Activities Construction activities produce combustion emissions from various sources such as site grading, utility engines, on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, asphalt paving, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions from construction activities envisioned on-site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. The use of construction equipment on-site would result in localized exhaust emissions. Fugitive Dust • Fugitive dust emissions are generally associated with land clearing and exposure of soils to the air and wind, and cut-and-fill grading operations. Dust generated during construction varies substantially on a project-by-project basis, depending on the level of activity, the specific operation and weather conditions at the time of construction. Construction emissions can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils, weather conditions and • other factors. The proposed project will be required to comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 to control fugitive dust. E,F&G- 40 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 9 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Mitgation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Architectural Coatings • Architectural coatings contain ROGNOC and are part of the 03 precursors. Based on the proposed project, it is estimated that the proposed buildings will result in approximately 3 to 4 pounds of ROGNOC per day during the coating phase. The emissions would occur • after grading activities, near the end of the construction period. Therefore, this ROGNOC emission is the principal air emission and is less than the SCAQMD.ROGNOC threshold of 75 pounds per day. • Emissions associated with architectural coatings could be reduced by using • pre-coated/natural-colored building materials, using water-based or low- ROGNOC coating, and using coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency. For • • • example, a high-volume, low-pressure (HVLP) spray method is a coating application system operated at air pressure between 0.1 and 10 pounds per square inch gauge • • (psig), with 65 percent transfer efficiency. Manual applications such as paintbrush, and roller trowel, spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge have 100 percent transfer efficiency. Odors Heavy-duty equipment in the project area during construction would emit odors. However, the construction activity would cease to occur after individual construction is completed. No other sources of objectionable odors have been identified for the proposed project, • and no mitigation measures are required. In compliance with SCAQMD Rule 402, the • proposed uses are not anticipated to emit any objectionable odors. Therefore, objectionable odors posing a health risk to potential on-site and existing off-site uses would not occur as a result of the proposed project. Naturally Occurring Asbestos • • The proposed project is located in San Bernardino County, and it is not among the counties that are found to have serpentine and ultramafic rock in their soils. In addition, there has been no serpentine or ultramafic rock found in the project area. Therefore, the potential risk for naturally occurring asbestors (NOA) during project construction is small and less than significant. 2010 General Plan FPEIR Air Quality Analysis and Mitigation Measures (short term) Short Term (Construction) Emissions - Continued development will contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. During the construction phases of development, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, construction worker vehicles, and energy use will generate emissions. In addition, fugitive dust would also be generated during grading and construction activities. While most of the dust would settle on or near the project site, smaller particles would remain in the atmosphere, increasing particle levels within the surrounding area. Construction is an on-going industry in the Rancho Cucamonga area. Construction workers and equipment work and operate at one development site until their tasks are complete. Nevertheless, fugitive dust and equipment emissions are required to be assessed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) on a project-specific basis and in conformance with the General Plan FPEIR. Therefore, the • following mitigation measures as identified in the FPEIR shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels: E, F&G- 41 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 10 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good 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. 2) Prior to the issuance of any Grading Permits, the 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. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. • 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • 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 activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public 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., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved • by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce Fine Particulate Matter (PM") emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. E, F&G- 42 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 11 S v n • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: poly-doily with man PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Air Quality based on the future build out of the City. Based upon on the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS7G) estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan (FPEIR), Nitrogen Dioxide (No2), Ozone (03), and Particulate Matter (PM15 and PM10) would • exceed SCAQMD thresholds for significance; therefore, they would all be cumulatively considerable if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less-than-significant. Lonq Term (Operational) Impacts Lonq Term Project Operational Emissions Long-term air pollutant emission impacts are those associated with stationary sources and • mobile sources involving any project-related changes. The proposed project would result in a net increase in the number of residential structures and uses in the project area; therefore, the proposed project would result in net increases in both stationary and mobile source emissions. The stationary source emissions would come from additional natural gas consumption for on-site buildings and electricity for the lighting in the buildings and at the parking area. Based on trip generation factors included in the Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Analysis prepared by Albert A. Webb Associates on October 7, 2011, long-term operation emissions associated with the proposed project, calculated with the URBEMIS 2007 shows that the increase of all criteria pollutants as a result of the proposed project would be less than the corresponding SCAQMD daily emission thresholds. Therefore, project-related long-term air quality impacts would not be significant. Mitigation measures would not be required. Table 3: Project-Related Emissions Burden (Summer) Emission (pounds per day) Source ROGNOC NOx CO SOx PMtg PM25 Area 0.35 0.01 0.69 0.00 0.01 0.01 Energy 0.01 0.08 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 Mobile 0.52 1.44 5.20 0.01 0.95 0.09 Total 0.88 1.53 5.92 0.01 0.97 0.11 • E, F&G- 43 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 12 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially wati man PP 9 Significant corporate Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Significant 55 55 550 150 150 55 Threshold • Significant No No No No No No Impact • Table 4: Project-Related Emissions Burden (Winter) • Emission (pounds per day) Source ROGNOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.S Area 0.35 0.01 0.69 0:00 0.01 0.01 Energy 0.01 0.08 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01 Mobile 0.52 1.52 4.81 0.01 0.95 0.09 • Total 0.88 1.61 5.53 0.01 0.97 0.11 Significant 55 55 550 150 150 55 Threshold Significant No No No No No No Impact 2010 General Plan FPEIR Air Quality Analysis and Mitigation Measures (long term) Long-Term (Operational) Emissions - The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Air Quality based on the future build out of the City. In the long-term, development consistent with the General Plan would result in significant operational vehicle emissions based upon on the URBEMIS7G model estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan FPEIR; therefore, would all be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less-than-significant. The following mitigation measures as identified in the FPEIR shall be implemented: 10) Landscape with native and/or drought-resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. 11) Provide lighter color roofing and road materials and tree planting programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources MSC-01 measure. 12) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate • high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. E,F&G- 44 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 13 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: • Potentially With Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 13) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate • thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. After implementation of the preceding mitigation measures, the General Plan FPEIR identified the citywide increase in operational emissions as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.3). c) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 4.3), continued development would contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. The General Plan FPEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant and adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The project proposed is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. d) Sensitive receptors are defined as populations that are more susceptible to the effects of pollution than the population at large. The SCAQMD identifies the following as sensitive receptors: long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities. According to the SCAQMD, projects have the potential to create significant impacts if they are located within 1/4 mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air contaminants identified in SCAQMD Rule 1401. The project site is located immediately • adjacent to residences. Potential impacts to air quality are consistent with the Public Health and Safety Super-Element within the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. During construction, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be generated from grading the site. The mitigation measures listed under b) above and the following mitigation measure will reduce impact to less-than-significant levels. 14) All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning devices (i.e. fireplaces/hearths) in new development on or after March 9, 2009. e) Construction Odors (short-term) may include odors associated with equipment use including diesel exhaust or roofing, painting and paving. These odors are temporary and would dissipate rapidly. Operation Odors (long-term) are typically associated with the type of use. Odors from residential uses would be from cooking and gardening. Similarly common odors associated with mixed-use and commercial land uses would be expected (i.e. restaurants). Local odors from the majority of land uses would be similar to other urban areas and would not be considered significant. Industrial uses could create objectionable odors and, therefore, are located away from residential uses and sensitive receptors. Typically, the uses proposed do not create objectionable odors. No adverse impacts are anticipated. • • E,F&G- 45 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127,-AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 14 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially ignifi any With an Significant Incorporated Significant Impact Incorporaletl Impact Impact 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with • established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) protecting . biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of.an adopted Habitat ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) Conservation Plan, Natural Community conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? Comments: • a) The site is located at the south side of Lima Drive between East Avenue and Acorn Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, east, and west. To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. The site has been disrupted along its perimeter for the construction of the surrounding residential developments to the west, associated street improvement to the north and east. Until very recently, the site was a drainage basin with an approximate depth of 15 feet. The site is currently being filled by the applicant with soil (Related file: Temporary Stockpile Permit DRC2011-00927) that was excavated as part of storm drain improvements that are being constructed by the City at a location south of the project site. According to the General Plan Figure RC-4, and Section 4.10 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore, development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use • Plan. E, F&G- 46 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga. SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 15 Than T Less h • Less an Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP 9 Significant corporate Si t No Imp act Incorporated Impact Impact b) The project site is located in an urban area with no natural communities. No riparian habitat exists on-site, meaning the project will not have any impacts. c) No wetland habitat is present on-site. As a result, project implementation would have no impact on these resources. d) The City is primarily located in an urban area that does not contain large, contiguous natural open space areas. Wildlife potentially may move through the north/south trending tributaries in the northern portion of the City and within the Sphere-of-Influence. However, The site is located at the located at the south side of Lima Drive between East Avenue ant Acorn Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, east, and west. To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. As such, the project site does not represent an area that would link two or more significant wildlife areas and wildlife are not likely to utilize the project site as a wildlife corridor. Therefore no adverse impacts are anticipated. e) There are twenty-nine (29) heritage trees (Eucalyptus trees) along the north perimeter of the project site that will be removed. Therefore, the proposed project is in conflict with the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance. According to the Arborist Report prepared by Sims Tree Health Specialists, Inc. on September 7, 2011, these trees need to be removed because they are not healthy due to insect damage and/or disease. The applicant has submitted an application to remove these trees — Related file: Tree Removal Permit • DRC2011-00927. To mitigate the impact of the removal of these trees, the applicant shall: 1) The removed trees shall be replaced with a matching species (or equivalent) on a one-to-one basis of a minimum 15-gallon size. f) Neither the City nor the Sphere-of-Influence are within an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved State habitat conservation plan area. The project site is not located within a local conservation area according to the General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Plan, Figure RC-1. No conflicts with habitat conservation plans will occur. 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ( ) (1) ( ) ( ) significance of an archeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) outside of formal cemeteries? • E, F&G- 47 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 16 • Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant Incorporated Significant Impact Incoroorafed Impact Impact Comments: a) The project site has not been identified as a "Historic Resource" per the standards of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 2.24 (Historic Preservation). There will be no impact. • b) There are no known archaeological sites or resources recorded on the project site; however, the Rancho Cucamonga area is known to have been inhabited by Native Americans according to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6). Construction activity, particularly grading, soil excavation and compaction, could adversely affect or eliminate . existing and potential archaeological resources. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Cultural Resources based on the future build out of the City. The following mitigation measures as identified in the FPEIR shall be implemented: 1) 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 sites from demolition or • significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. • Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying a in-kind mitigation fee. • Prepare a technical resources management report, 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. c) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6) indicates that the Rancho Cucamonga area is on • an alluvial fan. According to the research performed at the Natural.History Museum of Los Angeles County and the San Bernardino County database, no paleontological sites or resources have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the sphere-of-influence, including the project site; however, the area has a high sensitivity • rating for paleontological resources. The older alluvium, which would have been deposited during the wetter climate that prevailed 10,000-100,000 years ago during the Late Pleistocene epoch of•the Quaternary period, when the last "Ice Age" and the appearance of modern man occurred, may contain significant vertebrate fossils. The E, F&G- 48 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 17 Less Than • • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP g significant Mitigation significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact project site is underlain by Quaternary alluvium per the Public Safety Element of the General Plan; therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 2) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal 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 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 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 documentation in the • summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • • Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. d) The site is located at the located at the south side of Lima Drive between East Avenue and Acorn Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, east, and west. To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. The site has been disrupted along its perimeter for the construction of the surrounding residential developments to the west, associated street improvement to the north and east. Until very recently, the site was a drainage basin with an approximate depth of 15 feet. The site is currently being filled by the applicant with soil (Related file: Temporary Stockpile Permit DRC2011-00927) that was excavated as part of storm drain improvements that are being constructed by the City at a location south of the project site. No known religious or sacred sites exist within the project area. No evidence is in place to suggest the project site has been used for human burials. The California Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5) states that if human remains are discovered on-site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Coroner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. As adherence to State regulations is required for all development, no mitigation is required in the unlikely event human remains are discovered on-site. No adverse impacts are anticipated. • E,F&G- 49 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 18 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than pp 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • or that would become unstable as a result of the • project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have-soils incapable of adequately supporting the use O O O (✓) of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: a) No known faults pass through the site and it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault, according to the General Plan Figure PS-2, and Section 4.7 of the General Plan FPEIR. The Red Hill Fault passes approximately 1.75 mile northwest of the site, and the Cucamonga Fault Zone lies . approximately 3.5 miles north. These faults are both capable of producing Mw 6.0-7.0 earthquakes. Also, the San Jacinto fault, capable of producing up to Mw 7.5 earthquakes is 12.5 miles northeasterly of the site and the San Andreas, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is 14.5 miles northeasterly of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. Adhering to the Uniform Building Code and Standard Conditions will ensure that geologic impacts are less-than-significant. b) The City of Rancho Cucamonga is within a designated Soil Erosion Control Area Exhibit 4.7-4 of the General Plan FPEIR. The proposed project will require the excavation, stockpiling, and/or movement of on-site soils. The Rancho Cucamonga area •• is subject to strong Santa Ana wind conditions during September.to April, which generates blowing sand and dust, and creates erosion problems. Construction activities may temporarily exacerbate the impacts of windblown sand, resulting in temporary problems of E, F&G- 50 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 19 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact dust control; however, development of this project under the General Plan would help to reduce windblown sand impacts in the area as pavement, roads, buildings, and landscaping are established. Therefore, the following fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels: 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon - as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to • minimize PM10 emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM1a emissions. c) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.7) indicates that there is a potential for the hillside • areas at the northern end of the City and in the SOI for slope failure, landslides, and/or erosion. Areas subject to slope instability contain slopes of 30 percent or greater. Landslides may be induced by seismic activity, rain, or construction. The City Hillside Development Regulations prohibits the development within slopes of 30 percent or greater and limit the number of units that could be constructed within the Hillside Residential and Very Low Density Residential designations in the Hillside areas. The site is not within an Earthquake hazard zone or other unstable geologic unit or soil type according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-2. Soil types on-site consist of Hanford Coarse Loamy Sand (HaC) and Tujunga Gravelly Loamy Sand (TvC) Soil associations according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. No adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The majority of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located on alluvial soil deposits. These types of soils are not considered to be expansive. Soil types on-site consist of Hanford Coarse Loamy Sand (HaC) and Tujunga Gravelly Loamy Sand (TvC) Soil associations according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. These soils are typically stable. No adverse impacts are anticipated. e) The project will connect to, and be served by, the existing local sewer system for wastewater disposal. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal is proposed. 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation • adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) greenhouse gases? • • E,F&G- 51 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 20 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with man PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • Comments: a) Regulations and Significance - The Federal government began studying the phenomenon . of global warming as early as 1979 with the National Climate Protection Act (92 Stat. 601). In June of 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger established California's Green House Gas ("GHG") emissions reduction target in Executive Order (EO) S-3-05. The EO created goals to reduce GHG emissions for the State of California to 2000 levels by 2010; GHG emissions reduced to 1990 levels by 2020; and GHG emissions reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Additionally, on December 7, 2009, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued findings regarding GHGs under rule 202(a) of the Clean Air Act: (1) that GHGs endanger human health; and (2) that this will be the first steps to regulating GHGs through the Federal Clean Air Act. The USEPA defines six key GHGs (carbon dioxide [CO2], methane [CH4], nitrous oxide [N20], hydroflourocarbons [HFCs], perflourocarbons [PFCs], and sulfur hexafluoride [SF6]. The combined emissions of these well-mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and engines contribute to GHG pollution. The western states, including Arizona, California, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and Washington, already experience hotter, drier climates. California is a substantial contributor of GHGs and is expected to see an increase of three to four degrees Fahrenheit (°F) over the next century. • Assembly Bill (AB) 32 requires that the California Air Resources Board (ARB), the lead agency for implementing AB 32, determine what the statewide GHG emission level was in 1990 and approve a statewide GHG emissions limit (427 million metric tons of CO2 . equivalent) to be achieved by 2020 and prepare a Scopirig Plan to outline the main • strategies for meeting the 2020 deadline. Significant progress can be made toward the 2020 goal through existing technologies and improving the efficiency of energy use. Other solutions would include improving the infrastructure of the State and transitioning to cleaner and more efficient sources of energy. The ARB estimates that 38 percent of the State's GHG emissions in 2004 was from transportation sources followed by electricity generation (both in-State and out-of-State) at 28 percent and industrial at 20 percent. Residential and commercial activities account for 9 percent, agricultural uses at 6 percent, high global warming potential gases at 3 percent, and recycling and waste at 1 percent. • It is not anticipated that any single development project would have a substantial effect on global climate change but that GHG emissions from the project would combine with emissions across California, the United States, and the world to cumulatively contribute to . global climate change. Therefore, consistent with the ARB's Climate Change Scoping Plan, the proposed project was evaluated for consistency with the Early Action Measures (Scoping Plan is a recommendation until adopted through normal rulemaking). The proposed project is assessed by determining its consistency with the 37 recommended actions identified by ARB. In compliance with Senate Bill (SB) 97 and CEQA, the project has been analyzed based on a quantitative based standard (CEQA 15064.4). Additionally, the ARB was directed through SB 375 to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved within the automobile and light truck sectors for 2020 and 2035. • SCAQMD and ARB maintain ambient air quality monitoring stations in the Basin. The stations closest to the project site are the Upland station and the Ontario Highway station. E, F&G- 52 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 21 Than Less Tn • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with man PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact „Incorporated Impact Impact The Upland station monitors all criteria pollutant except PM1o, PM25, and SO2 which are monitored at the Ontario station. The ambient air quality in the project area for CO, NO2, and SO2 are consistently below the relevant State and Federal standards (based on ARB and EPA from 2007, 2008, and 2009 readings). Ozone, PM1o, and PM2•5 levels all exceed State and Federal standards regularly. Project Related Sources of GHG's - Based on the Guidelines for the Implementation of California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G, a project would normally be considered to have a significant effect on air quality if the project would violate any ambient air quality standards, contribute substantially to an existing air quality violation, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community. However, neither the CEQA statutes, Office of Planning and Research (OPR) guidelines, nor the draft proposed changes to the CEQA Guidelines prescribe thresholds of significance or a particular methodology for performing an impact analysis. Significance criteria are left to the judgment and discretion of the Lead Agency. Project-related GHG's would include emissions from direct and indirect sources. Based on the Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Analysis prepared by Albert A. Webb Associates on October 7, 2011, the project would result in the following emissions of carbon dioxide [CO2], methane [CH4], nitrous oxide [N2O], and hydroflourocarbons [HFCs] and would not result in the other GHG's - (perflourocarbons [PFCs] and sulfur hexafluoride [SF6]). As • seen in the tables below, the proposed project would result in a total of 21.94 MTCO2eq/yr from construction activities; 48.08 MTCO2eq/yr from operational activities; and 125.25 MTCO2eq/yr for mobile sources. Total project related emissions would result in 195.27 MTCO2eq/yr (construction, operational, and mobile combined). Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions - The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.5) indicates that GHG emissions result from construction activities associated with diesel-powered construction equipment and other combustion sources (i.e. Generators, workers vehicles, material delivery, etc.). The GHG emitted by construction equipment is primarily carbon dioxide (CO2). The highest levels of construction related GHG's occur during site preparation including demolition, grading and excavation. Construction related GHG's are also emitted from off-site haul trucks and construction workers traveling to the job site. Exhaust emissions from construction activities would vary each day with the changes in construction activity on-site. The combustion of fossil-based fuels creates GHG's such as CO2, Cho, and N2O. CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment. Construction greenhouse gas emissions are: Source Emissions Emissions (tons of carbon dioxide) (MTCO2e) Construction (2012) 342.52 343.07 Construction (2013) 314.34 315.26 Total 656.86 658.33 Average (30 years) 21.89 21.94 • E, F&G- 53 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 22 • Less Then Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially gti grfic cnMitaon Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • Although the emissions are less than the de facto SCAQMD threshold of 3,000 MT/year, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented to further reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels: 1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAWMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or other soil-stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 2) The construction contactor shall select construction equipment based on low-emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on • the grading plan that ensures all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufactures specification. 3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes. 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel-powered engines where feasible. 5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak-hour traffic. • 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for construction crew. Long-Term (Operational) GHG's Emissions - The primary source of GHG emissions generated by the proposed project would be from motor vehicles, combustion of natural gas for space and water heating, as well as off-site GHG emissions from generation of electricity consumed by the proposed land use development over a long term. CEQA • requires the Lead Agency to review the project for "adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure," to determine potential impacts of GHG's. Therefore the project has been analyzed based on methodologies and information available to the City at the time this document was prepared. Estimates are based on calculations for each GHG source and represent a scenario that is a worst case with the understanding that technology changes may reduce GHG emissions in the future. To date, there is no established quantified GHG emission threshold but the de facto screening threshold is 3,000 MT/year. Operational greenhouse gas emissions are: • Source Emissions (MTCO2e) Motor Vehicles 125.25 Landscaping 0.20 • Hearth 5.80 Natural Gas 17.41 Electricity 16.86 • Water Transport 3.52 E, F&G- '54 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 - RBF ASSOCIATES Page 23 Less Than • Significant Less Potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant corporate Significant pa Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Waste 4.29 Subtotal —Operations Total 173.33 Subtotal —Construction Total(Average 21 94 30 years) Total (Operations +Construction) 195.27 The project is the subdivision of one (1) vacant parcel with an area of 83,000 square feet (1.91 acres) into eight (8) lots for future residential development. This will result in an increase in both stationary and mobile source emissions. The majority of energy consumption typically occurs during project operation (more than 80 percent and less than 20 percent during construction activities). The proposed project will incorporate several design features that are consistent with the California Office of the Attorney General's recommended measures to reduce GHG emission including fiber optic communications infrastructure, on-street bike lanes, sidewalks, fire defensible space, and water efficient landscaping. The project is consistent with the California Environmental Protection Agency Climate • Action Team proposed early action measures to mitigate climate change included in the CARB Scoping Plan mandated under AB 32. The developer of the proposed project will be required to provide fiber optic communications infrastructure, on-street bike lanes, sidewalks, fire defensible space, and water efficient landscaping. Additionally, the City is participating in the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) with SANBAG for the San Bernardino County area pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 375. The long-term operation greenhouse gas emissions of the project will contribute to area pollutants but will not exceed the SCAQMD's threshold of 3,000 MT/year. To further reduce the emissions, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 7) Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials" such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low-volatile-organic-compound (VOC) materials. 8) Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy standard including but not limited to any combination of; • Increased insulation, • Limit air leakage through the structure, • Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances, • Landscape and developed site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and • landscaping, E,F&G- 55 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 24 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than pp 9 Significant coWithon Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems, • Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements, • Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED's) for outdoor lighting. 9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following; • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available and/or install the infrastructure to deliver and use reclaimed water. • Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets and waterless urinals/water heaters. • • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non-vegetated surfaces. 10) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. The proposed project will result in 195.27 MTCO2eq/yr total project-related emissions without reduction from project design features. The annual Greenhouse Gas emissions will be below the de facto 3,000 MT/year screening threshold. b) The project is the subdivision of one (1) vacant parcel with an area of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre) into eight (8) lots. No other applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emission apply to the project. The 2010 General Plan Update included adopted policies and Standard Conditions that respond to the Attorney General and the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). The General Plan policies and Standard Conditions guide infill and sustainable development reliant on pedestrian connections, re-use and rehabilitation of existing structures, link transportation opportunities, promote development that is sensitive to natural resources and incentivizes denser mixed use projects that maximizes divers opportunities. The developer of the proposed project will be required to provide fiber optic communications infrastructure, on-street bike lanes, sidewalks, fire defensible space, and water efficient landscaping and, therefore, is consistent with the policies of the General Plan. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of GHG's and determined that GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable, which would be a significant unavoidable adverse cumulative impact. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City • Council. The proposed project would not hinder the State's GHG reduction goals established by Assembly(AB) 32 and therefore would be a less-than-significant impact. E,F&G- 56 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 25 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 8. HAZARDS AND WASTE MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 1/4 mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or • working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ( ) (✓) ( ) () loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: a) Development within the City may utilize or generate hazardous materials or wastes. This is usually associated with individual households, small business operations, and maintenance activities like paints, cleaning solvents, fertilizers, and motor oil. Additionally, through construction activities that would use paints, solvents, acids, curing compounds, grease, and oils. These materials would be stored and used at individual sites. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition that is considered a full-service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive that any other in the State. The City has an Emergency Operations Plan that meets State and Federal requirements and is in the process of updating the approved 2005 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials and/or waste will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less-than-significant. No adverse impacts are expected. • E, F&G- 57 ' • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 26 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant Mitgalon Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) The proposed project does not include the use of hazardous materials or volatile fuels. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition that is considered a full-service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive than any other in the State. The City has an Emergency Operations Plan that meets State and•Federal requirements and is in the process of updating the approved 2005 Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Compliance with Federal, State, and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials or volatile fuels will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less-than-significant. No adverse impacts are anticipated. c) There is a school, Grapeland Elementary School, located approximately 1/4 mile north of the-project site located at 7165 Etiwanda Avenue. The project will be required to comply with existing State and Federal standards on the use and transport of hazardous materials. Typically, the uses proposed do not create objectionable odors. No adverse impacts are anticipated. d) The proposed project is not listed as a hazardous waste or substance materials site. Recent site inspection did not reveal the presence of discarded drums or illegal dumping of hazardous materials. No impact is anticipated. e) The site is not located within an Airport Land Use Plan according to the General Plan Figure PS-7 and General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.8-1 and is not within 2 miles of a public • airport. The project site is located approximately 5.5 miles northeasterly of the Ontario Airport and is off-set north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. f) There are no private airstrips within the City. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2.5 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. g) The City has a developed roadway network that provides emergency access and evacuation routes to existing development. New development will be located on a site that has access to existing roadways. The City's Emergency Operation Plan, which is updated every three years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in the event of a disaster. Because the project includes at least one points of public street access and is required to comply with all applicable City codes, including local fire ordinances, no adverse impacts are anticipated. h) Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest ongoing threat from a wind-driven fire in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone found in the northern part of the City. The project is located with the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according to General Plan Figure PS-1. The City recognizes the risk and has adopted policies and Standard Conditions that limit uses to Very Low density residential development and Hillside residential uses in these areas to limit property exposed to wildiand fire hazards. The project shall prepare a Fire Protection Plan to outline appropriate measures to address fire hazards. Therefore, the following wildiand fire mitigation measure shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels: 1) The project shall comply with Chapter 7A of the California Building Code • (CBC), which includes building standards for the Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. The standards call for the use of ignition-resistant materials and design to inhibit the intrusion of flame or burning embers projected by a E, F&G- 58 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 27 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • vegetation fire and help reduce losses resulting from repeated cycles of interface fire disasters. 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river; in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) site or area, including through the alteration of the • course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on-or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ( ) (7) ' ( ) ( ) g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) that would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ( ) ( ) ( ) (7) loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Comments: a) Water and sewer service is provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). The project is designed to connect to existing water and sewer systems. The State of California is authorized to administer various aspects of the National Pollution Discharge • Elimination System (NPDES) permit under Section 402 of the Clean Water Act. The General Construction Permit treats any construction activity over 1 acre as an industrial activity, requiring a permit under the State's General NPDES permit. The State Water E,F&G- 59 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 28 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP g Significant Mitip Significant No Impact Incorporated d Impact Impact • Resource Control Board (SWRCB) through the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Santa Ana Region, administers these permits. Construction activities covered under the State's General Construction permit include removal of vegetation, grading, excavating, or any other activity for new development or significant redevelopment. Prior to commencement of construction of a project, a discharger must submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) to obtain coverage under the General Permit. The General permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction activities, including site clearance and grading: • • Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) which would prevent construction pollutants from contacting storm water and with the intent of keeping all products of erosion from moving off-site into receiving waters. • Eliminate or reduce non-storm water discharges to storm sewer systems and other waters of the nation. • Perform inspections of all BMPs. Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges. • A construction project for new development or significant redevelopment requires an NPDES permit. Construction project proponents are required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). To comply with the NPDES, the construction contractor of the project will be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) during construction activities, and a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for post-construction operational management of storm water runoff. The applicant has submitted a WQMP for Non-Category Projects approved by the City on March 20, 2012, which identifies Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize the amount of pollutants, such as eroded soils, entering the drainage system after construction. Runoff from driveways, roads and other impermeable surfaces must be controlled through an on-site drainage system. BMPs include both structural and non-structural control methods. Structural controls used to manage storm water pollutant levels include detention basins, oil/grit separators, and porous pavement. Non-structural controls focus on controlling pollutants at the source, generally through implementing erosion and sediment control plans, and various Business Plans that must be developed by any businesses that store and use hazardous materials. Practices, such as periodic parking lot sweeping can substantially reduce the amount of pollutants entering the storm drain system. The following mitigation measures would be required to control additional storm water effluent: Construction Activities: 1) Prior to issuance of Grading Permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval, a 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. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to E, F&G- 60 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 29 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan 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. 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street 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. 5) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for Non-Category Projects prepared by the applicant to reduce pollutants during construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. Post- Construction Operational: • 6) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for Non-Category Projects prepared by the applicant to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm-drain system to the maximum extent practical. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for 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. b) According to CVWD, approximately 35 percent of the City's water is currently provided from water supplies coming from the underlying Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins. CVWD complies with its prescriptive water rights as managed by the Chino Basin Watermaster and will not deplete the local groundwater resource. The proposed project will not deplete groundwater supplies, nor will it interfere with recharge because it is not within an area designated as a recharge basin or spreading ground according to General Plan Figure RC-3. The development of the site will require the grading of the site and excavation, however, would not affect the existing aquifer, estimated to be approximately 300 to 470 feet below the ground surface. As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.9), continued development citywide will increase water needs but will not be a significant impact. CVWD has plans to meet this increased need to the year 2030. No impacts are anticipated. c) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and • amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape E, F&G- 61 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 30 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact proposed on a site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project design includes landscaping of all non-hardscape areas to prevent erosion. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by.the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of Grading Permits. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The impact is not considered significant. d) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or-Liver. All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of Grading Permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, all runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. The project will not result in substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by • the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of Grading Permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are anticipated. f) Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary increase in the amount of suspended solids in surface flows during a concurrent storm event, thus resulting in surface water quality impacts. The site is for new development, therefore, is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to minimize water pollution. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 8) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice 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. g) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. No adverse impacts are expected. h) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. No adverse impacts are expected. i) The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood protected by an extensive storm drain system designed to adequately convey floodwaters from a 100-year storm event. The system is • substantially improved and provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage flows. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, spreading grounds, concrete-lined channels, and underground storm drains as • E, F&G- 62 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 31 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact shown in General Plan Figure PS-6. The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. No adverse impacts are expected. j) There are no oceans, lakes, or reservoirs near the project site; therefore, impacts from seiche and tsunami are not anticipated. The Rancho Cucamonga area sits at the base of the steep eastern San Gabriel Mountains whose deep canyons were cut by mountain streams. Numerous man-made controls have been constructed to reduce the mudflow impacts to the level of non-significance within the City. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, and spreading grounds both within and north of the City. 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or ( ) ( ) (• ) ( ) regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, • specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning • • ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? • c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • or natural community conservation plan? Comments: a) The site is located at the south side of Lima Drive between East Avenue and Acorn Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, east, and west. To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. This project will be of similar design and size to surrounding residential development to the north and west. The project will become a part of the larger community. No adverse impacts are anticipated. • b) The project site land use designation is Low-Medium Residential. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan (with the exception of noise-related impacts) and does not interfere with any policies for environmental protection, SCAG's Compass Blueprint, or SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is for eight (8) lots that will be developed with single-family residences. The development of the site with residences will be consistent with the land use designations as described in the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the General Plan. The dwelling unit density of the subdivision, subdivision layout, and the individual lot sizes are consistent with the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the General Plan. As such, no significant impacts are anticipated. The project site is within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards according to General Plan Figure PS-9 at build-out. The project site is adjacent to the Ontario Freeway (1-15) and East Avenue. The freeway surface is above grade to allow the freeway to pass over the roadways of East Avenue and Base Line Road near the east and south sides of the project site. East Avenue is slightly below the elevation of the • • project site. The applicant has submitted an application for a variance to allow perimeter • walls in excess of 6 feet, the maximum wall height permitted in residential districts, for noise attenuation purposes (Variance DRC2012-00127). According to the Acoustical E,F&G- 63 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 32 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With man PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Analysis and Addendum to the Acoustical Analysis prepared by Albert A. Webb Associates on October 25, 2011 and January 13, 2012 (respectively) the construction of a noise attenuating wall will reduce the noise impacts caused by the freeway to less-than- significant levels. • c) The site is located at the south side of Lima Drive between East Avenue and Acorn Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, east, and west. To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from the southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. The site has been disrupted along its perimeter for the construction of the surrounding residential developments to the west, and associated street improvement to the north and east. Until very recently, the site was a drainage basin with an approximate depth of 15 feet. The site is currently being filled by the applicant with soil (Related file: Temporary Stockpile Permit DRC2011-00927) that was excavated as part of storm drain improvements that are being constructed by the City at a location south of the project site. According to the General Plan Figure RC-4, and Section 4.10 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore, development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals . because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan. • 11. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: • a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) resource that would be of value to the region and the • residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other and use plan? Comments: a) The site is not designated as a State Aggregate Resources Area according to the City General Plan, Figure RC-2 and Table RC-1; therefore, there is no impact. b) The site is not designated by the General Plan, Figure RC-2 and Table RC-1, as a valuable mineral resource recovery site; therefore, there is no impact. 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? E, F&G- 64 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 33 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With man PP 9 Si Impact MWithon Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ( ) (• ) ( ) ( ) ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ( ) ( ) ( ) (J) would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: a) The project site is within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards according to General Plan Figure PS-9 at build-out. The project site is adjacent to the Ontario 1-15 Freeway and East Avenue. The freeway surface is above grade to allow the freeway to pass over the roadways of East Avenue and Base Line Road near the east and south sides of the project site. East Avenue is slightly below the elevation of the project site. An improvement project by the City to reconstruct the interchange of the Interstate 15 Freeway and Base Line Road is planned (the Interstate 15 Freeway/Base Line Road • Interchange project). As part of this interchange project, a noise attenuating wall along the north side of the southbound off ramp connecting the Interstate 15 Freeway and Base Line Road is proposed to be constructed. According to the Acoustical Analysis prepared by Albert A. Webb Associates on October 25, 2011, this noise attenuating wall will be sufficient to mitigate noise impacts to the project site from the freeway. However, the commencement and completion of construction of this interchange project is uncertain. To address this, the applicant was asked to submit a revised study to determine the noise impact, and corresponding mitigation, in the absence of the noise attenuating wall along the off ramp. The revised study concluded that there will be a noise impact, and that a noise attenuating wall along the south and east perimeter of the project site to mitigate this noise impact will be required. The applicant has submitted an application for a variance to allow perimeter walls in excess of 6 feet, the maximum wall height permitted in residential districts, for noise attenuation purposes (Variance DRC2012-00127). According to the Addendum to the Acoustical Analysis prepared by Albert A. Webb Associates January 13, 2012, the following mitigation measure will reduce the noise impacts caused by the freeway to less-than-significant levels: Exterior: 1) For noise attenuation purposes, the applicant shall construct a 6-foot high block wall along the south property lines of Lots 1 through 4, a 9-foot high block wall along the south property lines of Lots 5 through 8, and a 7.5-foot high block wall along the east property line of Lot 8. These walls shall be constructed of masonry block or other material of sufficient weight (3.5 pounds per square foot of face area) and have no decorative cutouts or line- of-sight openings between the project site and adjacent land uses. All gaps (except for weep holes) shall be filled with grout or caulking. These walls • shall be fully constructed simultaneously with the development of the site and prior to occupancy of any of the homes. If the Interstate 15 Freeway/Base Line Road Interchange project and corresponding noise attenuating wall at E, F&G- 65 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927- RBF ASSOCIATES Page 34 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Nth Than PP g Significant corponoe Significant impact 'IncamarateE Impact Impact • the north side of the southbound off ramp connecting the Interstate 15 Freeway and Base Line Road (as discussed in the Acoustical Analysis dated October 25, 2011) are both completed prior to the issuance of precise Grading and Building Permits for the development of the project site, then the noise attenuating wall along the south and east perimeter of the project site (as discussed in the Amendment to the Acoustical Analysis dated January 13, 2012)will not be required. Interior: Specific mitigation measures for interior noise impacts are not possible at this time as the project does not include a house product. Mitigations measures cannot be established without knowing the design of the houses. Therefore: 2) When an application for the development of homes on the project site is submitted, the applicant (current or future) shall submit a noise assessment to determine the required mitigations measures to reduce the noise impacts to levels of less significance. b) The uses associated with this type of project normally do not induce ground borne • vibrations. There may be short-term construction related vibration. However, the applicant will be required to follow all City requirements regarding construction activities. As such, no impacts are anticipated. c) The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. The proposed activities will not significantly increase traffic as analyzed in Section 16 — Transportation/Traffic and, therefore, will not likely increase ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project. d) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.12) indicates that during a construction phase, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will generate noise exceeding City standards. The following measures are provided to mitigate the short-term noise impacts: 3) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 4) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. The developer shall hire a consultant 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. 5) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in first phase. E, F&G- 66 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 35 Less Than • Significant Less Potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact The preceding mitigation measures will reduce the disturbance created by on-site construction equipment; but do not address the potential impacts because of the transport of construction materials and debris. The following mitigation measure shall then be required: 6) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, 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. e) The site is not located within an Airport Land Use Plan and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The site is located approximately 6.5 miles northeasterly of the Ontario Airport and is off-set north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. f) The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2.5 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated. 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: • a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ( ) ( ) ( ) (1) directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ( ) ( ) ( ) (1) necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: a) The project is located in a predominantly developed area and proposes the subdivision of the property into eight (8) lots for future residential development. Although the project will increase the population growth in the area, there will be a less-than-significant impact as the project is consistent with the underlying Zoning and General Plan Designation, which density was analyzed as part of the build out in the General Plan FPEIR. Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new employees to the area. No impacts are anticipated. b) The project site is vacant. Because the property is vacant, there will be no displacement of housing or people. Therefore, no adverse impact is expected. c) The project site is vacant. Because the property is vacant, there will be no displacement of housing or people. Therefore, no adverse impact is expected. • E, F&G- 67 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 36 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) c) Schools? () () () (✓) • d) Parks? () () () (✓) e) Other public facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Comments: a) The site is located at the south side of Lima Drive between East Avenue and Acorn Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, east, and west. To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. The • project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Standard conditions of approval from the Uniform Building and Fire Codes will be placed on the project to lessen the future demand and impacts to fire services. No impacts are anticipated. b) The increase in residential units may lead to an increase in calls-for-service. Although there may be an increase in calls, additional police protection is not required as the addition of the project will not change the pattern of uses within the surrounding area and will not have a substantial increase in property to be patrolled as the project site is within an area that is regularly patrolled. c) The Etiwanda School District and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District serve the project area. Both school districts have been notified regarding the proposed development. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay the school impact fees. With this standard mitigation, impacts to the School Districts are not considered significant. d) The site is located at the south side of Lima Drive between East Avenue and Acorn Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, east, and west. To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. There is a park, Windrows Park, located one mile northwest from the project site at 6849 Victoria Park Lane The project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. A standard condition of approval will • require the developer to pay Park Development Fees. No impacts are anticipated. e) The proposed project will utilize existing public facilities. The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project will not require the E, F&G- 68 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 37 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Impact construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Cumulative development within Rancho Cucamonga will increase demand for library services. According to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.14), there will be a projected increase in library space demand but with the implementation of standard conditions the increase in Library Services would be mitigated to less-than-significant impact. Additionally, the Paul A. Biane Library has an additional 14,000 square foot shell of vacant library space that is planned for future Library use. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. Therefore no adverse impact is expected. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and ( ) ( ) ( ) (/) regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? • • Comments: a) The site is located at the south side of Lima Drive between East Avenue and Acorn Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, east, and west. To the south is a St of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. There is a Y P Y park, Windrows Park, is located one mile northwest from the project site at 6849 Victoria Park Lane. This project is not proposing a substantial number of new housing or large employment generator that would cause an increase in the use of parks or other recreational facilities. A standard condition of approval will require the developer to pay Park Development Fees. No impacts are anticipated. b) See a) response above. • • E, F&G- 69 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 38 • Less Than Significant Less Potentially With Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 16. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) program, including, but not limited to a level of service • standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including ( ) ( ) ( ) (1) either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that result in substantial safety risks? • d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous -intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs ( ) () () (✓) regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or • safety of such facilities. Comments: a) Implementation of the proposed project will generate 104 vehicle trips daily. The proposed project contemplates the subdivision of the property into eight (8) lots that will allow for the development of eight (8) single-family residences. The Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Model estimates that each residence will generate 13 trips daily. As noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.16), continued development will contribute to the traffic load in the Rancho Cucamonga area. The proposed project is consistent with the General • Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with street improvements existing or included in project design. The project will not create a substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips, traffic volume, or congestion at intersections. The project site will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site per City roadway standards. In addition, the City has established a Transportation Development fee that must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of Building Permits. Fees are used to fund roadway improvements necessary to support adequate traffic circulation. No impacts are anticipated. b) The Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Model estimates that each residence will generate 1.75 • two-way peak hour trips daily. In November 2004, San Bernardino County voters passed the Measure I extension which requires local jurisdictions to impose appropriate fees on development for their fair share toward regional transportation improvement projects. On May 18, 2005, the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted a Comprehensive Transportation E,F&G- 70 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 39 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Fee Schedule updating these development impact fees. As a result, the San Bernardino County Congestion Management Agency waived the Congestion Management Plan (CMP) Traffic Impact Analysis reporting requirement. This project will be required, as a condition of approval, to pay the adopted transportation development fee prior to issuance of building permit. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with all street improvements existing. The project will not negatively impact the level of service standards on adjacent arterials. The project will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. No impacts are anticipated. c) Located approximately 5.5 miles northeasterly of the Ontario Airport, the site is off-set - north of the flight path and will not change air traffic patterns. No impacts are anticipated. d) The site is located at the south side of Lima Drive between East Avenue and Acorn Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, east, and west. To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. The site has been disrupted along its perimeter for the construction of the surrounding residential developments to the west, associated street improvement to the north and east. Until very recently, the site was a drainage basin with an approximate depth of 15 feet. The site is currently being filled by the applicant with soil (Related file: Temporary Stockpile Permit DRC2011-00927) that was excavated as part of storm drain improvements that are • being constructed by the City at a location south of the project site. The project will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. The project design does not include any sharp curves or dangerous intersections or farming uses. The project will, therefore, not create a substantial increase in hazards because of a design feature. No impacts are anticipated. e) The project is residential. Although houses are not part of the proposal, when the houses are submitted for review, adequate parking, specifically an enclosed garage and a driveway, in compliance with standards of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code will be required. No impacts are anticipated. 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? • • c) Require or result in the construction of new storm ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) project from existing entitlements and resources, or • are new or expanded entitlements needed? E, F&G- 71 • Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 40 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially wth Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) regulations related to solid waste? Comments: a) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-1 and RP-4 treatment plants. The RP-1 capacity is sufficient to exceed the additional development within the western and southern areas of the City. The RP-4 treatment plant has a potential ultimate capacity of 28 mgd which is considered more than adequate to capacity to treat all increases in wastewater generation for build-out of the General Plan. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated. • b) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which is at capacity. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated. c) All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of Grading Permits. The impact is not considered significant. d) The project is served by the CVWD water system. There is currently a sufficient water supply available to the City of Rancho Cucamonga to serve this project. No impacts are anticipated. e) The proposed project is served by the CVWD sewer system, which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of which are at capacity. No impacts are anticipated. f) Solid waste disposal will be provided by the current City contracted hauler who disposes the refuse at a permitted landfill with sufficient capacity to handle the City's solid waste disposal needs. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. g) This project compiles with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding . solid waste. The City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to implement waste reduction procedures consistent with AB 939. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated. E, F&G- 72 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC20.11-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 41 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP 9 Significant Mitigation Significant Na Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the ( ) ( ) (• ) ( ) quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually ( ) ( ) ( ) (• ) limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects that will ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) • cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? • • Comments: a). The site is located at the south side of Lima Drive between East Avenue and Acorn Place and is characterized by residential development to the north, east, and west. To the south is a set of vacant properties. that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp from southbound 1-15 Freeway to Base Line Road. The site has been disrupted along its perimeter for the construction of the surrounding residential - developments to the west, associated street improvement to the north and east. Until very recently, the site was a drainage basin with an approximate depth of 15 feet. The site is currently being filled by the applicant with soil (Related file: Temporary Stockpile Permit DRC2011-00927) that was excavated as part of storm drain improvements that are being constructed by the City at a location south of the project site. According to the General Plan Figure RC-4, and Section 4.10 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore, development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan. There are twenty-nine (29) heritage trees, Eucalyptus trees, along the north perimeter of the project site; therefore, the proposed project is in conflict with the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance. The applicant is proposing to remove these trees to allow grading and future construction of the homes. The applicant has submitted an application to remove these trees — Related file: Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927. A mitigation • measure contained in this Initial Study will ensure impacts are at less-than-significant • levels. b) If the proposed project were approved, then the applicant would be required to develop • the site in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The 2010 General Plan was adopted along with the certification of a Program FEIR, Findings of E, F&G- 73 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 42 • .- _. - Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than pp 9 Significant Mitigation Significant Na Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Fact, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant adverse environmental effects of build-out in the City and Sphere-of-Influence. The City made findings that adoption of the General Plan would result in significant adverse effects to Aesthetics, • Agriculture and Forest Resources, Air Quality, Climate Change and Mineral Resources. Mitigation measures were adopted for each of these resources; however, they would not reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels. As such, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations balancing the benefits of development under the General Plan Update against the significant unavoidable adverse impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15092 and 15096(h)). These benefits include less overall traffic volumes by developing mixed-use projects that will be pedestrian friendly and conservation of valuable natural open space. With these findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, no further discussion or evaluation of cumulative impacts is required. c) Development of the site under the proposed land use change would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The Initial Study identifies construction-related emissions of criteria pollutants as having a potentially significant impact. However, air quality impacts resulting from construction would-be short-term and • would cease once construction activities were completed. The Initial Study also identified potentially significant impacts associated with the exposure of people to increased noise levels. Mitigation measures contained in this Initial Study will ensure impacts are at less-than-significant levels. • • EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier PEIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices , 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (T) General Plan FPEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified May 19, 2010) (T) General Plan FEIR (SCH#2000061027, Certified October 17, 2001) (T) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) (T) Etiwanda Specific Plan EIR (SCH #82061801, certified July 6, 1983) (T) Etiwanda North Specific Plan EIR (SCH #89012314, certified April 1, 1992) • (T) Air Quality/Greenhouse Gas Analysis Albert A. Webb Associates, October 7, 2011 (hardcopy to South Coast Air Quality Management District; all others refer to attached CD) E,F&G- 74 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES Page 43 Less Than • Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Nth Than PP g Significant rgation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • (T) Arborist Report Sims Tree Health Specialists, Inc., September 7, 2011 (T) Acoustical Analysis and Addendum to Acoustical Analysis Albert A. Webb Associates, October 25, 2011 and January 13, 2012 (T) Water Quality Management Plan • • E,F&G- 75 • initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga SUETT 8826. DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 - REF ASSOCIATES Page 44 Ssavnielireiner note Issues and Supporting Information Sources ,a�_� 4m e:a 15 _.._...._ i r mm we c trenno I APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify hat I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans 0; proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would occur. i7 // % / Applicant's Signature: _ rr-%-saw (-t/ Date: / -7f C J 7 Print Name and Title: _JG%t ff (C / 455✓C, • • E,F&G- 76 • ,viiMme,, .r City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING orLadit PROGRAM Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826, Variance DRC2012-00127, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927 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 Planning Director, 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 E, F&G- 77 • MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927— RBF ASSOCIATES Page 2 • 3. Appropriate specialists will be retained if technical expertise beyond the City staffs 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 1 measures. The project planner is responsible for approving any such refinements or additions. An MMP Reporting Form will be completed by the 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 Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits. • E, F&G- 78 rA.,) a) :¢c ta , C o 5 T_,i:>:, a ).. • C E r O U _ _ ° c E N Z t,TS Ni (V N N N 3.„ '0 C a d y H Y • CV CO 0'0,1 Q (is N ° 3 CL r 0 0 O o ' 0 N r m y (� o o o o 0 Q k a 0 a • a • F- LL •� co p.' Q m m m as m J Q c '- a a a a a w 0 o :et 0 `o `o o `o F- a c ? / 3 m 3 3 3 as m > m Z v E a aa) aa) aa) a Q. 0, I- > ' 0_ ix 2 it ix ALV co a o 0 >, c ° J L c ,t r. • U 45 o uJ a LL o 0 0 co 0 I s; V d rn LI a d .c a a `o Z Cu • N 0 p .r 0 0 CO 0] • CO a' �0 L oZ •V LL VOnrxg a a a 0] 0] 0 '?*' O C la C C -0 ._c .. N 'o O@ o 0 = _ a) ° t 0 m ; ; o)° @ o 0 0 0 0 3 0 tj a 0 a) r a 10 2 N Z CO r �';: c mL d p y ° a) 9_ 2 m 2 (7 N Xr @ °c Qo N ., 0 m o a.. N a.. @ @ o r @ O hh��`��, -O a) E a= N r a) N L U O ea c E E m' C O N N o 0 a) 2O L o ` € o Q ° z .o a) _ co Q � o N a a N � N ° V - c w+ h'r .c U C >` CO N O) (a @ @ w �O C @ 3 a) — N @ _0 co x y Tu @ ° � a� > Ea to a� Ci '� E ?• O H H E 00 ,- m •m c @ c ° ° � N o @ E V a ° E 92 y ey,-- a s ° a) o ° -o c E @ € o — N a) o a 7 Y'f c - 0w o)o fl ° a) O C @ a j, a O m '- r fie' m ,C @ U > 2 O ° c ° C E N 0 N c @@ -O @ CO N.c+3 '_*„r.P N m O .0 C - m C ON �N C@ Q a) N V O N 'O .0 d •O O .,,�'F C co N@ N > `° 00 'O U E N O °U .._. V) . °) C = 2 X C <V N Z mo E a ? E = E mo ° r a) ao ~ 10 a) ct.w` aN ° ac) -NOo c°oEom � SaONno mPycn o7 E o. a t.:,q .� C E a) c a a c 3 ° m - ° @ N d m 0_ 2, m 2 C d v ; o-.O o .°_- a ° o Na0 ° ° —_ mN ° _° rn Q o0 o.° c Z d Ra �2 c -OH QN 2 o w — -o t0 0bo "0 CO 3 E � v -o 3 A d O c0 a) @ 'y @ a) N m N N a N m0 ° @ 0 c0 C O • d a � c o ° c uc a) -c 3toe .-Ec � °) Ua ) 0 @o LL o aci ,. N .4 c .4 c N °) N ca E — c0 o ` cam a) t+ E c'_e! °) C o c@ o N o a) a) a) m a) E °) c@ C S CO W (o .'ms'. y C O C C ` O a c O O) O al C m a L C a) V c) m y :,,,=5 5 o m u m o . a c E ' m o m2 m N > a'- c N m cp-w = a tdq ° a) a c 'm m c ° > c '5 a '5 ai c @ c c .°C ,c s ca a�i ° a) o C —in o a) a) a-'> o- > oa) @m — a) ca .m — o — = 0 d C E q`z-C Qoa) oE2o O- v -coma) QaaLE Qc QCt .E E, F&G- 79 a) 0 C 8 m w a c E • 0 0 V C as o v v v c fo Z N N N N V Q V N- V V V' N is F. -a C O - a) a ... O m > w C O M 0 0 O 0 t 5 > a a a a a a Q a Q Q 0 CO C CO Cl) CO c CO CO Cu CO CO CO e a a s a o a C °O o a 0 w ` o o o o o o ' o� co r0 d a3 m a3 a3 0) 2 0) 0). 0) 2 0) 2 3 C N a y C N C , C N N m Cl) a) N a) a) O p 0 p 0 0 0 CO 0 o a) 1 > m m m Ct 0! Do Do 00 Do Do cc 0 >, I C o C C v- _ v- - - = E a 0 0 O 0 12 LL U 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N a) _m c a o a c c O 0 0.2 aa)) L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 re .2 m m m m m m m m m m m Cu Cu C -0 -0 U .-L W -0 >+ C "0 C O C N 03 0 0 ._ C a) 0) O m . O L L C •m ._ C O "' co 3 m CD « N C N O O c m f0 N N O. a) y CD C O O .0 C D 2 0`o U N o m ° E 000 � m CE. — � m o ° ` � mN Q ;oE ° w 2 e =o @ m ® ai0) oa) 312 'mn ° daE < co ` m To a rn a) Ev m .. E L o Q v � w c m -0 a) C :00 - . O) U 'O L- eo U a) (U/) a) t` 0 4) O L O L m m m N a) L N m m m m o > 0 N N V y U N `I 'O v N a) O El.) -c 0) C O C .O 'U O a) L m n a a) C N L c c ._ y L 'N a ` L N 3 -C N N V N m > C 0 d m 0 C. L C 0 0 -C L CO Cl- n V C c m Oc a) -o E 0c) cm) C m >O co 0 -0 a a) w '; -o m 7 > — O) � N - - O ._ >, we E_ ' X ° mm co L p > �. m om mE N C m N 'O c C t0 . ° 0 -0 O " Ca O a 0 L _a > m m c X E -o 0 0) °) - � °ON � > a) � gm a..., w '0 a m 0 o OU o N N N = U 41 "O V U a co c d N a N N U D N U ° N 75 Z Inc a c > a > n o 0 o v ° ,co ° a) o m 'i E `m w� � am n m O 0 co @ O .O-. @ = L U U +_-• 1._O 0) U V O a) C m U Q .N co .c O C N ma rna �)'� '0— - `mow � CO '� 0 � C `p C � 0)C5 ma '� .N � o co ci) � � a oo ° ate ° Om NULEE -oaOD mtE Ncmc3 aia) ud C C N L 0 N O. to CD 'm0` 0 CD a N 0) 0) 2 c O"0 .w 2 N .N > Lt. 0 N N m 2 • O 0 to m a) N w N O Y O. O .c a) _. 2 . 1-o.. O_ N d C N 0 , N U c 19 m Y 0_ v) > my CL)0 = 'm r � OxO � � � 3 > L .Eo � cU .� � � 'wmoo' � .(2.= Uwv ° c 0)a Ct5 0_ a co 0) m 3 O co m (� � .JI= ° cn 3 (n aL w 0 = � fa o d m a 0 L p N O O L > N m L N • 1- to m 0m (`0 1- m E, F&G- 80 • ON t ta o t *A.a L cra} e tat' H m 0 V ' V V i UJ z N N N N N N .s%"• .'- N ,- CO Cti -4rty ra Pe x'01 F -o = d = d Miii- � > qtyka O ,t% ;€4,, } t F Z ��w 2 • t 13 Ca E > a 0 0 0 0 0 . . ' smF N N v) m CO 0 0 y C C C C C C C t !a (13 m m m m 41 m t s4 C a Oa a a a a a p'i< O i+ "0 O O O O O �" O s > > > > > > > LS gm Co) all q • C 4 r • • 3 �.. r nx r w O �2• IL U U �U U 6U U • m co g, e a) KI - L O N : r, C ! O O a) L O 0 0 0 0 0 3""' 0 x m m m m CO m 'w a is Y m 0 0 a m 0 m tO 3 0) CO ,^ x 0 - c 0 L O a) > 0 m 0 @ O) a) v 0 O 0 A c s '' `m 3 -o o 'C.. O.) (f) -0O of o oE ' —C u � � u � m a m C Q a o a E 0 0 0 S c -' ® ' m a E O 0 � � u a m o o m0 yo ' ; + E 'w ,- 0 003 7 aj C 0 N O 0 12 0 U C R� v) N '" 0 t.a) 0 c a 0 m a) C aj m "0 fa S o .0 m O m • O L Vey m -0 z. O a) O co 0)•C 0 5 N '> 0 0 O C O 2 N 0 o "r' L o W 0 -0 U 2 to 0 - c 0a mwN a 0 "_T' .5 ac 00-3 30 } : .° 000 3 N 'N N �" U . > L fa U o ` o E ' _ c0 0 ' in ao c L 0 C L - m O Fr N m 0 ❑ "O O N O 0 O) O N D co ca 00 ai C C L � O0) L- Ccl N - 00 •9 Eac0 -- -0 -c om 00_,- 0)- � 0 � `oQ ` o3a0) M? a0 rA o0 ° E .c ° x54 , Kti 0 g a m c arc 03 o) ° U m� 3 a) 0mom° - 0 c tM m'o @ � m 6 c c E c E 02 yy aa) .a -0 = 0 oNN - > f 0 u L o Q 13• > o Z om ,a m0 .o 0 a r wm cc >>o -E 0 `" a`) tee mc0 q ° m '0 - o '00 i0 n Q > C 2 aj a) .�. a 0 c 3 C 0 > CO w, U m :{N.4 o a) 'N 5, V 0 , a u 'T' o z cad) .0 o `o E = 0 m io -o0 0 v� u- 0 '> ?L': a, m e r,3ai:� d m CU g 4 `0 C om0 E33 Ec v -000 r�.Li.4 0 > 0 �:yy0E- oom0o0 m a 2 O L a) U m O -O °-.§- V C O 'O c «''JR d O — ,:o "O s w 0 17 " a m 3 k 0 0 m ;'Ck 0 = m E 51).5 O a) T c 0 0 U O N N O) n $ � _ E • EC -g) .a) 3m � t 0 me ° Via) (7) >•• • 0= a m0 0l0mo .5 C ;�„ G N — a = c o Q 0 m a aoi 0 vi n� Q a'` 0 s.�x o o ,0 a 0 � 'o) 0 0 0 m 0 c :_ me 0 `g. THE. a -o E y o c , E mt E a, 2 0 m E O E a3) o a n '00_ C jj N N N U) m 3 8 U 8 c Oa i 0)'. N N c °.ts- C 0 m � N °- 0U3 D0 '> 00 0 _ - roE c - � V! No0 0 a) .EAO mo .5 '> wL L O N m O O O` co .° — CP a — a) — L .N m O aa)) "O$ L a.c t.C7'v,, C -. 'U a) U 5— _ F 0 U J N aa� Qs m Q .. Q a, 0 30- 3 -0 m°,. H 0 E 'f8, 0 m nm E, F&G- 81 0 U ` C O m w CL 0 O O • O ✓ U . NC O R V V V V CO Z M CO CO CO CO V N • o a a 'C oe E 0 o 0 0 > 0 c to 0 (U o 0 .c 2 > ° °a °a °a °a °a C r -C a a a a a a c 2 2 2 2 2 2 w 0 o '.:1 `o o `0 0 0 0 c w a9 0 a3) a3) a3) a) E N N 0 > N aa)) 0 i- > It CC CC CC CC CC Cr) a Co C C r E o O 51t 0 0 0 0 0 m 'd- o) o c a `o • a ' c C O o 0 0 0 0 CL m m m m d . 0 0 - 6 0 0 re 2 a a a a a a -0 C N E 3 (9 0 C O .% ((j @ 0) o '0 -5 -.F. ..>;.-8 0 O " N C 0 0 .� O N -C O "' C 0 U C .0 �p C N 0 L O .J ,t� -0 O D L CU °- C CO t0 Q 0 2 O C Y N O a o (Ca C .E N >O O l9 ..cf, rn``- � ` c0 5 v� d 'Eooas .5 aoQE m °c_) EN ° amEo°v ° N ° '3 ' °° rUw � L �- m aci ° Lo � °c_ a `o m ° f :0° NE am c Ea) a) •t ` o Emca =o o iE@ � m 0 C ° N N O' C O O ° N L a 0I (0 C N 0) ) 0 = C p).N ,E_ _ c c m a) w "T" 4N .- no t20w - 3o (13 0) E0 - n.og 'a1- 3 ` o 'ca ° 'E U .5 m a) D 'C O a) t :°- N CO) E a) o c a) a) -a 0 O o rn- 0 0 °" °) 0 O U N 0 0 0 N O �_ a7 N Z` .U.. ° 0 `t O a >," -0 O C C -- -- _ ° N w a o s_ - ° 0 a O N N U ° O 0 U O N d °--O N E O c m w E _ co O ° aO) .LO.r „�., O CO 0 0 ° 0 O > O ..L.. '� O O 0 Y N '5 o U o tr O w O C N L)2 0) @ c m a d > O) 2 C O a° E " 1:170E4- 03 ' - = .� ° `" C O '00 co C CO '= 0 .N O ,N ,C m._ O s.D. 0 = E 0 �O a1 0 O O C d O . ." U � ° EOO > ° a mt moN 0 ° ' a) o ° oi0OV ° rfOOEc 3 N °- ° U O a) C ° O a3 • t O) o 'o) C C .. 0 0 N 0 • - m Q E -p Oa U aN) C C o -_° U ` ->o al C a a) ° p):=' ' U O o .O '> N 0 O N V) (1) CI � Eoo BOO O 'o ° ¢ 0 _�' 'nN ° ' � E � � o � � aoEa> c0 i7 .0 ,_ O 0 p_ O O a) N .0. C 0) laa O o o 0 N 0 - 0 O1 0 0 C O .0 0 • C C j 0 a O O 0 0 (a f0 C U 2 N .0 o 0 ?i a - 0 E 0 0 (0 ,- - 0 O O a1 op C 'o (0 N E O ;co (0 .> N o ` E E N o m E E L L ° > E r ' E a v y co a a s c t a 0 o o a w w 10 0 c ,_ o U a) 0 O ` U o 0 . d 0 O 0 . ` U o 2 N U > a 0 C CD F. Q W '� 3 CO U .E -o ° a CO a N •.� E 'a w E c_ -o a `o `o Q m c.N a) N aa)) — '5 N ° a 0 2 E m o aa) o ° Lao ay o • - VUaNNEm E, F&G- 82 PA o g4 .11a1 '13 w ifto e c"E"2 O o c L.= , ., . ,4'. th n - . 9sH, co co z Nr = co in to MI - 12 7-C F a) ... ...i: O to ;•,24-... > 0 W a %;TP 1.0 wo o V 47. -a co 'il 0 .2 41 .c « = CD Ut; 1/4cga t C C t 0 0 0 0 0_ Cl 0- 0. = 2 2 2 El 424 g a o c o 6 .2 46 "6 5 46 a.4.,-., 1.3 1.7-• '..= C> 0 CO 7 C 67. CD a) cu a) 4 .= a " .. t a) 5 w '5 Q) 5 o 4 — c w.. = 0 15 c o o R > CC CC CC ft i14 Do Do Do "ri",i CO >, s,an4) C 0 rO T-.. C II .... = ._ c cr O a) .- 2 u- CO C.) 63 0 0 11 W. Star 0 0 C.) N- O In LgIhr‘,L :iNtrkl CO a) c iii.ii 4)`'Ll "i .- “,vii 75 8 (7) := 'o'-•Ak, C C O 0 0.5 ‘ , a) 8 0 0 o 0 M10 0 0 re Ll■ CL co ia. CL o3 CO c0 .0 _C 0 DO) ai a) -a " o o o as .. _-5 ca .= •-• -0 co c p c . c 0 c c u) ii") 'a o 2 , ,,,, c, ca c sr) 0 0 o ''';," 0 -2 0 a. E co fX 0 2 ly) c Mc? 5 a t7 E o)2 a) E c w - c0 .6 a) 2 ;Nti a 0 -= - 7-') 5 .01.9 cii ra .a 2 yc E .,,--- .-- ,- < ° -§ cc, -- - co o cy -° Ea) -,- -,-,— .- en (I) c b'Es a...- ,t..t..; (1) 0 .E as 8 ,_° :3 cC, p -5-,_ - t ((A G a) co O at CO CO vrtO li "3 2 a a) 0- E Lkas,u 3 c a) .7, -8. 0 - o :.- > -.--b- toro -cEIC) 00.. a) (1) a) -*±,,. ...,,. >.. o -a. 05 cp „, 0) C a) a) E 0 ,- in' o E :- 2 a) - a.•3 0 E 2 2 .- a) •- E _ " a) -S "0 M ')., - .c -0 in co cp a) . :c• u) a a. t5 E 2 "tc> = . CD >:•."5" .—C -C7:51 -02 1 1:3 E0 -cat) ma'---. 2 130 mc 440,4: 1".„.a) .a,E 2' al 2 0 :Ea) E -o :•0 ca I -c t = CD > a . o tu a z -c .- a3 o 0 a) 02 E a" to -0 u) tats: -0 5 . _ c _ _c 0 E co TD ,EL- ..-. _2 0 2 5 10 0 ,.., _ --- a - -0 0 = 0 a) t- 4-• j ^ co a ..=.1 w 6 () coca) c oc 2, 0 (00 t- a) t4j co al a_ 0-) in 0, 2.... ?„ = z (Th -como c -tE0 ,_ '-'o 2 a) a -a -- " ..-.- 0 C 0 CO tO _c -C :..d _ ,0 >a) @ (DP 2, 2 m 5_, cp a• 1&) 0 0 vcr a) .,..2 -rs > 7:1 ,....... CO cv 0. . = co a) '0 en- w E W) z.-,.c E E i- 2 4,, co c P S2 c 2 a) .= (if d 'S fi .1) -I' = " c -- c ° o E H xfing 4" aci, 2 ' a - -F0 !°- E o c u) g www 0 - c - P -mid cc (/) .- ,..,0 ..„..- o N ._ „,coa a . -E. -- _ co . . ._ .— CO 7 • a) Lot CD ..--• h- (1) w CO = L) 0 -0 1,1) 0) o "'-' -0 = CDCD "1-' 00 CU) 000 70 La ca. o cn- m =TO ca >-,0 co .-r, _al coc2 To -o 2 = 0 -0 c o -o 2 ti c 2 2 co g . 'r-64.-: 0 c .,-6 2 -0 -5 w co .2 17; a) a) a) • , 4 7., = 0.1) iii 0, -0 min2 2 -2 Lo 2 coEi E c_Cl-2, !=' E 2 g .,a9ti, ='R -0 0 a9 a a) - c a O SD 0) a. Ec 3 , coc Eco .,, a) it-4.. a) .- co-< - a) a) cu) R. ° ° 47 '— to n C .0— '5 5 •- a) 0 10 - — 0 = .0 -0: a) ::.->-; = 0 C.) a op 0 (-) CD CU ca al in o-.- 45 c .... u) ° E s E 0 c 0 = = 0 = -4,9)., u) ,(0 u 0 03 to -g -,n- o 15 01-= < a) E -o af') o To cao 0- -o co ci to 0 c) ,;-= M' 0 It) c 5 an -(7) VU) :•• 8y, a) r- -5, 7, 2 n E . (LE, ..c 5 . = co 0_ o x § 2 u_ 8 a) o >, 0 u) ..0 - • • • . 4,,..9-, E, F&G- 83 T.c., C) im, . . rpi c wil, 0 ., pa cs) a c E •o o 64,4,4 a v .41), < < • co o -.)-:.p co z -o- g..-4T CN CV <I- Z cr Z N 0 ra To 1.,,csi irm. a E pk-c a) r_ a) 3 cu co te, > 0 c Si.. w- o 0 T3 Ca rel 0 0 —0 ..0 Mt' 5 E > < c < < < < < < 0 ,rne: Pfr Fa C Ct3 C C ',.,4 . C C C C C -a ... 0 0 ..--,, 0 0 0 0 0 0 O ..c, ....6. .1,-,:m!j' z( g .p. 0 p 0 .... 0 .-- 0 t —0 „, to .,.-,, CD •-• D = a) 2 a) 2 D 41-e., 0) 1- ..-. 0 cm ,._= a) " a) ,_ .E w- c to ti = v., (7) cp L_E roc c iz c my, c to c ro a I- c , , c , . om = , , - c )- E 0 = 0 = c o = 0 D 0 D 0 = 0 5Q P > Do 4; o , , 0 o 0 _ Do Do Do Co Co cC zvt co , --; Co o 0 r 2 .- 0 C Cr lag 45 40 0 ,:ct, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m) cn c 4,4thtei Et '6 'CI) :.-1 tiltej CC t00 0 0 CO M 0 tn 0 ifi 0 0 0 W 2 m m Oh a in o_ in in in -coo 5 c047; 43v o mc o) CD CD C CC) .0 '0 c o 0 0) c 1:1 _, cc .. a) (vac — c -6' mc pa 7 a) . 0 = 0 t-r. (7) - .„.. p .,-, § 5 N > 2 a -0 5 go 0 Om ltdi tn 0- a) rn 2 a) CL 2 op 146 E E 2 I; E 10 a, E > " ..m W g a) •,-, § ..:+m 0 t a a) c 8 o = , 0 , , , 0 .,, o -a = mc c co' a) < 0 6 Lc to' u Ea En 0 u., — a) E cu a a) c c.) 2 , C C a -1 43 ° " C E a) .06, := a) CO 0 E Ar? = E 0 0 a L) ti rm) -.-• 5 c Ic8 - c fa 76 0 o a) a, ,._ w c o v) 0) mo E 2 2 w w 2 co 1:3) E CD 44.-;'' — E co :-S o 0 c u = c • w co g.), a To ' a) I) - a' OS To a.) cn to- -i-ls- ,,, co 2 8 o - o To ,- cr,r-' 2 o cr,,:rP -c c co _›:.-c._ 0-' 0 m- --hi :1= a) ca- E m 2 a o_° , v a) o a- 6 ). 3 -5 co ).=.. v ai ,-- a.) :- •-• E C 0--5 a) c.) = E imic, w 2 ' co 0 - .- .,,,. o ..._. E , c 0 a) a) E S g 6 —Da) -> 't"t-, 2--5 'Kr 8_ t‘tu, a g n o mo 0 0 a) •,.., co , 2 r, Z E2 ',7,_T; 6 : :: °- 0- a) .,. a) m - 0 a)V . a) :4- c - 13) - 0 c a) 0.. aa c e:5-g E i= _w_ n 0 --d. , o) _ c 0 ..7) 512 v cu mo (7) o w o rico - oesg oro .-. 0- 0c0Taki9= - a) ,E, Cu - (0E ' E 2 ,_ r:TI " c -a la a 0 = ,,,L7' ,;tals,, —0 E cc CO a)C al 0 p C c -C 8 .-. O "0 7 ..... 0 MtnIti = < .2 -0 CT3 E Wnl w 16 ) >, g a) >, 92 ra a g a a) ou -00 20 (tEzoi co u,' - E = •4°' tal - - LowDEw Tu g -5 E Fa a co a mc c —co co cr) , -63 a, a) !...(.2;:. Et2 (umt rimco u) - = a -o - co 5 5 mc ,- a, enD,i. o > ,- c - = -0 c cu c-i-3 = r) o c 4_ non ! II c 0 c «. to 0 - ,un, 15 .c > '''' r,-4 = i- (.) fa -0 ■- mc 0 0 .- --. 1.- 000 E C -,_ 1 i 5 Mum,- wog< tm_ cr 'Ca 'e' E ..., 5 2 6 6 `;" cn t , Tr ° E ' 0 o a) co m c o_ :409 ,5, ono 0)z u) C 0 0 co w C.) aj = 0 W 0 IQ -co mf., E .° 0 •-• a) .1-c'e " c CO G c0 M ° E >.-c .5_5 a) -5 To .4-,_, - 4- c c c en 2 E 0 (cfa g ;Pt), a g mg t." c% u sc E ‘-, P (-7.) i c a) -,`,5 ot,5 -5 -00 - L- ccuc a - 0 cit a) -0 Co -15 ,-, >-. co 47. a 2 a) -o ;-11)B ° ma -5 -5 r-6 ,_a) m8 up 8 co c cu 2 E 2 = co ow Tip Hill 2 E C 3 CC CI'75 i 2 TiS-9'4 1-- 2 § E co co 1- a) cu -a.2 E F— to •7C- =a) 2 Ucl. ilco Ono2E :)= ...?_- :, 4t, E, F&G- 84 a) o o m O • = E O O U C CZ O (n Z N N 0) • Cu -C 'C N C a) O CO > 0 ii w a, Q 2 > U o N N C C O) co C a a 4- O o •� o o U N .5 5 • o CD ~ > a) C1 a Co t C c _o_a)_ • .. 0) r c CT O = .2 it m 0] O CD CD = . A • C C O O 0 O.2 m 0 ca R' w 0 ] 0 Q) T T C T'-' a) a) O) O) N a) C N L a) O O O CA C O CO 3 O) 'O o N o U N E C C N o JIlL U O)-0 .O O lilt L E m J w N j m o O ' m c 2 ° ° o o aa)) ° aa)) c � co .c a) .v f0 ° `O 7 N � 'Q N o co — N — N d a) O N C t0 N m _ -O U N O C U V N E N N "O it U .S O O a) N O t c 'O O C M — C a) a) 'O N O O) oU Vi a C 0) V a N U O N C O) O N _ a) O O .`O+ co N m .0 N C C E ° .� � 3 N = 'O O X .0 O L TC a) C N L a) O a) a) co C a. N 92 .O ••5 O U N Z a) - O) co • 'o )O — O m N 'V ,U O N N N a) 4 'O N O N N = o m m o va -o N o = 6 � o tC a�iU � � u rnt-- vi CD C � N C W OS W .0 O) N C N o C a) `p. m 'O f0 C C L O Y L a) 'O C izi co LO Q N 'O N L (6 �. CO C O Q.L.. OS U p_ ')p CO OI U �0 N CO c '� m o 0 '� o a c m m N o 0 0 3 m ` ` > 3 '� o • C C ' 20 N O 0 - -0 `;' N ° N a) TOO "00 U N TO al a) a) .�.� (O � O a) �a m o U E U Q J N ,_ C T V) W N = 07 N co n1 N O a a) co 3 .0 a) CO E C C C J En._ _la C N Ea. co a Q C N O J b a° 0 3 0 IS O 3 O) O)N 9 O t Q N N E N a E ga) .J O O. O H U • • • 0_ CO • • • • E, F&G- 85 U o 41 L 2 ..5. 0,c a .a- v g m o d) Z N ;.514 N N N Wf To F. : 7v, .^.x: ac . NC is . F- L w Z. a) m .,L"3 S , a: r �lJi' '.4iar 4 .111 toy. O pt, . TS ca .4 I eitth O 0 ft a U 0 1� > : . a a _ 0 _ _ �-. m CO a r$' a Q O .... O "W O o h�'"' O O D) c .0 t& 3 3 3 N Y a) N i- > It m Cf i CC CC jira c 0 *5 ` _ r • o Cr K U U o 0) :x' ; „ a) C '.t,- s N . d O S U ? O 0 x w CO CO y'�yk�� m CO N 1.1V a) CA a m �d "' V) 0 C C 'O V a) CA O N a) y9 "' m .c a E C 0 — 0 yz: . E > a a) c m a) ° C O .c C � n ri � m m o . 'O $- N a) L .0 oe V' a) O` 0 U «6 'O N O C o o a) .0 2 C — p = 0) m 'o > `t, `o5 amvm P as UJ -oar -o 0 2 c a) w o ' a i d - a, .c '.1:1. m� )0 T E J o - a) , a) 0 -.c v) 3 O N Q , `',7g % N d a 0 U O_ o U a U « a_CO u) m a) a @ 0 �y ^ a m3 � ,- w y,:y L p C m to • m E E � ,Zm E Ev° .o 0 .o N N p , ,T. J p N *7- y To m C U 'O.L. N ._ O - .0- _ ° N L d'. E rn f6 a it ,4 c m C .N o U (ayy'fr'�77� .0 a O c « a) p (a a) O ' U m flo . µ me CD 1. CO 0 ro°sj E c aE m �� a� vJL° o � � aNU o 3 w w fra. N L c V U C 4`p C m N is ° 9t N 'o N p C N E a C 2 c Jmiax j rn t • occc 43m a°: EEYa Ea) vpo m am L 3 c o p p 19 m � C o 0. 'c L-) W = - - c 'CS c w '.0 5 > o. w:u °)-, > TA aa) a - m w -p c ' J c o 0i c p_ ' m rica 3U -- m2 ;g,_.,g SJ2 c c _ E m . Eomm a) o i) a) m 3 E;(U >,m D s s y` m m a N o s a a°) .4 _ c 'c g c aci a m m a) ` x p a) CO fAcat a_c " .0 -o 2 5mn C7 .Lp• c m -o :.5 aa)i w E ao .E p o :o c c ,n -o E ra m � .� J p m > Vl O . U E . co @ m yc occ ° ,� o -po �_ pOOrn cv�`f ° 'co) Dc � mvy `ma) cmcmiEcmE E o o a) 'o .a; o o _ c .a c a�„. o . C m a c p m o c C a m m E 'd: U o) o a ' ( E o Q) E m ;_ u' v) a) N E = U N O)... N — CA U 'ET) J m• a) L ❑. .`Z— o .x b ._ w N 2 2 C 'N c 2 m :.. ma) cTOCO >u wawc 'v2 � ti r; ON a`, cu= cmo � WJ ° amN ° mom 11) Cr� E ° 0mm `a � o@cava cjwc °- u2m Ua ._ o .Ugm � aoacioo6 :. -o .0 w .� :iC�., c m p 'Gm3, ,n L c w c c m H m 10 ' , aoi • O N N O N f/le •o m "u) N m a) O u! is, V) >, co 0 0 O '.CO 'C. N o) E o).O-` N ° N 'O N 0E ammo � nEmN .mmmN o ° � EwNOE 'in y �cc� avaa° o ° CO ra CI) co .> U n,m,; O -p N U :D :Orr U Q U d m N �- N -C-CI).3 m C 'o ` C n. J T a N,x m : C a) E J 3,� O W a) .O , c p >` J N a) � U m� L m "a m 'O a) O'er N � � W CAC � 1E- :0. _ R E � a ° d 2r f- U ca Ea m r2` d main vci'm Jo rn ¢ -0 ti. rn° `o 2Q .c 'a) ° 3 E,F&G- 86 0 ` C o a ya • O E .3U _ C n mo v v v in a a) Z N N N M N N Cu Fs- 'O C co C F w .. a. w N V- = O V Cu O 0 L F - Co a a 0 w 0) w 0) Cl) C C C C C C (0 (0 (0 Of CO w e a a ' a aa) a o o `o `o o c m ,o `o co �_ w ,3i w aa)) aa)) o 0°) aa)) O) a') aa)) 0) ° 'c 0 0 F > CC CC CC CC co c CY rn a C u o W 1-r• ❑ O C U LL m U m ❑U m W ❑o m O o) 0) o c : o Q C C C O 0 a CO rC 4-• s 0 m 0 m . N O O p C 0 'C c CD C 'C c 3 CD U 'C O O N O " CO "O m > N p 'N OZ -O -`O a) Z o -0 w N C OT. .c tG a) w `) N N w a) a ) N ° .mac. c - o ' C O O E O w N >. d w 0 rn ° 3 c aa)) E to w 7a ° ° r .oy `o EN 'w 3E a0 (T) 2 a0' o aa) °- oo � v•N 0 0 O c 2 V a c0 2 a to 0 03 N c d .L_. a w O a) co p- m_U on — a m.0 N N w °.• C ago > oo � a. ma) '4La .613 La m E mm � o)� Y2 - - - (` w O `p U a) O_ c a d c a U �J o w O 0 a) 0. E a) a) a YO `p a) a) a c c a) a) d p c .0 ,N N - 'O .0 w +L- w p c N a) a) to p � O Z a) co O w » ao) m O °) ao) (V � °) s - • ;o o) Et o -0 a) E .. o Ema E a) aEE wE cop) W .c N C c - ° 'o ._ c a) w .E c o c 0) 'm `m C to- CD °" o W N E o Qc `o (ag ao .E o2 ac E c N E o = o f UN w L Ox s w ° >< a3 -o a) -D OVTp NQ _0a`) c 0) w _ umw w � ° aa -0ca) � w co • an a) _c E a `o (o .w .` E m a `m E as .5 m m ° a • 2 c t_ O 2 _ „, .0 Q p D = N d = o C a) p) w t p f/1 (0 C C 0 0 0 0 O '3 w Ft) O ° a 'O .'c.. O d a) r.., c O_ a w (o o 'p o m carp o rnd -O > m Z`c ° ,. °) Z'c ° (V - -- m E (ca mE ma) `m o .cyc a) coo ( E ° ° E ° = wcw vi � a-) c � c .� cc ° a��= m Oa��S � -wo ° .NE a) Ea) E a z N co N = N a) (0-CO .,> t a) N 0 >. N O f a) C N 'C > a) E ❑ w =o .N ❑ T.) al H50aw H . Uaw _I o .ca a) wE2a E, F&G- 87 a) U C O• O U s R o v iv, CO Z (N M N N V "{:Z N Cu '-.: 3 -Po?: F o a4t 0 m f > 0 g+ c 0 o 'a U CO ° Z a W ` a� > a.te ❑ Q CO C a d C 0 o 2 , o E m c o E m 2 > > L N I- > o occ � Co , C V ` i \— 0_0 cr ..... m m O • 3 0 o *• - m v.. .(3-as o = p...ci s W O• 0 vip',. as • ° a a m O 00 >>-..e. - y T O N N a) °- C N N Cl) co .0 p_ a) : Cu U W L ° -c C .c �O 0 , 0 O ° C 0 L.. >' E c f6 ) o O c r.- N o O L 0 -0 °- o o >' N o m N - CA a 3 C aL L c 0 .E C o N' 0 0 0 V) 0 .LC. O L o o �' 3 -rn> a) U F O a) C o y >' E O 0_ N L U w A N N m L °- 2 C 'C .F x 3 ° C 0 a) a) N d ' . N N U) O W ,U '-• L N N N C a) CO C y U 'C v-O a) 3 c a- C cn � .L-. ❑ ❑ F a 0.,- In a3 c U 0 -0 N y O C o U la O CO Z = ❑ .0 l6 a) Z Iv- 0 0 0 0 0 0 = c6 O) co 0 CO c a) C '° U O c Z d E Y N E o o m m -1 o N E E p10 m 8 o o ' n o o 0 - oa)) > a .. $ � mm `° m� oalaQa - 0 aaN $ ai oEo O.C L0, c N t*- 3 0 N o m U O ui = E ° o m u) N 0 CO E O E o 0 0 -0 a) r c Cu (la o o .N ` > 0 of 0 Cu .90 :. N --- — °) ° -0o /1 v � � O _,z, o �' _ N o .0) 7 m.D g -00 � R co :w o CO c C 00 >,aw - 0 4 ' °- o o � 3Nm � � . � o- o -ooasc - � � o a o r co `C D o L m ' as - a E ~°o ° m 3 CV 00 0 E .m L -o Z C 0) C CAC CO CO Q - j sift'. C °)r 2 O a) L N C C ! N co 8 E O N N O) @ N O p C (6 O m0 ° N ° ''.' o L ° an N N U " CO . .a 0 CO v C O i w = O N U . U 7Z O . L O ° O O cu a) U co )n E >: d as a ° ° (n O Z a7 d x. w .--, O 1°n L• ~ y a) O L w �O U o c 'E W O)c) >' C O m C c 0 N c .0 c • W U a= c V � a 0 U E > O C C N N .E LLl O N :. O E O e a3 .0 .. �O L .p U y N N N N N N 0 O7 (0 . • o - o mOu o _ anyo 0 o ai 20 _ o 0 E o 0 n N ` -_ U m ` p 2 i ° n J 0 O -N `N-' -C C O" E O o! U.N.. 2 ° C (0 cm_ U o U 0 o CO C 'O C siya C - Op_ a3 Cu O N a O N a o -a°) L N O_ o d N y V) "O c0 0 P g .0 a n.. co O a) d ,N0 j O Z75', O O O` N t C a1 N O` ° a7 > a) L a) .O. a) a O O -) N am3Ei Umo my t`Z= u. Ua3co - E �va33v � � � .°. � E Utac E, F&G- 88 c c m E u :6475 .�" 2 a c c N O- q (0 on a • o Sc O O 0 LL c u c• = 0 c - ° o m o N- ° `o a) o U) Z v' Q V a.4ia O1 B `m o t $ m .r -2 .N N Sti=t' a) N O o 0- s.n•.* U' U x a D c ‘.0 L Lo .c c s o to c w 0) '�: s L .c 0 m > 1-a 0 -• �C' (n K K U 00 5.00.E • • • • ,•'04, r N M R R) co r- 0 •'w in- 4'. c w 1. a) N ?., o N SRC: Q a) C C C C O K w O °' o ._ o O ° '',Into E To U U U SO* c Cri a)0) 0) 2 0) 2 0) 2 tI o a E E E,w C ) C . .0 N 01 0 6, d H > Dc°) Do Do rnt m ,,++ a) a U m CD _ s �o C U +L+ O O o- co • O• d O L'. U 0 0 r C) ->. a c c 0 0 .Q - c, > o 2 Nw w7; ❑ U N V* N O O 0 S N U O _ O.5 m ELLf Z c ea sz w m a d � C litt W Fo- c E 0 rn O# s o 0 a) 0) 01 T" T'-' c 0) N -O N T N a3 .2. — T N L c n -5 O .0 N a) E co W E O tO O U '5 N Tr.• m �O L -c a) 9— co ,hoi 0- 'T O O O T N E N J '3 L C .n J C 0) C O ° -O N 'N a IEr Q as O ❑ W co -o a) t 3 ° a) c fa a1 T N N N co N N m N -0 a) 0) a -' ;x3 x a E a) .E o .-- .c ,T, a) m o v 0 v = o) o.0 _ c '-. a) E. 2 0 0- ° `t-_ .n _a 0 O 3 O Y 'C N ° c ° 0) omat0 ° 70v1Oaa)) — m u .nc (n ° c > � vth c c E a) a) r m a a' a) ms_ 2 o ° 2 J N -O X rn — a_ c o (0 E E U L (0 c .. ° -0 a) c w L O Q — N C x E N - 3 C N O >,:::U..La) c CD -vo c m m — w . N fliP m fill O ° ° E ° 2 O. O p N — • MT — . - c NO 't. c '.4tv N O (D C >. N O N C o a1, O O . O) C (o — "O r_ «� .. — a) a) W C c E (0 O c U N — 'O C O 0) 0 N 'y 03 •2- N .m m e c• Z c N a) O -co' m C C ..C_ ° co 0. _c N O O ° o f — r N > " E a) c 'y' rn c c)-0 ° o)N J c O — N E J a I- „z a -o .m a) u) N O N a .0 CO .D w ° !a 3 t2 0 'O -0 U (o 3,�Cy w 'o a) m N V m O L C O .2 'w > U O N E p = 'c d m¢ X ;) wo aa)) aa)) Q eS.L� O o `o m ° w 0�) � O N E N O V. >, N O N L C (o - � Y > O 'O T N CO ° (`o v o y pws D N a U .o v • E C c 0 N E c n C 0 _ O ! O O C N O N -OO 'O U C (o -° -t 0)y° c p C O p- o eci 4- o O— O v -t _c 0) O a) N (n O p a7 p m N U �- E of o) U inc d U -Np` �- m N .� a vi-NO` :o 'NO` .N E: a ° .`_ m t U c N t :k V) E 'c W a U w C C N ° C E N Y p"C;;. 0 at « '� "p N „ E: 20 ° a> — moo oo t9 � 0 mm ° 2m . U ::o co N •v) „ o a) a) N — O -O co -0 -o °- O " (3 -o CO c (o N at,„ o •j.01' . d C.) m 0- E �, O. C C U O co -0 ` c -c c c c c O a J J O '.. ._ -O a C C °'� zN_: ❑ Al , 2 = U N (n H c U n N N N .'c.. N C u) H m 2 .c .0 c -c (o a o .L. N a) 'n�q U a U m a a E, F&G- 89 u!'ir City of Rancho Cucamonga ! fes MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Mitigated Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826, Variance DRC2012-00127, Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927 Public Review Period Closes: June 13, 2012 Project Name: Project Applicant: Jon Friedman RBF Associates, Inc 1435 Reynolds Court Thousand Oaks,CA91362 Project Location(also see attached map): Located in the Low-Medium (LM)Residential District, within the Etiwanda Specific Plan at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of the 1-15 Freeway. Related files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826, Variance DRC2012-00127, and Stockpile Permit PMT2011-02122 - APN: 0227-012-24. Project Description: A request to subdivide a vacant parcel of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre) into eight (8) lots, and a request to allow walls in excess of 6 feet, the maximum wall • height permitted in residential districts for noise attenuation and soil retaining purposes along the perimeter of a proposed subdivision, and a request to remove six (6) or more trees. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga,acting as the lead agency,has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is proposing this Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted,the Mitigated Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. The factual and analytical basis for this finding is included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909) 477-2847. NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration during the • review period. June 13, 2012 Date of Determination Adopted By E, F&G- 90 RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826,A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE A VACANT PARCEL OF APPROXIMATELY 83,000 SQUARE FEET (1.91 ACRE) INTO EIGHT (8) LOTS IN THE LOW MEDIUM(LM)RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT,WITHIN THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF LIMA DRIVE AND THE WEST SIDE OF EAST AVENUE NEAR THE SOUTHBOUND OFF RAMP OF THE INTERSTATE 15 FREEWAY; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 0227-012-24. A. Recitals. 1. RBF Associates, Inc. filed an application for the issuance of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution,the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of June 2012, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. • NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting on June 13, 2012, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a vacant parcel located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of the Interstate 15 Freeway; and b. The project site is a vacant parcel with an area of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 645 feet (east to west) by approximately 124 feet(north to south); and c. To the north and west of the project site are single-family residences(Tract 15912), while to the east, across East Avenue, is a condominium complex(Tract 16335). To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally(from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp of the southbound Interstate 15 Freeway to Base Line Road; and d. The zoning of the property and the properties to the north and west is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the property and the properties to the east is Medium (M) • Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the south is Office Professional(OP)District and is currently owned by the City. The subject property and all surrounding properties are within the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and E, F&G- 91 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826— RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 2012 • Page 2 ge 2 e. The proposal is to subdivide the property into eight (8) lots for single-family residential development. The applicant does not intend to construct the homes at this time; and f. All lots will comply with the development standards applicable to this zoning district as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Individual lot areas will range between 8,649 square feet to 16,526 square feet, which are in excess of the minimum of 7,200 square feet that is required. The minimum average lot area is 10,281 square feet, which is in excess of the minimum 10,000 square feet that is required; and g. As the applicant has not submitted any applications to develop the site, any proposals for construction of residential structures on these parcels will be subject to review and action by the Planning Commission at a later date. These parcels will remain vacant until then;and h. All lots will have access to a public right-of-way. Access to the project site will be via Lima Drive. The street was constructed with Tract 15912. Unfinished public right-of-way improvements(sidewalk and parkway landscaping)on the south side of the street are missing and will be completed at the time this project site is developed with homes. i. This application is in conjunction with Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927 and Variance DRC2012-00127. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the • above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed development is in accord with the General Plan,the objectives of the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The proposal is to subdivide a property with an area of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre)into eight(8)lots for single-family residential development. The underlying General Plan designation is Low Medium Residential. b. The proposed development,together with the conditions applicable thereto,will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The project site is vacant;the proposed land use is consistent with the land uses within the vicinity where it is located and the expectations of the community. The zoning of the property and all surrounding properties is Low Medium (LM) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan. c. The proposed development complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan except for the proposed noise attenuation walls along the perimeter of the proposed subdivision that will be in excess of 6 feet in height. The applicant has submitted a Variance request for consideration by the Planning Commission. The proposed development, otherwise, meets all standards outlined in the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative • Declaration,together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and E,F&G- 92 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826 — RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. • June 13, 2012 Page 3 Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that,with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it,finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii)that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation • Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the subdivision of a parcel of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre) with overall dimensions of approximately 645 feet(east to west)by approximately 124 feet(north to south) at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of the Interstate 15 Freeway -APN: 0227-012-24. • 2) Development of all lots shall be in accordance with the standards and requirements applicable to the Low Medium(LM)Residential District as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. E, F&G- 93 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826— RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 4 • 3) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, Etiwanda Specific Plan, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 4) All setback lines shall be shown on the Final Map. 5) The interior side yard building setback lines of Lot 1 shall be 10 feet along the west property line and 5 feet along the east property line. • 6) Prior to recordation of the Final Map, all lots shall be rough graded to include building pads and interim improvements (for example, drainage) as deemed necessary by the City. 7) Prior to construction, all future homes and associated improvements shall require the review and approval by the City and the issuance of applicable Building Permits by the Building and Safety Department. The site plotting and architecture of these homes (and accessory structures) shall require the submittal of a Development Review application for Design Review Committee and Planning Commission review and approval. 8) Any house product on Lots 1 and 8 that is proposed by the applicant • and/or subsequent homebuilder shall be limited to a single-story structure. 9) The proposed wall along the south perimeter of the project site shall be constructed per Caltrans standard. 10) The proposed wall along the east perimeter of the project site, parallel to East Avenue shall be constructed per the decorative design shown in Figure 5-28A of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 11) The proposed wall along the west perimeter of the project site shall be constructed of decorative block that matches the design of the existing block wall along the common property line between the project site and 7185 and 7195 Acorn Place. 12) The segment of the proposed wall along the common property line between the project site and 7195 Acorn Place shall step-down, i.e. gradually lower in height, from its maximum height to the height of the existing wall. 13) The construction of the proposed wall along the west perimeter of the project site shall be coordinated with the owner/residents of the properties at 7185 and 7195 Acorn Place. 14) All Conditions of Approval for Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927 • and Variance DRC2012-00127 shall apply. E,F&G- 94 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826 — RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 • Page 5 Building and Safety(Grading) Department 1) Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall provide to Building and Safety Services Director(or his designee)a Storm Water Quality Management Plan for review and approval. 2) Water Quality Management Plan a) A Storm Water Quality Management Plan shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. b) The Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Webb & Associates dated June 23, 2011, has been reviewed and deemed"Approved with Corrections"dated September 27, 2011. The following corrections are required prior to the final approval of the WQMP. Page Section Item 6 Please complete this section including signatures. • Engineering Department 1) East Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Secondary Arterial" standards, Figure Nos. 5-28 and 5-28A of the Etiwanda Specific Plan and as required and including: a) Provide curb and gutter, a.c. pavement and 5-foot sidewalk, as required. b) Protect existing traffic signing and striping along East Avenue,or repair as required. c) Protect or relocate existing 9500 Lumens HPSV street light, as required. 2) As part of the design and alignment of the Base Line Road/Interstate 15 Freeway interchange, East Avenue fronting Lot 8 shall be widened and additional street dedication will be required. Amount of said additional dedication is under review and not yet determined at this time. 3) The development has two options to show the theme walls on East Avenue. One is to provide a 10-foot wide landscape easement, the wall being at the easterly boundary of Lot 8 and landscaping similar • to the west side of East Avenue, north of Chateau Drive (Lot 3 of Tract 15912) or to provide a 5-foot landscape easement per Figure No. 5-28 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. E, F&G- 95 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826— RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 6 • 4) Lima Drive frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Local" standards as required and including: a) Protect the existing curb and gutter or repair as required. d) Provide drive approaches per City Driveway Policy, sidewalk, curbside drain outlets, and street trees as required. e) Protect the existing 5800 Lumen HPSV street lights and provide two (2) 5800 Lumen HPSV street lights along Lima Drive. f) Protect the existing traffic signing and striping, or repair as required. 5) Modify Drawing No. 1715-D to show removals of existing storm drains and installation of new storm drain connections. This project cannot proceed with the removals and installation until the City Master Storm Drain Line 8 is installed. In addition, the basin cannot be filled until all proposed drainage facilities are installed. 6) The project site is in the Etiwanda Drainage Area 8, Upper Etiwanda. The developer is required to pay the Regional Mainline Fee which is currently $7,800.00 per net acre (fee is subject to verification of any • annual increase). Area 8 does not pay Secondary Regional Fee and the Master Plan Fee has been credited under Tract 15912. 7) Modify Drawing No. 1715-L for additional LMD improvements at rear of Lot 8. 8) The project needs to have a disclosure statement attached to the subdivision map and each individual property lot deed that informs the individual owners about the City's project to improve the Interstate 15 Freeway at the Base Line Road interchange. The disclosure should inform the individual lot owners that City's improvements include, but are not limited to, the reconstruction of the southbound off ramp, removal and replacement of the existing bridge over East Avenue,and installation of a 16-foot high sound wall adjacent to the south property line. 9) The developer shall request that the City appropriately process and quitclaim the blanket easement over the whole tract for drainage purposes, prior to final map approval. Environmental Mitigation Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating • condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and E,F&G- 96 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826— RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 7 maintained as per manufacturers'specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the developer shall submit construction plans to the 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. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • • 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 activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public 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.,wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent • (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQC[3])daily to reduce Fine Particulate Matter(PM10)emissions,in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. E, F&G- 97 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826— RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 8 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 10) Landscape with native and/.pr drought-resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. 11) Provide lighter color roofing and road materials and tree planning programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources MSC-01 measure. 12) All residential structures shall be required to incorporate high- efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances,and water heaters. 13) All residential structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane • windows and weather-stripping. 14) All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning devices (i.e.fireplaces/hearths) in new development on or after March 9, 2009. Biological Resources 1) The removed trees shall be replaced with a matching species (or equivalent) on a one-to-one basis of a minimum 15-gallon size. Cultural Resources 1) 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 sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for • the City to establish its archaeological value. E,F&G- 98 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826 — RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. • June 13, 2012 Page 9 • Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of the area. • Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 Archaeological resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archaeological sites, capping or covering sites with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind mitigation fee. • Prepare a technical resources management report,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. 2) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal 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 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 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 documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository(i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. • Geology and Soils 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB)daily to reduce PM1p emissions, E, F&G- 99 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826 — RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 10 • in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM,o emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PMio emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or other soil-stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly • as possible. 2) The construction contactor shall select construction equipment based on low-emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a statement on the grading plan that ensures all construction equipment will be tuned and maintained in accordance with the manufactures specification. 3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more than 5 minutes. 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline-or diesel-powered engines where feasible. 5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak-hour traffic. 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for construction crew. 7) Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials" such as materials that are resource efficient, recycled and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low-volatile-organic-compound (VOC) materials. 8) Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy • standard including but not limited to any combination of: E, F&G- 100 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826— RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. • June 13, 2012 Page 11 • Increased insulation, • Limit air leakage through the structure, • Incorporate Energy Star or better rated windows, space heating and cooling equipment, light fixtures, and appliances, • Landscape and developed site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping, • Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems, • Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements, • Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED's) for outdoor lighting. 9) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation strategy appropriate for the project and include the following: • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga • Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available and/or install the infrastructure to deliver and use reclaimed water: • Design building to be water efficient by installing water efficient fixtures and appliances including low flow faucets, dual flush toilets, and waterless urinals/water heaters. • Design irrigation to control runoff and to remove water to non- vegetated surfaces. 10) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. Hazards and Waste Materials 1) The project shall comply with Chapter 7A of the California Building Code (CBC),which includes building standards for the Wildiand-Urban Interface Fire Area. The standards call for the use of ignition-resistant materials and design to inhibit the intrusion of flame or burning embers projected by a vegetation fire and help reduce losses resulting from • repeated cycles of interface fire disasters. E, F&G- 101 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826—RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 12 • Hydrology and Water Quality 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval a 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. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, 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. This Erosion Control Plan 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. 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the • site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street 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. 5) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for Non-Category Projects prepared by the applicant to reduce pollutants during construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 6) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for Non-Category Projects prepared by the applicant to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for 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. 8) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall • obtain a Notice of Intent(NOI)to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)General E, F&G- 102 • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826— RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 • Page 13 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 1) For noise attenuation purposes, the applicant shall construct a 6-foot high block wall along the south property lines of Lots 1 through 4, a 9-foot high block wall along the south property lines of Lots 5 through 8, and a 7.5-foot high block wall along the east property line of Lot 8. These walls shall be constructed of masonry block or other material of sufficient weight(3.5 pounds per square foot of face area)and have no decorative cutouts or line-of-sight openings between the project site and adjacent land uses. All gaps(except for weep holes)shall be filled with grout or caulking. These walls shall be fully constructed simultaneously with the development of the site and prior to occupancy of any of the homes. If the Interstate 15 Freeway/Base Line Road Interchange project and corresponding noise attenuating wall at the north side of the southbound off ramp connecting the Interstate 15 Freeway and Base Line Road (as discussed in the Acoustical Analysis • • dated October 25, 2011) are both completed prior to the issuance of precise Grading and Building Permits for the development of the project site, then the noise attenuating wall along the south and east perimeter of the project site (as discussed in the Amendment to the Acoustical Analysis dated January 13, 2012) will not be required. 2) When an application for the development of homes on the project site is submitted, the applicant (current or future) shall submit a noise assessment to determine the required mitigations measures to reduce the noise impacts to levels of less significance. 3) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 4) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. The developer shall hire a consultant 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. E, F&G- 103 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826— RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 14 • 5) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in the first phase. 6) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, 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. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2012. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Luis Munoz, Jr., Chairman • ATTEST: Jeffrey A. Bloom, Secretary I, Jeffrey A. Bloom, 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 13th day of June 2012, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: • E, F&G- 104 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT . E DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: SUBTT18826 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP APPLICANT: RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF LIMA DRIVE AND THE WEST SIDE OF EAST AVENUE NEAR THE SOUTHBOND OFF RAMP OF THE INTERSTATE 15 FREEWAY—APN: 0227-012-24. ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: itGeneral Requirements Completion Date 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. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 12-24, 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 activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 3. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The / /_ project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning Director hearing: a) Mitigated Negative Declaration -$ 2,151.50 X B. Time Limits 1. This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning / /_ Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. • 1 E, F&G- 105 Project No.SUBTT18826 Completion Date C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include _/_/_ • site plans,architectural elevations,exterior materials and colors,landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department,the conditions contained herein, Development Code regulations, and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon,all Conditions _/_/_ of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and _/_/_ State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be _/_/_ submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for / /_ consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.)or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. • 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all _/_/_ other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 7. A detailed plan indicating trail widths, maximum slopes, physical conditions,fencing, and weed _/_/_ control, in accordance with City Master Trail drawings, shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to approval and recordation of the Final Tract Map and prior to • approval of street improvement and grading plans. Developer shall upgrade and construct all trails, including fencing and drainage devices, in conjunction with street improvements. 8. Local Feeder Trail entrances shall also provide access for service vehicles,such as veterinarians _/_/_ or hay deliveries,including a 12-foot minimum drive approach. Entrance shall be gated provided that equestrian access is maintained through step-throughs in accordance with Engineering Department Standard Drawing 1006-B and 1007-B. 9. Local Feeder Trail grades shall not exceed 0.5%at the downstream end of a trail for a distance / /_ of 25 feet behind the public right-of-way line to prohibit trail debris from reaching the street. Drainage devices may be required by the Building Official 10. Provide a 24-foot by 24-foot or 12-foot by 48-foot corral area in the rear yard adjacent to the Local / /_ Feeder Trail. Grade access from corral to trail with a maximum slope of 5:1 and a minimum width of 10 feet. 11. For single-family residential development within the Equestrian/Rural Overlay District,at least one / /_ model home shall be provided with a constructed 24-foot by 24-foot corral with appropriate fencing. 12. Where corner side,interior side or rear yard property lines are adjacent to local equestrian trails, _/ /_ construct minimum 6 foot high decorative masonry walls. Decorative masonry shall mean split- face double sided block, 'slump stone'or an alternative material that is acceptable to the Design Review Committee. • • 2 E,F&G- 106 Project No.SUBTT18826 Completion Date 13. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs)shall not prohibit the keeping the equine / / animals where zoning requirements for the keeping of said animals have been met. Individual lot • owners in subdivisions shall have the option of keeping said animals without the necessity of appealing to boards of directors of homeowners' associations for amendments to the CC&Rs. 14. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property _/_/_ owner, homeowners'association,or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape maintenance shall be submitted for Planning Director and Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of building permits. 15. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double wall _/_/_ condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/ fences along the project's perimeter. 16. Construct block walls between homes(i.e.,along interior side and rear property lines), rather than _/_/_ wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency. 17. Access gates to the rear yards shall be constructed from fmaterial more durable than wood /_/_ gates. Acceptable materials include, but are not limited to,wrought iron and PVC. 18. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. / /_ 19. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured _/_/_ products. D. Building Design 1. For all residential development,provide conduit from each unit/lot and a pull box to connect to the _/_/_ • • street. Provide interior structured wiring for each house/building with minimum Category 5 copper wire, Radio Grade 6 coaxial cable, and a central distribution panel, prior to release of occupancy (fiber-to-the building, FTTB). Plans shall be submitted for Planning Director and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. E. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in / /_ the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. 2. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 _/_/_ slope,shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. • 3 E, F&G- 107 Project No.SUBTT18826 Completion Date 3. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater _/_/_ slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq.ft.of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size • shrub per each 100 sq.ft.of slope area,and appropriate ground cover. In addition,slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 4. For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously _/_/_ maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be ' conducted by the Planning Department to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. 5. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development _/ /_ Code and/or Etiwanda Specific Plan. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 6. The final design of the perimeter parkways,walls,landscaping,and sidewalks shall be included in _/_/_ the required landscape plans and shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Services Department. 7. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the _/_/_ perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 8. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas,the _/_/_ design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services.Department. 9. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water _/_/_ efficient landscaping as defined in Ordinance 823 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. • F. Environmental 1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of _/_/_ implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the Planning Director in the amount of$557 prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures. Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be considered grounds for forfeit. G. Other Agencies 1. The applicant shall contact the U.S.Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location /_/_ of mailboxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mailboxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. • 4 E, F&G- 108 Project No.SUBTT18826 Completion Date APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DEPARTMENT, (909)477-2710, • OR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: OTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S) H. General Requirements 1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: _/_/_ a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan; c. Floor Plan; d. Ceiling 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 line diagrams; f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams,water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air conditioning; and g. Planning Department Project Number(i.e.,SUBTT18826)clearly identified on the outside of all plans. • 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils 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. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. _/_/_ I. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be / /_ marked with the project file number (i.e., SUBTT18826). 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 Building and Safety Department for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential project or major addition,the applicant _/_/_ shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include,but are not limited to: Permit and Plan Check Fees, Construction and Demolition Diversion Program deposit and fees and School Fees. The applicant shall provide a copy of the School Fees receipt to the Building and Safety Department prior to permit issuance. 3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building and Safety Official after tract/parcel map / /_ recordation and prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday _/ /_ through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays. • 5 E, F&G- 109 Project No.SUBTT18826 Completion Date J. New Structures 1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances _/_/_ • considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness. 2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. / /_ • 3. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's "high wind" instructions. • / /_ 4. All structures are required to be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. / /_ K. Grading 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building /_/_ Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The Grading and Drainage Plan(s)shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to _6 /_ perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 3. The final Grading and Drainage Plan,appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be _/_/_ completed, submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 4. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the _/_/_ time of application for Grading Plan check. 5. A separate Grading and Plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for _/_/_ • existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of combined cut and fill. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared, stamped, and wet signed by a California licensed Civil Engineer. 6. The applicant shall comply with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Dust Control Measures and place _/_/_ a dust control sign on the project site prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. 7. If a Rough Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit are submitted to the Building and Safety Official for _/_/_ review,that plan shall be a separate plan/permit from Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 8. A drainage study showing a 100-year, AMC 3 design storm event for on-site drainage shall be _/_/_ prepared and submitted to the Building and Safety Official for review and approval for on-site storm water drainage prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. All reports shall be wet signed and sealed by the Engineer of Record. • 9. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage easements / /_ priOr to the issuance of a Grading Permit. 10. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage acceptance _/_/_ letter(s)from adjacent downstream property owner(s) or discharge flows in a natural condition (concentrated flows are not accepted) and shall provide the Building and Safety Official a drainage study showing the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. 11. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain written permission from the adjacent / /_ property owners to construct wall on property line or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s)to be constructed offset from the property line. • 6 E, F&G- 110 Project No.SUBTT18826 Completion Date 12. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on-site construction where /_/_ possible, and provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. • 13. All slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way or adjacent private _/_/_ property. 14. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted / /_ California Plumbing Code. . • 15. The maximum parking stall gradient is 5 percent. Accessibility parking stall grades shall be _/_/_ constructed per the current adopted California Building Code. 16. The final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100-feet _/_/_ beyond the project boundary. 17. The applicant shall provide a grading agreement and grading bond for all cut and fill combined _/_/_ exceeding 5,000 cubic yards prior to issuance of a Grading Permit. The grading agreement and bond shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official. 18. This project shall comply with the accessibility requirements of the current adopted California / /_ Building Code. 19. the precise Grading and Drainage Plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho / /_ Cucamonga handout"Information for Grading Plans and Permit." 20. Grading Inspections: / /_ a) Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre-grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the Building Inspector to discuss about grading . • requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a pre-grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations,the Grading Permit may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector; b) The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Department at least 1 working day in advance to request the following inspections prior to continuing grading operations: i. The bottom of the over-excavation H. At the completion of rough grading, the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety front counter) an original and a copy of the Pad Certifications to be prepared by and properly wet signed and sealed by the Civil Engineer and Soils Engineer of Record; iv. The rough grading certificates and the compaction reports will be reviewed by the Associate Engineer or a designated person and approved prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. c) Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy the engineer of record shall certify the functionality of the storm water quality management plan (WQMP) best management practices (BMP) devices. • 7 E,F&G- 111 Project No.SUBTT18826 Completion Date APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT,(909)477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: • • L. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets(measured from _/_/_ street centerline): 44 total feet on East Avenue / / • 2. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the / /_ final map. M. Street Improvements 1. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source / /_ of energy,fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council,except:that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings,structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. 2. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: _/_/_ Curb 8. A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike • Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other East Avenue X • • Lima Drive X X X X X Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be provided for this item. (E)Access Ramps 3. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees,street lights,and intersection safety lights / /_ on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements,prior to final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a _/_/_ construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. c. Pavement striping, marking,traffic signing, street name signing,traffic signal conduit,and _/_/_ interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. • • 8 E,F&G- 112 Project No.SUBTT18826 Completion Date d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction _/_/ project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and • interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer Notes: 1) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets,a maximum of 200 feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer. 2) Conduit shall be 3-inch galvanized steel with pull rope or as specified. e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City /_/ Standards or as directed by the City Engineer. f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with _/_/ adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving,which shall be refunded upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be _/_/_ installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots. h. Street names shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to submittal for first plan /_/_ check. 4. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in _/_/_ accordance with the City's street tree program. 5. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed _/_/_ legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street • improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction legend stating: "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on sheet (typically sheet 1)." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. The Engineering Services Department reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field conditions and other variables. For additional information, contact the Project Engineer. Grow Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spacing Size Qty. Lima Drive Cercis occidentalis Western Redbud 3' 20'O.C. 15 Gal Fill In East Avenue Geijera parviflora Australian Willow 5' 25'O.C. 15 Gal Fill (Jog Area) Eucalyoptus sideroxylon Red Ironbark 6' 50'O.C. 15 Gal in (Parkway) Construction Notes for Street Trees: 1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans. 2) Prior to the commencement of any planting,an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil amendments, as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Services Department. 4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. N. Public Maintenance Areas • 1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards shall be _/ / submitted to the Engineering Services Department for review and approval prior to final map 9 E, F&G- 113 Project No.SUBTT18826 Completion Date approval or issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. The following landscaped parkways,medians,paseos,easements,trails or other areas shall be annexed into the Landscape Maintenance District: East Avenue Beautification Master Plan. • 2. Public landscape areas are required to incorporate substantial areas(40%)of mortared cobble or _/_/_ other acceptable non-irrigated surfaces. 3. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting _/_/_ Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of building permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 4. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the _/_/_ developer until accepted by the City. 5. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s)shall conform to the results of the respective East / /_ Avenue Beautification Master Plan: East Avenue 0. Drainage and Flood Control 1. A final drainage study shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map _/_/_ approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first. All drainage facilities shall be installed as required by the City Engineer. 2. Trees are prohibited within 5 feet of the outside diameter of any public storm drain pipe measured _/_/_ from the outer edge of a mature tree trunk. P. Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system,water, gas, _/ /_ • electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. / /_ 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the / /_ Cucamonga Valley Water District(CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District,and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits,whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. / /_ Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. Q. General Requirements and Approvals 1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all / /_ new streetlights for the first six months of operation,prior to final map approval or prior to building permit issuance if no map is involved. • 10 E, F&G- 114 Project No.SUBTT16626 Completion Date 2. Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, a Diversion Deposit and related administrative fees /_/_ shall be paid for the Construction and Demolition Diversion Program. The deposit is fully • refundable if at least 50%of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department when the first Building Permit application is submitted to Building and Safety. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: R. 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 censored cell. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: SEE ATTACHED • • 11 E, F&G- 115 6p Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District ' Fire Construction Services tr4, FIRE a STANDARD CONDITIONS September 26, 2011 RBF Associates Inc. North of Baseline west of East Avenue (8) SFR Lots SUBTT18826 THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO THIS PROJECT. FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply 1. The private water supply and fire hydrants shall be design in accordance with RCFPD Standard 5-10 and the 2010 California Fire Code. 2. Public water supply and fire hydrants shall be design in accordance with the RCFPD Standard 5-10, the 2010 California Fire Code and the Cucamonga Valley Water District. FSC-2 Fire Flow • 1. The required fire flow for this project will be determined in gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch when the structure size for the development is known. This requirement is made in accordance with Fire Code Appendix III-A, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances. 2. Public fire hydrants located within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project may be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property shall not be used to provide required fire flow. 3. Fire protection water plans are required for all projects that must extend the existing water supply to or onto the site. Building permits will not be issued until fire protection water plans are approved. 4. On all site plans to be submitted for review, show all fire hydrants located within 600-feet of the proposed project site. FSC-9 Single-family Residential Sales Model homes require approved Fire District vehicle access and water supply from a public or private water main system before construction. All structures must be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers in accordance with NFPA 13D per the 2010 California Residential Code FSC-13 Alternate Method Application Fire Construction Services staff and the Fire Marshal will review all requests for alternate method, when *submitted. The request must be submitted on the Fire District "Application for Alternate Method" form along with supporting documents and payment of the $92 review fee. FCS-15 Annexation of the parcel map: Annexation of the parcel map into the Community Facilities District#85-1 or#88-1 is required prior to the issuance of grading or building permits. E, F&G- 116 Chronological Summary of RCFPD Standard Conditions PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS — Please complete the following prior to the • issuance of any building permits: 1. Public Water Supply (Domestic/Fire) Systems: The applicant shall submit a plan showing the locations of all new public fire hydrants for the review and approval by the Fire District and CCWD. On the plan, show all existing fire hydrants within a 600-foot radius of the project. Please reference the RCFPD Standard #10-5. 2. All required public fire hydrants shall be installed, flushed and operable prior to delivering any combustible framing materials to the site. CCWD personnel shall inspect the installation and witness the hydrant flushing. Fire Construction Services shall inspect the site after acceptance of the public water system by CCWD. Fire Construction Services must grant a water supply clearance before lumber is dropped on site (except form lumber). 3. Construction Access: The access roads must be paved in accordance with all the requirements of the RCFPD Fire Lane Standard #14-1. All temporary utilities over access roads must be installed at least 14' 6" above the finished surface of the road. 4. Fire Flow: A current fire flow letter from CCWD must be received. The applicant is responsible for obtaining the fire flow information from CCWD and submitting the letter to Fire Construction Services. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION — Please complete the following: 1. Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers". On private property, the • markers shall be installed at the centerline of the fire access road, at each hydrant location. 2. Public Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire access roadways must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and acceptable to Fire Construction Services. 3. Address: Prior to the granting of occupancy, single-family dwellings shall post the address with minimum 4-inch numbers on a contrasting background. The numbers shall be internally or externally illuminated during periods of darkness. The numbers shall be visible from the street. When building setback from the public roadway exceeds 100-feet, additional 4-inch numbers shall be displayed at the property entry. • • E, F&G- 117 RESOLUTION NO. 12-25 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE DRC2012-00127 A REQUEST TO ALLOW WALLS IN EXCESS OF 6 FEET, THE MAXIMUM WALL HEIGHT PERMITTED IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS FOR NOISE ATTENUATION AND SOIL RETAINING PURPOSES ALONG ' THE PERIMETER OF A PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF A PROPERTY OF APPROXIMATELY 83,000 SQUARE FEET (1.91 ACRE) INTO EIGHT (8) LOTS IN THE LOW MEDIUM (LM) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT,WITHIN THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF LIMA DRIVE AND THE WEST SIDE OF EAST AVENUE NEAR THE SOUTHBOUND OFF RAMP OF THE INTERSTATE 15 FREEWAY; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 0227-012-24. A. Recitals. 1. RBF Associates, Inc. filed an application for the issuance of Variance DRC2012-00127 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of June 2012, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. • B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on June 13, 2012, including written and oral staff reports,together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application is related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927; and b. The application applies to a vacant parcel located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of the Interstate 15 Freeway; and c. The project site is a vacant parcel with an area of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 645 feet (east to west) by approximately 124 feet (north to south); and d. To the north and west of the project site are single-family residences(Tract 15912), • while to the east, across East Avenue, is a condominium complex (Tract 16335). To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp of the southbound Interstate 15 Freeway to Base Line Road; and E, F&G- 118 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-25 VARIANCE DRC2012-00127— RBF ASSOCIATES INC. June 13, 2012 Page 2 • e. The zoning of the property and the properties to the north and west is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the property and the properties to the east is Medium (M) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the south is Office Professional (OP) and is currently owned by the City. The subject property and all surrounding properties are within the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and f. The applicant is requesting a Variance to allow the construction of combination walls along the south, east, and west perimeters of the proposed subdivision. The combination walls will be comprised of a lower retaining wall and an upper screen/garden or noise attenuating wall and will have an overall height in excess of 6 feet; and g. Per Section 17.08.060(K)of the Development Code,the maximum height of walls permitted in residential districts is 6 feet; and h. The height of the proposed combination walls will be approximately 10.5 feet along the east property line (3 feet retaining, 7.5 feet noise attenuating) parallel to East Avenue, approximately 14 to 17 feet along the south property line (up to 8 feet retaining, 6 to 9 feet noise attenuating), and between approximately 10 to 12 feet along the west property line (4 to 6 feet retaining, 6 feet screening). 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 • and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. The proposed walls along the east and south perimeters of the project site are for noise attenuation purposes to reduce the exterior noise levels at the lots along the perimeter of the proposed subdivision. The height of the walls is necessary to mitigate the noise impacts to a level that is less than 65 dBA CNEL(Community Noise Equivalent Level)as specified in the Development Code. If the walls were limited to 6 feet as specified in the Code, or if the walls were absent altogether,the exterior noise levels would not comply with the Code, nor be consistent with Public Health and Safety policies relating to noise (Goal PS-13 of the General Plan). The retaining portion of these walls is necessary to retain soil that will need to be imported in order to raise the finished surface elevation at the project perimeter to allow for adequate surface drainage to Lima Drive and accommodate sewer connections. There is no practical alternative to these walls. b. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district. The project site is located generally adjacent to the Ontario Freeway (Interstate 15)and the southbound off ramp that links the freeway to Base Line Road. As a result, it is exposed to noise generated by traffic that is generally not present near other residential properties in the City which are screened by existing development and/or sufficiently distant from these principal noise sources that noise impacts are negligible. c. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. • The purpose of the walls is to attenuate traffic noise. The exterior noise levels generated by traffic exceed the maximum limits established by the Development Code and would negatively affect a E, F&G- 119 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-25 VARIANCE DRC2012-00127— RBF ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 • Page 3 future homeowner's ability to enjoy and use the outdoor areas of his property in the absence of these walls. Furthermore, the effectiveness of noise attenuating materials used in the construction of the homes is augmented by the presence of the noise attenuating perimeter wall. The absence of the wall would reduce the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures and expose the occupants of the homes to elevated interior noise. d. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district. The Ontario Freeway (Interstate 15) corridor within the City is adjacent to numerous residential properties. Traffic noise impacts along the corridor must be mitigated to levels as described in the Development Code and consistent with the General Plan. The freeway corridor abuts various residential zoning districts including the Low Medium (LM) Residential District. Walls of this height or similar are common along the freeway corridor for noise attenuation purposes where residential properties are adjacent to the freeway. e. That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The wall segment along East Avenue will be generally similar to the existing walls for other residential development along East Avenue and in the general vicinity of the freeway that were constructed for noise attenuating and/or grading related purposes. This segment, and associated landscaping, will be constructed per the decorative design shown in Figure 5-28A of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. The wall segment as seen from the Ontario Freeway(Interstate 15)will be similar to the height of other • noise attenuation walls along the freeway corridor within the City. This segment will be constructed per the decorative design established by Caltrans. The property adjacent to the wall along the south perimeter of the proposed subdivision is vacant. There is pending reconstruction of the interchange of the Interstate 15 Freeway and Base Line Road. Future practical development of this property will be precluded by the improvements associated with the interchange (roadway, overpass, embankments, etc.). Although the property is owned by the City as part of the interchange reconstruction project, Caltrans will acquire the property from the City. This segment also will be constructed per the decorative design established by Caltrans. The wall segment along the west property line will have the most impact on the properties located at 7185 and 7195 Acorn Place. At the request and acceptance of the owners/residents of both properties,the applicant will design and construct the wall in a manner that will be the least disruptive to them, including leaving the existing property line wall in place, i.e. constructing the new wall parallel and immediately adjacent to the existing wall; constructing the new wall with decorative block; and visually integrating the new wall with the existing wall by gradually lowering its height from its maximum height to the height of the existing wall instead of ending abruptly at the midpoint of the rear property line at 7195 Acorn Place. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of • the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that with the imposition of mitigation measures there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative E, F&G- 120 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-25 VARIANCE DRC2012-00127— RBF ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 4 • Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii)that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, • California 91730, telephone (909)477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below. Planning Department 1) Approval is for perimeter walls in excess of 6 feet, the maximum wall height permitted in residential districts, for noise attenuation and soil retaining purposes along the perimeter of a proposed subdivision of a property of approximately 83,000 square feet(1.91 acre)into eight(8) lots in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, within the Etiwanda Specific Plan located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of the Interstate 15 Freeway-APN: 0227-012-24. 2) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 3) All Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00963 shall apply. • E, F&G- 121 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-25 VARIANCE DRC2012-00127 — RBF ASSOCIATES June 13, 2012 Page 4 • Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i) that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii) that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, • California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth • below. Planning Department 1) Approval is for perimeter walls in excess of 6 feet, the maximum wall height permitted in residential districts, for noise attenuation and soil retaining purposes along the perimeter of a proposed subdivision of a property of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre) into eight (8) lots in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, within the Etiwanda Specific Plan located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of the Interstate 15 Freeway - APN: 0227-012-24. 2) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 3) All Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00963 shall apply. • E, F&G- 122 et COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS ! PROJECT#: DRC2012-00127 SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT: RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF LIMA DRIVE AND THE WEST SIDE OF EAST AVENUE NEAR THE SOUTHBOUND OFF RAMP OF INTERSTATE 15 FREEWAY-APN: 0227-012-24 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 0. General Requirements Completion Date 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. 2. Copies of the •signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No.12-25, 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 activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. B. Time Limits 1. Variance approval shall expire if building permits are not issued or approved use has not /_/_ commenced within 5 years from the date of approval. No extensions are allowed. C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include _/ /_ site plans, architectural elevations,exterior materials and colors,landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. • 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions / /_ of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 1 E,F&G- 123 Project No.SUBTT18826 Completion Date 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and / /_ State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety • Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy. 4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be _/_/_ submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for / /_ consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.)or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all /_/_ other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the time of building permit issuance. • • 2 • I:\PLANNING\FINAL\PLNGCOMM\2012 Res & Stf Rpt\DRC2012-00127StdCond 6-13.doc E, F&G- 124 RESOLUTION NO. 12-26 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2011-00927 A REQUEST TO REMOVE SIX (6) OR MORE TREES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF A PARCEL OF 83,000 SQUARE FEET (1.91 ACRE) IN THE LOW MEDIUM (LM)RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT,WITHIN THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF LIMA DRIVE AND THE WEST SIDE OF EAST AVENUE NEAR THE SOUTHBOUND OFF RAMP OF THE INTERSTATE 15 FREEWAY; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 0227-012-24. A. Recitals. 1. RBF Associates, Inc. filed an application for the approval of Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927 as described in the title or this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tree Removal Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of June 2012, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. • NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on June 13, 2012, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application is related to Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826 and Variance DRC2012-00127; and b. The application applies to a vacant parcel located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of the Interstate 15 Freeway; and c. The project site is a vacant parcel with an area of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 645 feet (east to west) by approximately 124 feet(north to south); and d. To the north and west of the project site are single-family residences(Tract 15912) while to the east, across East Avenue, is a condominium complex(Tract 16335). To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally(from northeast to southwest)by the • off-ramp of the southbound Interstate 15 Freeway to Base Line Road; and E, F&G- 125 • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-26 DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 2 e. The zoning of the property and the properties to the north and west is Low Medium • (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the property and the properties to the east is Medium (M) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the south is Office Professional (OP) and is currently owned by the City. The subject property and all surrounding properties are within the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and f. The trees are not designated as historically significant; and g. The trees are not specifically noted in the Etiwanda Specific Plan per Figure 5-13; and h. The applicant has submitted an arborist report assessing the health of the trees. The report observes that the trees are Eucalyptus that range between poor and good health and are infested with a variety of insects including beetles; and i. It is necessary to remove the trees because of their condition and in order to grade the site, construct future single-family residences, and associated improvements that will allow economic enjoyment of the property; and j. It is not necessary to remove the trees to construct required improvements within a flood control or utility right-of-way; and k. There are a significant number of mature and newly planted trees within the surrounding residential neighborhoods;the removal does not affect the established character of the • area and the property values; and I. The trees cannot be preserved by pruning and proper maintenance or relocation rather than removal; and m. The trees do not constitute a significant natural resource of the City. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. The proposed project is in accord with the objectives of the Municipal Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and c. The proposed project is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and d. The proposed project, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for • the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and E,F&G- 126 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-26 DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 3 • Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that,with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it, finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (H)that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore • adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the removal of twenty-nine(29)trees in conjunction with a proposal to subdivide a vacant parcel with an area of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre) into eight (8) lots in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District, within the Etiwanda Specific Plan, located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of the Interstate 15 Freeway-APN: 0227-012-24. 2) Section 19.08.100 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code requires that all Heritage trees be replaced on a one-for-one basis, not less than • 15-gallon size. E,F&G- 127 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-26 DRC2011-00927— RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 4 3) The removed trees shall be replaced with a matching species (or • equivalent) of a minimum 15-gallon size. 4) This permit shall be valid for a period of 90 days, unless an extension is requested in writing at least 14 days prior to the expiration date. Where this permit is associated with development, the effective date begins and the 90 days shall start from the date of final map recordation or Building Permit issuance, whichever occurs first. 5) All Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826 and Variance DRC2012-00127 shall apply. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2012. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Luis Munoz, Jr., Chairman ATTEST: • Jeffrey A. Bloom, Secretary I, Jeffrey A. Bloom, 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 13th day of June 2012, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: • E,F&G- 128 reY ^ �, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT fe DEPARTMENT fl ail 7 STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: DRC2012-00927 SUBJECT: TREE REMOVAL PERMIT APPLICANT: RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF LIMA DRIVE AND THE WEST SIDE OF EAST AVENUE NEAR THE SOUTHBOUND OFF RAMP OF INTERSTATE 15 FREEWAY-APN: 0227-012-24. ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 0. General Requirements Completion Date 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. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 12-26, 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 activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. B. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include / /_ site plans,architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors,landscaping,sign program,and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, the Etiwanda Specific Plan, and the Development Code regulations. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon,all Conditions _/ /_ of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 3. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code,all _/_/_ other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the • time of building permit issuance. 1 E, F&G- 129 The Historic Preservation Society of Rancho Cucamonga Presents Tour Historic Rancho Cucamonga Saturday www.HPAofRC.org June 16, 2012 -Donations Welcomed- llam-5pm ., 1.. ` c r/ _ s • -( ` /1-11-1 .8 1 a , 210FREEWAY �' , r .• A VIII .�.,44 FOGSI� x .rarr+-t.. - i*1 1 = 4 19th ST. l `+ ._._!k4't ? ` .....?i.147. C$.11 ,.. 1 iE@". ..aY'.' - v. ISAAC LORD HOUSE ® ALBERT HOUSE . .. ® W sf m �J� �` ..gar..,- . mot 1' .g k i l' Li Of BAiSELI NE RD. a 44.6 X42 a z II V re CHURCH ST. Q. a Z ,. c.7777.. ,, .. a' ,�P •ISAAC LORD HOUSE ,. ® W i SAN BERNARDINO RD. FOOTHILL.BLVD. m ,''y�F1tp ,i ( : 1 The Rancho Cucamonga Historic Tour 1- • ,- I t#-dy ` , r Locations for 2012 ; , � , , u -4; y L ',` '' . You May Start At Any Home 4, ,` , ' 3 �� A,J. t• Albert House r ,.`i .Milli r , ' 10323 19th St. V. 5i r Se, � _; • t--,- . . . t Alta Loma, CA 91701 OLD STONE CHURCH ` Isaac Lord House 6797 Hellman Ave. 1 ;- = 1 4'r (49.-: Alta Loma, CA 91701 W,', vi n Old Stone Church (united Methodist Church) 1 ' 7690 Archibald Ave. , •-------- tl� a r' h -'; Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ho SSAfl04 . . j`� r�'', San Bernardino Rd. Fire Station #172 + 14 - `' . ': 9612 San Bernardino Rd. ' • , - on o'fl ■ N j ,;,rri'i, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Lis, i i Sorry NO wheel chair access SAN BERNARDINO RD.FIRE STATION#172,; Children under 12 discouraged FOR INFORMATION CALL 909-271-4772 $25 PRE-SALE $30 AT THE DOOR PRE-SALE TICKETS CAN BE PURCHASED AT FRAME-ART 8601 BASELINE RD. RANCHO CUCAMONGA 91730 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826— RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 5 Building and Safety(Grading) Department 1) Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall provide to Building and Safety Services Director (or his designee) a Storm Water Quality Management Plan for review and approval. 2) Water Quality Management Plan a) A Storm Water Quality Management Plan shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. Engineering Department 1) East Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Secondary Arterial" standards, Figure Nos. 5-28 and 5-28A of the Etiwanda Specific Plan and as required and including: a) Provide curb and gutter, a.c. pavement and 5-foot sidewalk, as required. b) Protect existing traffic signing and striping along East Avenue, or repair as required. c) Protect or relocate existing 9500 Lumens HPSV street light,as required. 2) As part of the design and alignment of the Base Line Road/Interstate 15 Freeway interchange, East Avenue fronting Lot 8 shall be widened and additional street dedication will be required. Amount of said additional dedication is under review and not yet determined at this time. 3) The development has two options to show the theme walls on East Avenue. One is to provide a 10-foot wide landscape easement, the wall being at the easterly boundary of Lot 8 and landscaping similar to the west side of East Avenue, north of Chateau Drive (Lot 3 of Tract 15912) or to provide a 5-foot landscape easement per Figure No. 5-28 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. C I� 9r. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826— RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 5 Building and Safety(Grading) Department 1) Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall provide to Building and Safety Services Director(or his designee)a Storm Water Quality Management Plan for review and approval. 2) Water Quality Management Plan a) A Storm Water Quality Management Plan shall be approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. b) The Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Webb,&.� 'Associates dated- June 23, 2011, has been reviewed and ,�) deemed"'Approvedwith Corrections"dated September.27,2011. U / The following corrections are required prior to the final,approval r- of the WQMP. Page Section Item 6 Please complete this section including signatures. 3 Engineering Department 1) East Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Secondary Arterial" standards, Figure Nos. 5-28 and 5-28A of the Etiwanda Specific Plan and as required and including: a) Provide curb and gutter, a.c. pavement and 5-foot sidewalk, as required. b) Protect existing traffic signing and striping along East Avenue,or repair as required. c) Protect or relocate existing 9500 Lumens HPSV street light, as required. 2) As part of the design and alignment of the Base Line Road/Interstate 15 Freeway interchange, East Avenue fronting Lot 8 shall be widened and additional street dedication will be required. Amount of said additional dedication is under review and not yet determined at this time. 3) The development has two options to show the theme walls on East Avenue. One is to provide a 10-foot wide landscape easement, the wall being at the easterly boundary of Lot 8 and landscaping similar to the west side of East Avenue, north of Chateau Drive (Lot 3 of Tract 15912) or to provide a 5-foot landscape easement per Figure No. 5-28 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. E, F&G- 95 1Pc%L / Reco/az `-6P y PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18826, DRC2012-00127, AND DRC2011-00927 - RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 2 B. General Plan Designations: • Project Site - Low Medium Residential North - Low Medium Residential South - Office East - Medium Residential West - Low Medium Residential C. Site Characteristics: The project site is a parcel of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre) located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of the Ontario Freeway (1-15) (Exhibit B). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 645 feet (east to west) by approximately 124 feet (north to south). The site is vacant and until very recently was a drainage basin with an approximate depth of 15 feet. The site is currently being filled by the applicant with soil (Related file: Temporary Stockpile Permit DRC2011-00927) that was excavated as part of storm drain improvements that are being constructed by the City at a location south of the project site. There are numerous trees along the north perimeter of the project site along the Lima Avenue street frontage. To the north and west of the project site are single-family residences (Tract 15912), while to the east, a es •venue, is a condominium complex (Tract 16335). To the south is a set of vacant prop- ies t t are •`-n- bisected diagonally (from northeast to southwest) by the off ram• rom the southbounds Interstate 15 Freeway to Base Line Road. The zoning of the property = •d the properties to the north and west is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning •• the erty—and—the properties to the east is Medium (M) Residential District. The zoning of the • operties to the south is Office Professional (OP) District and is currently owned by the City. The su. - •roperty and all surrounding properties are within the Etiwanda Specific Plan (Exhibit C). As previou • •• • • subject property was a drainage basin; the surrounding topography is generally level with a southerly slope; the elevations at the north and south perimeter are approximately 1,312 feet and 1,308 feet, respectively. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into eight (8) lots for single-family residential development (Exhibit D). Development/construction of the homes following the subdivision of the property will be by others, as it is not the intent of the applicant to do so. All of the lots will comply with the development standards applicable to this zoning district as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Individual lot areas will range between 8,649 square feet to 16,526 square feet, which are in excess of the minimum of 7,200 square feet that is required. The minimum average lot area is 10,281 square feet, which is in excess of the minimum 10,000 square feet that is required. The depth of each lot will be at least 100 feet, and the width of each lot will meet the required 60-foot dimension. All of the lots will be conventional, i.e. rectangular in shape, which will allow conventional house plotting. The proposed subdivision has two major design issues that are driven by technical considerations. The first issue is the finished pad elevations of each lot. Because of the need for surface water to drain, i.e. flow to, and the sewer lines of each lot to connect to the existing sewer line beneath the surface of Lima Drive, the finished pad elevations of each lot must be higher than the finished surface at the street. To accomplish this, the average pad elevation will be approximately 1,313.9 feet. These raised pad elevations will result in a difference in elevation between the project site and the properties to the south and west. The project site will be at least 4 feet higher than the properties to the south and between at least 4 to 6 feet higher than the properties to the west. RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826,A REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE A VACANT PARCEL OF APPROXIMATELY 83,000 SQUARE FEET (1.91 ACRE) INTO EIGHT (8) LOTS IN THE LOW MEDIUM (LM) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, WITHIN THE ETIWANDA SPECIFIC PLAN, LOCATED AT THE SOUTH SIDE OF LIMA DRIVE AND THE WEST SIDE OF EAST AVENUE NEAR THE SOUTHBOUND OFF RAMP OF THE INTERSTATE 15 FREEWAY; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 0227-012-24. A. Recitals. 1. RBF Associates, Inc. filed an application for the issuance of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18826, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution,the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of June 2012, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting on June 13, 2012, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a vacant parcel located at the south side of Lima Drive and the west side of East Avenue near the southbound off ramp of the Interstate 15 Freeway; and b. The project site is a vacant parcel with an area of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 645 feet (east to west) by approximately 124 feet (north to south); and c. To the north and west of the project site are single-family residences(Tract 15912), while to the east, across East Avenue, is a condominium complex (Tract 16335). To the south is a set of vacant properties that are generally bisected diagonally(from northeast to southwest) by the off ramp of the southbound Interstate 15 Freewa to Base Line Road; and d. The zoning oft e property and the properties he north and west is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The z• i the pro.-rties to the east is Medium (M) Residential District. The zoning of t le properties to the south is 01• a Professional (OP) District and is currently owned by the City. The su•tec •ro•e• :nd all s rounding properties are within the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and EFSI' 6 - 9/ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-24 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18826— RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 2 e. The proposal is to subdivide the property into eight (8) lots for single-family residential development. The applicant does not intend to construct the homes at this time; and f. All lots will comply with the development standards applicable to this zoning district as described in Figure 5-2 of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Individual lot areas will range between 8,649 square feet to 16,526 square feet, which are in excess of the minimum of 7,200 square feet that is required. The minimum average lot area is 10,281 square feet, which is in excess of the minimum 10,000 square feet that is required; and • g. As the applicant has not submitted any applications to develop the site, any proposals for construction of residential structures on these parcels will be subject to review and action by the Planning Commission at a later date. These parcels will remain vacant until then; and h. All lots will have access to a public right-of-way. Access to the project site will be via Lima Drive. The street was constructed with Tract 15912. Unfinished public right-of-way improvements (sidewalk and parkway landscaping) on the south side of the street are missing and will be completed at the time this project site is developed with homes. i. This application is in conjunction with Tree Removal Permit DRC2011-00927 and Variance DRC2012-00127. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the • above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed development is in accord with the General Plan,the objectives of the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The proposal is to subdivide a property with an area of approximately 83,000 square feet (1.91 acre) into eight(8) lots for single-family residential development. The underlying General Plan designation is Low Medium Residential. b. The proposed development,together with the conditions applicable thereto,will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The project site is vacant;the • ••osed Ian• se is consistent wi i the land us- it '- - . • lo - -• an. •- -xpectatio : • the com • t. •- zoni of • prop- y and the.properties to the north and west is the Low Medium (LM) Residential Distric Etiwanda Specific Plan. The zoning of the properties to the east is Medium (M) Residential • District. The zoning of the properties to the south is the Office Professional (OP) District. c. he prof- e4 •- -log en ••mp .-s with --chof the -••licableprovisio - • •- Developm- Code an. the Etiwanda Specific Plan excep for •- • ••ose• oise atten = ion walls along the perimeter of the proposed subdivision that will be in excess of 6 -- height. The applicant has submitted a Variance request for consideration by the Planning Commission. The proposed development, otherwise, meets all standards outlined in the Development Code and the Etiwanda Specific Plan and the design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City. 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 , 6 - 9.2- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-25 VARIANCE DRC2012-00127– RBF ASSOCIATES INC. June 13, 2012 Page 2 e. The zoning oft : property and the properties to th- north and west is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. Thef•ning the properti- . to the east is Medium (M) Residential District. The zoni,g of e properties to the south is Offic= Professional (OP) and is currently owned by the City. T e s bject prope• . and al roundi•• properties are within the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and f. The applicant is requesting a Variance to allow the construction of combination • walls along the south, east, and west perimeters of the proposed subdivision. The combination walls will be comprised of a lower retaining wall and an upper screen/garden or noise attenuating wall and will have an overall height in excess of 6 feet; and g. Per Section 17.08.060(K) of the Development Code,the maximum height of walls permitted in residential districts is 6 feet; and h. The height of the proposed combination walls will be approximately 10.5 feet along the east property line (3 feet retaining, 7.5 feet noise attenuating) parallel to East Avenue, approximately 14 to 17 feet along the south property line (up to 8 feet retaining, 6 to 9 feet noise attenuating), and between approximately 10 to 12 feet along the west property line (4 to 6 feet retaining, 6 feet screening). 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. The proposed walls along the east and south perimeters of the project site are for noise attenuation purposes to reduce the exterior noise levels at the lots along the perimeter of the proposed subdivision. The height of the walls is necessary to mitigate the noise impacts to a level that is less than 65 dBA CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) as specified in the Development Code. If the walls were limited to 6 feet as specified in the Code, or if the walls were absent altogether,the exterior noise levels would not comply with the Code, nor be consistent with Public Health and Safety policies relating to noise (Goal PS-13 of the General Plan). The retaining portion of these walls is necessary to retain soil that will need to be imported in order to raise the finished surface elevation at the project perimeter to allow for adequate surface drainage to Lima Drive and accommodate sewer connections. There is no practical alternative to these walls. b. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other properties in the same district. The project site is located generally adjacent to the Ontario Freeway (Interstate 15) and the southbound off ramp that links the freeway to Base Line Road. As a result, it is exposed to noise generated by traffic that is generally not present near other residential properties in the City which are screened by existing development and/or sufficiently distant from these principal noise sources that noise impacts are negligible. • c. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district. The purpose of the walls is to attenuate traffic noise. The exterior noise levels generated by traffic exceed the maximum limits established by the Development Code and would negatively affect a Y � 6 —// 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 12-26 DRC2011-00927 — RBF ASSOCIATES, INC. June 13, 2012 Page 2 e. The zoning oft - property and the properti- : the north and west is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The -•ning of-the-preperty-and the •r•.erties to the east is Medium (M) Residential District. The zoning e? the properties to the so h is Office Professional (OP) and is currently owned by the City. The • 1.-ct prope y and . surrounding properties are within the Etiwanda Specific Plan; and f. The trees are not designated as historically significant; and g. The trees are not specifically noted in the Etiwanda Specific Plan per Figure 5-13; and h. The applicant has submitted an arborist report assessing the health of the trees. The report observes that the trees are Eucalyptus that range between poor and good health and are infested with a variety of insects including beetles; and i. It is necessary to remove the trees because of their condition and in order to grade the site, construct future single-family residences, and associated improvements that will allow economic enjoyment of the property; and j. It is not necessary to remove the trees to construct required improvements within a flood control or utility right-of-way; and k. There are a significant number of mature and newly planted trees within the surrounding residential neighborhoods;the removal does not affect the established character of the area and the property values; and I. The trees cannot be preserved by pruning and proper maintenance or relocation rather than removal; and m. The trees do not constitute a significant natural resource of the City. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. The proposed project is in accord with the objectives of the Municipal Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and c. The proposed project is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and d. The proposed project, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and / 6 , Sat SIGN-IN SHEET PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING RANCHO CUCAMONGA June 12, 2012 NAME COMPANY ADDRESS/EMAIL /YAW- Ale,t,AA-PLee-pm painb 77/elc(4 rid. MAc c -s eS) Co+s,a, LCOM jolt Feinia ti..u, 6(07 t g 3 s 4vWaS Lc to ft (3 6 Z V'Ivi(Cn ►, .I ,,efi, gl. ,r 7125- ►rn Plt-a botitty q/ 731 C cr1l `P11Z, c Eep 7'n °r.\ �fccif 9/79