Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-09-28 - Agenda Packet - PC-HPCf THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 28, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 11 I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance Roll Call Chairman Oaxaca Vice Chairman Macias Munoz _ Wimberly _ Fletcher II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. III. CONSENT CALENDARMISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA 12ANCHO SEPTEMBER 28, 2016 C[iCAMONGA Page 2 A. Consideration of minutes dated August 24, 2016 B. Vacation of Portions of Center Avenue, located west of Haven Avenue and south of Arrow Route (V-233) IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/orposted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. — A proposed subdivision of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots within the Low (L) Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue — APN: 1087-081-25. Per CEQA Section 15073.5.c, staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts and with a public hearing will consider the project and amended mitigation measures. V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION D. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES E. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS VI. ADJOURNMENT 1, 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 September 22, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, - please contact the Planning Department at (909) 477-2750. Notification of 48 ElmIf hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility. Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA SEPTEMBER 28, 2016 Page 3 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. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. 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 $2,662 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us. d 190 Basi Foot Arro 8 Vicinity Map Historic Preservation and Planning Commission Meeting SEPTEMBER 28, 2016 t ! ! I a Y —N t� V j t / d � st ! i /se 0 Line J Church Church 1 gill Foothill N A N w � gym.. N I Arrow i = _ d it � = ey L 3 :h Ce w d a t9 6th,- c — _N 6th w t } s dth i ¢ . _ _ �.._ 4th ® it Meeting Location: City Hall/Council Chambers 10600 Civic Center Drive Item B: Vacation (V-233) of portions of Center Avenue west of Haven Avenue and south of Arrow Route. Item C: SUBTT18908—Northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE MINUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 24, 2016 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 11 I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance 7 02 PM Roll Call Chairman Oaxaca X Vice Chairman Macias X Munoz X Wimberly X Fletcher A Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director, Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer: Albert Espinoza, Assistant City Engineer: Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary 11 H. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. None Item A —1 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES K,.,, AUGUST 24, 2016 Page III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of minutes dated August 10, 2016. B. VACATION OF A PORTION OF BASE LINE ROAD, LOCATED EAST OF AMETHYST STREET (V-232) - NAS ALTA LOMA, LLC - A request to vacate a portion of Base Line Road, located east of Amethyst Street -APN: 0202-161-10. Related file: DRC2008-00909 Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Munoz, carried 4-0-1 (Fletcher absent) to adopt the Consent Calendar. 11 IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/orposted as public hearings as required bylaw. The Chairman will open the public hearing to receive testimony. All such opinions shall be limited to 5 minutes per individual for each project. Please sign in after speaking. C. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT DRC2016-00667 - 7418 ARCHIBALD, LLC - An amendment to Development Agreement DRC2014-00610 between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and 7418 Archibald, LLC, for the purpose of providing a senior housing project in accordance with the Senior Housing Overlay Zoning District (SHOZD), including deviating from certain development standards, for the development of a 24,641 square foot, 60-unit, senior apartment complex on 2.25 acres of land located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road; APN: 0208-03-158 and 0208-031-59. The City Council adopted a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for this project on June 3, 2015. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review of Negative Declaration is required for subsequent projects or minor revisions to projects within the scope of a previous Negative Declaration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, gave the staff report. Chairman Oaxaca opened the public hearing. Seeing and hearing none, he closed the public hearing. Moved by Macias, seconded by Wimberly, carried 4-0-1 (Fletcher absent) to adopt the Resolution recommending approval of Development Agreement Amendment DRC2016- 00667 by the City Council. Item A -2 nl�� RANCHO CL'CA.MONGA HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 24, 2016 Page 3 V. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION D. INTER -AGENCY UPDATES Commissioner Munoz reported that the League of California Cities is hard at work planning for the 2017 Planning Commissioners Academy to be held in Los Angeles at the Airport Marriott. Marchl-3, 2017. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS Vice Chairman Macias said he will be absent for the meetings of October at a minimum for medical reasons. 11 VI. ADJOURNMENT 713 PM 1, 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 August 18, 2016, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54964.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 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. Item A -3 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION r AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO AUGUST 24, 2016 CUCAMONGA Page 4 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. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. 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 $2,597 for all decisions of the Commission. (Fees are established and governed by the City Council). Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session. Copies of the Planning Commission agendas, staff reports and minutes can be found at www.CityofRC.us. Item A —4 STAFF REPORT ENGINFERING, SIAWICLti DEP_1Rl .MENT Date: September 28, 2016 To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission From: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer By: Carlo Cambare, Engineering Technician 7 7 4 RANCHO CUCAMONGA Subject: VACATION OF PORTIONS OF CENTER AVENUE, LOCATED WEST OF HAVEN AVENUE AND SOUTH OF ARROW ROUTE (V-233) — A request to vacate the east side of Center Avenue between 24th and Humboldt Avenue (8855 Center Avenue) - APN 209-123-05 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the finding through minute action that the proposed vacation is in conformance with the General Plan. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: In conjunction with the development review for a new single family residence at 8855 Center Avenue, it was determined that there is an excess right-of-way of 10 feet, located on the east side of Center Avenue. Said excess right-of-way was previously dedicated under the North Cucamonga Township Map. Once vacated, said excess right-of-way will be part of Lot 5 of Block 63 of the North Cucamonga Township. The vacation is consistent with the General Plan right-of-way is not required for street, highways and of Lot 5 Block 63 of the North Cucamonga Township, Respectfully submitted, Dan James Senior Civil Engineer DJ:CC/rlf Attachment: Vicinity Map and the Development Code because said excess related purposes anymore and therefore will be part Item B —1 8855 CENTER AVE 01jw i6,B- A.M. & ,en , bw 7 -1 - M%M16 Item B —2 STAFF REPORT PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: September 28, 2016 RANCHO TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA FROM: Candyce Burnett, City Planner BY: Dominick Perez, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. — A proposed subdivision of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots within the Low (L) Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue — APN: 1087-081-25. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts and with a public hearing will consider the project and amended mitiaation measures. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 and adoption of the revised Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts by adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions. BACKGROUND: This item was previously scheduled for a Planning Commission public hearing that was to be held on March 23, 2016. On March 22, 2016, the Planning Department received a letter (Exhibit H) from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) in response to the project's Mitigated Negative Declaration that was circulated on February 18, 2016. The letter provided comments and recommendations relating to the Biological Resources section of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. Staff requested a continuance to allow the applicant the time to adequately prepare a response to CDFW's comments/recommendations. These comments and recommendations are discussed in further detail within the Environmental Assessment section below. The applicant and the applicant's biologist have since worked with Staff and submitted a response that addresses the concerns described in the letter. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Proiect Density: 2.83 dwelling units per acre. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Vacant; Low (L) Residential District, Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) South - Vacant; Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan (ENSP) East - Vacant; Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) West - Vacant; Low (L) Residential District, Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Low Residential North - Low Residential South - Very Low Residential East - Very Low Residential West - Low Residential D. Site Characteristics: The project site consists of approximately 10.6 acres of undeveloped land located northwest of the intersection of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue. Both streets Item C —1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 2 currently terminate at the intersection and do not continue northward (East Avenue) and westward (Wilson Avenue). The subject parcel has a linear dimension, from north to south, of approximately 659 feet and a linear dimension, from east to west of approximately 662 feet. With the exception of a residential subdivision to the southwest, the site is surrounded by vacant land in all directions. The zoning of the subject property and the properties to the north and west is Low (L) Residential District, while the zoning of the properties to the east and south is Very Low (VL) Residential District. The project site and all surrounding properties are within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP). ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant, Richland Ventures, Inc., is proposing to subdivide a property of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 lots for single-family residential development; the applicant does not intend to construct the homes at this time. The lots will be developed in accordance with the development standards that apply to single-family residential development within the Low (L) Residential District, Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) including density, lot width and depth, minimum and average lot area, street width, and wall design. For example, the proposed density for the project is 2.83 dwelling units per acre. The maximum density allowed is 4 dwelling units per acre. Individual lot areas will range between 7,451 square feet to 26,051 square feet; the average lot area is 10,007 square feet. The required minimum net average lot area is 10,000 square feet. The conceptual grading plan indicates the highest pad elevation is 1,645 feet at the northwest corner of the site, and lowest pad elevation is 1,635 feet at the southwest corner of the site. There are 2:1 slopes along the northern and northwestern portion of the site within the rear yard area of Lots 1 thru 13, and at the south and east perimeters of the site along East Avenue and Wilson Avenue. The slopes along East Avenue and Wilson Avenue will be within a private landscape easement that will be maintained by a homeowners association created for this subdivision. The subdivision will have two points of access, one along the future extension of Wilson Avenue and one along the future extension of East Avenue. The design of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the surrounding residential subdivisions including the adjacent subdivision, of 358 lots on approximately 150.8 acres, located to the north and west of the subject property that was approved by the City Council on June 16, 2004 (related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072). The lots within Tract 16072 are similar in size and layout to the lots of the proposed project. Per the ENSP, this site is located within the "Upper Etiwanda" neighborhood, which requires specific site design features. The Upper Etiwanda neighborhood entry monument will be installed at the northwest corner of Wilson Avenue and East Avenue in accordance with Exhibit 25(A) of the ENSP, which was included as an attachment to the Design Review Comments (Exhibit E). A stone wall 30 inches in height (maximum) with a concrete cap and low pilaster will be constructed. Also, per the ENSP, a theme wall is required along lots that abut Wilson Avenue and East Avenue. The theme wall will consist of a concrete block cap with a stucco color and finish that will match the existing walls in the surrounding area. The stone used in the monument entry and theme wall columns is Coronado stone. Item C —2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 3 B. Technical Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Technical Review Committee (TRC) on September 15, 2015. Preliminary conditions were discussed. The Committee accepted the proposal and recommended approval. The Committee's conditions of approval, including dedication and construction of the northerly extension of East Avenue and westerly extension of Wilson Avenue, have been incorporated in the Resolution of Approval. C. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (DRC) on September 15, 2015. No major issues were discussed in the DRC Comments (Exhibit E). However, there were two secondary issues involving landscaping. To address these, the Committee added conditions of approval requiring a) the street trees for the project to be in accordance with the City's acceptable street tree list, and b) future development of this site to comply with the water efficient landscaping standards specified in Chapter 17.82 of the Development Code. The Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission. D. Neighborhood Meeting: On October 26, 2015, a neighborhood meeting was conducted by the applicant at Summit Intermediate School located at 5959 East Avenue. The intent of this meeting was to invite property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project boundaries for input relating to the project. There were three attendees. During the meeting, the applicant presented the tentative tract map and conceptual grading plan for the proposed project. The attendees were generally curious about the project and, otherwise, did not identify any concerns or major issues with the application. Assembly Bill 52: On November 9, 2015, per AB 52, the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians and the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians were notified of the project. The purpose of that notice was to determine if either tribe desired consultation to discuss the proposal. Staff received a series of correspondences via letters and email from both tribes. Per a letter dated December 7, 2015, the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians indicated that the tribe does not have any specific concerns regarding known cultural resources in the specific area that the project encompasses. They also went on to request that the approved Native American Monitors be present during any future ground disturbing proceedings, including survey and archaeological testing, associated with this project. On November 17, 2015, staff received a response email from the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, requesting to review a Cultural Resource Assessment (CRA) for the site. After reviewing the CRA, the San Manuel Band requested to know why the issue of potential for subsurface cultural deposits was not specifically addressed. According to the CRA and Paleontological Review conducted by FirstCarbon Solutions on September 5, 2014, no archaeological or historical cultural resources were found, and the proposed project is expected to have no impacts on any archaeological or historic resources. Per the Cultural Resources Assessment, the recommendations section addresses the potential for subsurface archaeological materials based on the results of the records searches (2 searches) and pedestrian survey. Based on the records searches and site surveys, FirstCarbon Solutions has determined the project to have a low potential for encountering buried prehistoric resources as none have been previously recorded within the project nor within a mile radius. The exact text from the study discussing this matter is as follows: No historic or prehistoric resources were found during the course of the pedestrian survey. Ground visibility was approximately 75 percent, and the ground surfaces were exposed between natural vegetation cover. No resources have been recorded within the project area. Item C —3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 4 FCS has assessed the effects of the proposed development on any local cultural resources. The results of the assessment indicate that the proposed project is expected to have no impacts on any archaeological or historic resources. Based on the results of the record searches and pedestrian survey, FCS considers the project area to have low sensitivity for prehistoric and historic resources, and archaeological monitoring is not recommended. Although mitigation measures are included that require an archaeologist to be retained to monitor the initial grading in areas, it is not guaranteed that monitoring of the site will continue beyond the initial grading of the site. Therefore, in an effort to reduce the direct and indirect impacts that this project could have on Native American tribal cultural resources to a "less than significant" status, a mitigation measure is included that requires the applicant to contact the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians to discuss monitoring of the project to ensure that cultural resources that may be encountered during ground disturbances are protected and preserved for study. This mitigation requires the applicant to submit the results of this consultation to the City prior to issuance of permits for grading of the site. The Initial Study for this project was circulated on February 18, 2016. The Planning Department received comments from the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians. The comments include revisions to the Cultural Resources mitigations numbers 2, 4 and 7 in the Initial Study Parts II and III. The comments received will not remove or change the intent of the previously proposed mitigations, but will ultimately make the mitigations stronger and more specific (Exhibit G). Staff has since updated the mitigations in the Cultural Resources section of the Resolution to reflect the comments received. F. Environmental Assessment: 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 related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and waste materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning 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 and was circulated on February 18, 2016. Thereafter, Staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration at a Planning Commission hearing that was scheduled for March 23, 2016. Due to a letter (Exhibit H) received on March 22, 2016 from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), the Planning Department requested a continuance to allow the applicant the time to prepare a response to the concerns described in the letter. The applicant and M. J. Klinefelter, the applicant's biologist, have since worked with Staff and submitted a response (Exhibit 1) that addresses CDFW's concerns, which include (a) the project's potential to impact sensitive species and natural communities, (b) the adequacy and specificity of the proposed mitigation measures, and (c) the analysis of the project's cumulative contribution to impacts to biological resources within the region of the Etiwanda alluvial fan. Below is the list summarizing each of CDFW's concerns, followed by the response from the applicant's biologist (text added to, and deleted from, the Mitigated Negative Declaration are shown with an underline or a strikethrough, respectively). Item C —4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 5 San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat and Coastal California Gnatcatcher CDFW Concern: The IS/MND identified two Federally Endangered species with the potential to occur on -site: the San Bernardino kangaroo rat and coastal California gnatcatcher. Although focused surveys for both species failed to find any individuals on the project site in 2014, CDFW indicated concern regarding the time lag between the survey dates and the likely start of construction, as they believe this is long enough to allow the potential for one or both species to naturally disperse on to the project site from surrounding habitat. Biologist's Response: "Protocol surveys were conducted by qualified permitted biologists for both San Bernardino kangaroo rat and coastal California gnatcatcher with both species found to be absent from the Site. These surveys are further supported by numerous surveys previously conducted over the past 14 years on the adjacent Tentative Tract 16072 and 14749; in all instances these species were not detected on the properties. Results of the surveys were submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in accordance with the qualified biologist's permit requirements. The survey results support the findings and conclusions in the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration." 2. Los Angeles and San Diego Pocket Mouse CDFW Concern: The CDFW does not concur that trapping and relocating individual LAPM prior to the issuance of a grading permit would prevent significant project impacts to Los Angeles pocket mouse (LAPM), a California Species of Special Concern (SSC). Since the regional population of LAPM is primarily threatened by habitat loss and fragmentation, CDFW recommends the City mitigate project impacts to LAPM by identifying and preserving habitat that (a) is either already occupied by a viable population of LAPM or connected/adjacent to occupied habitat and accessible to the adjacent population, and (b) would not otherwise be preserved. Biologist's Response: "The revised Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 2 (see Habitat Conservation section below) would preserve in perpetuity 27.4 acres of habitat directly adjacent to the 175-acre conservation area for Tentative Tract 16072 that is occupied by LAPM. The following revisions to Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 4 are recommended." To offset the loss of Los Angeles Pocket Mouse on the property from development, nr► n�f. .mssrn ,�tnrr.Trsr�:rs�. . This revised measure would accommodate DFW's preference and recommendation to forgo trapping and translocation of LAPM on the Site and would still provide mitigation to offset the project's impacts to the LAPM, such that the project would have a less than significant impact on the species, by preserving three times more Item C —5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 6 conservation open space than would be impacted by the project and to do so in an area which will serve to further buffer habitat occupied by the LAPM in the region which is designated for long-term biological conservation. This revised mitigation measure would be expected to reduce the project's impacts on the LAPM to at least the same degree as the measure articulated in the original MND previously circulated. 3. Listed and Sensitive Plant Species CDFW Concern: CDFW disagrees with the previously proposed Mitigation Measure 3, which proposes to reduce the potential for project impacts to these species by requiring focused plant surveys to be conducted over the project site prior to issuance of a grading permit, and then developing mitigation plans for all sensitive plant species discovered. Instead, CDFW recommends a rare plant survey be prepared that indicates a) the population sizes of any sensitive plant species present on -site, b) a thorough and detailed analysis of the project's impacts to sensitive and special -status plant species, including, if applicable, potential indirect impacts to off - site populations, and c) a detailed description of the mitigation plan(s) that addresses the project's reasonably foreseeable direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts to sensitive and special -status plant species. Biologist's Response: "Botanist Fred Roberts conducted sensitive plant surveys on the site on March 18 and May 4, 2016. Mr. Roberts is a botanical consultant with more than 25 years of field experience surveying rare plants in southern California, and he previously worked as a botanist for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. During his surveys of the site, he encountered a single sensitive plant species, Plummer's mariposa lily (Calochortus plummerae), a CRPR 4 plant. This species is not listed as "threatened" or "endangered" by either CDFW or USFINS. This species was recently downgraded by the California Native Plant Society from CRPR 1B.2 to CRPR 4.2, indicating that the distribution of this species is more widespread than previously thought. Impacts to Plummer's mariposa lily would not be considered significant especially in light of the project's relatively small size and the existence of the species in conservation open space within the region." "Mr. Roberts did not observe any other sensitive species on the site. There were no new seedlings or young plants observed on the site that could be confused with later blooming sensitive species so Mr. Roberts concluded that further surveys were not necessary to ensure that the Site has been sufficiently surveyed for the 2016 year for the potential presence of sensitive plant species. Mr. Roberts is preparing a more detailed written summary, discussing the findings of his surveys and will include a complete species list of plants observed. Based on the results of Mr. Roberts' surveys and the analysis in the Biological Resources Assessment, the project would have a less than significant impact on any plant species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species and no further mitigation is required. Furthermore, CEQA does not require — nor does it favor — the speculative approach to current site conditions suggested by the Department. Sufficient surveying for sensitive plant species have been conducted to properly characterize existing Site conditions in this regard." Item C —6 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 7 4. Nesting Bird and Migratory Bird Treaty Act CDFW Concern: The CDFW noted the requirement to comply with all applicable laws related to nesting birds and birds of prey, including the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918, as well as sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of the Fish and Game Code (FGC). These requirements ultimately state that it is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by FGC or any regulation made pursuant thereto. Mitigation Measure 7 requires a breeding bird survey to be conducted ten (10) days prior to ground -clearing activities. The CDFW recommends revising Mitigation Measure 7 to require the surveys to be conducted no more than three (3) days prior to vegetation clearing or ground disturbance activities, as instances of nesting could be missed if surveys are conducted sooner. Biologist's Response: "Comment noted regarding compliance with all applicable laws related to nesting birds and birds of prey. The applicant intends to comply with all applicable laws. Guidance and past recommendations from the Department regarding breeding and nesting bird surveys vary widely. We acknowledge the Department's current recommendation; however, we believe that the Mitigation Measure 7 meets the intent of compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503 and 3513." 5. Habitat Conservation CDFW Concern: Mitigation Measure 2 requires purchase and conservation of 9.13 acres of white sage scrub habitat to compensate for the removal of the same amount and type of habitat. CDFW does not concur that a the proposed mitigation, as it is described in the IS/MND, is sufficient to reduce the project's impacts to a level that is less than significant, because it would result in an overall net loss of 9.13 acres of white sage scrub without providing any compensatory gain in habitat function. Instead, CDFW recommends that mitigation for habitat loss incorporate some level of enhancement, restoration, rehabilitation, and/or creation within the mitigation area, and that the size of the mitigation area be increased to account for the net loss in acreage, the time lag, and the uncertainty of success. Biologist's Response: "The proposed Mitigation Measure 2 is consistent with the Environmental Impact Report for the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP). The cumulative habitat losses in the ENSP area were considered in the EIR and additionally in the most recent update of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. However, in order to address CDFW's concern that Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 2 does not contain sufficient detail regarding the location and status of the habitat to be preserved, the Project applicant is proposing to conserve 27.4 acres (3:1 ratio) of habitat directly to the north of the approximately 175-acre conservation area proposed for Tentative Tract 16072. The 27.4 acres consists of relatively undisturbed native habitat within the Day Creek watershed directly adjacent to Day Creek and is within the proposed conservation area identified within Chapter 6, Resource Conservation section of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Habitat within the 27.4 acres includes mixed sage scrub, sycamore alder riparian woodland, and chaparral. The 27.4 acres is contiguous to and expands the size of the 175-acre conservation area intended to be preserved in perpetuity to offset biological impacts to Tentative Tract 16072 and increases the size and contributes to the functioning of the overall dedicated conservation lands within the Etiwanda Fan area providing Item C —7 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 8 protection of wildlife corridors and sensitive watersheds. The following revisions to Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 2 are recommended:" Mitigation for the removal of white sage scrub on -site is required — preservation in oemetuity of 27.4 acres of habitat within APN 1087-051-02 in the mitigation ratio) �eRt of in lieu fee . If this mitigation measure is implemented, adverse effects to WSS habitat would be less than significant. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide documentation to the Planning Department GGRfiFMiPg the miggatien land is SeGHFe that the property has been 6. Lake and Streambed Alteration Program CDFW Concern: CDFW does not concur with Mitigation Measure 9, which requires the applicant to consult with the Army Corps and USFWS and obtain, if necessary, a Streambed Alteration Agreement, as well as any other appropriate permits from other regulatory agencies. This is due to the fact that the formulation of mitigation measures would be defered to a future time. In order to ensure that the City can be reasonably certain that the mitigation measures will be sufficient to reduce the severity of the impacts to a level that is less than significant, CDFW recommends including a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to meet a specific minimum standard of mitigation for impacts to streambed resources. Biologist's Response: "Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 9 specifically addresses impacts to jurisdictional waters including streams subject to FGC Section 1602 regulation. The proposed project will permanently impact 0.216-acre of streambed. The applicant is proposing to preserve in perpetuity 27.4 acres of undisturbed habitat including approximately 1 acre of riparian habitat (4.6:1 mitigation ratio) that is directly adjacent to existing and proposed conservation areas. In order to address CDFW's concern that it may not be able to prepare a Streambed Agreement due to workload and staffing constraints, the following revisions to Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 9 are recommended," Prior to approval by the City of any grading and/or construction permits, the Project applicant shall consult with the Corps to obtain a Jurisdictional Determination and, if necessary, acquire required permit authorizations from the regulatory agencies. These authorizations will include, but are not limited to, the following: • CWA Section 404 Permit from the Corps (Nationwide Permit 29 for Residential Developments may be applicable) • CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification from RWQCB, and • California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW." Item C —8 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 9 Additionally, a FESA Section 7 Consultation between the Corps and USFWS will be required. Copies of any correspondence and/or permit authorizations received shall be submitted to the City for review and record." Cumulative Impacts to the Etiwanda Alluvial Fan CDFW Concern: The proposed site is located on an undeveloped portion of the Etiwanda Alluvial Fan, a feature of high ecological significance to the region which has been severely impacted by development. Due to the importance of the Alluvial Fan and the extent to which it has already been developed, CDFW has concerns about the project's contributions to the cumulative loss of Alluvial Fan habitat. CDFW has requested a thorough and detailed analysis be prepared that discusses the cumulative impacts to the quantity, quality, and continuity of alluvial fan habitat; the species that depend on the alluvial fan habitat; and the continued viability of local populations of sensitive and special -status species within the region. The analysis should consider the impacts as a whole from this project in conjunction with other, similar projects, as well as this project's individual contribution to the cumulative effects. Biologist's Response: 'The Site is located on a portion of the historic alluvial fan known as the Etiwanda Fan that extends along the San Gabriel Mountain front from Deer and Day Canyons east to San Sevaine Canyon. A variety of habitats exist in the area generally considered to be part of the Etiwanda Fan. Both CNPS and CDFW have adopted the Second Edition of "A Manual of California Vegetation," (the "Manual') which provides a standardized, systematic classification and description of vegetation in the State. Based on the Manual, CDFW published the currently accepted "List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations" (the "List') that are accepted for vegetation classification and mapping. Using the Manual and the List, there is a broad mosaic of habitat associations across the Etiwanda Fan. The Department's comment does not refer to a specific habitat type from the currently accepted List or Manual and it is unclear if the term "Alluvial Fan habitat" refers to a particular type of habitat or the general region where the project is located. Tentative Tract 16072 was approved by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in 2004. After extensive review by the USFWS and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), both agencies issued approvals for the project in the form of the USFWS Biological Opinion (FINS-SB- 08B0267-08F0270) and Corps Individual Permit (File No. SPL- 2005-00655-SJH). The CDFW reviewed the notification of lake or streambed alteration (No. 1600-2011-0020-R6) and on November 1, 2011 the Department issued a letter stating that an agreement was not required because the Department did not respond within the required time period for an agreement to be necessary. Although construction of Tentative Tract 16072 has not begun, it has been reviewed and approved by regulatory agencies including CDFW. Tract 16072 includes residential development directly adjacent to the west and north boundary of the project site as well as the construction of Wilson Avenue and East Avenue along the southern and eastern boundaries of the project site. Because of these approvals and the fact that Tentative Tract 16072 will essentially surround the project site with development and roads, the Biological Resource Assessment took this into consideration when evaluating the cumulative impacts and identified the Project being surrounded by existing and approved development that will isolate the onsite sage scrub habitat. Item C —9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 10 Significant conservation efforts have taken place within the geographic area of the Etiwanda Fan from Deer Creek to San Sevaine Creek and include the following conservation areas: North Etiwanda Preserve. In 1998, the County of San Bernardino created a 763- acre conservation area in response to impacts to AFSS from the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) project. The Preserve and surrounding lands also contain significant amounts of other rare and threatened habitats that include Sycamore Alluvial Woodland, California Walnut Woodland, and Fresh Water Marsh. North Etiwanda Preserve Expansion Area. In 2009 an additional 440 acres of land was set aside for conservation purposes adjacent to the North Etiwanda Preserve and within the San Sevaine Creek area. Along with the original 763 acre preserve, these lands are managed with the intent of permanently protecting the alluvial scrub and other native communities and species that occupy the North Etiwanda Preserve. U.S. Forest Service Conservation Area. This 880-acre conservation area is located adjacent to the western edge of the North Etiwanda Preserve and includes land purchased by the Metropolitan Water District along Day Canyon and Day Creek as mitigation for the MWD's Inland Feeder Project. The land has been transferred to the U.S. Forest Service and is a part of the San Bernardino National Forest. The majority of this conservation area extends beyond the City's Sphere of Influence, into unincorporated territory. San Sevaine Preserve. This 137-acre conservation area was established by San Bernardino County as mitigation for floodwater diversion structures and debris basins. Day Creek Preserve. A 200-acre conservation area was set aside through a conservation easement to the San Bernardino County Flood Control District as mitigation for impacts from sand and gravel operations. Tract 16072 Mitigation Area. This mitigation area consists of 335 acres that will be conserved as habitat mitigation for Tentative Tract 16072. This area is within the Day Creek watershed and contains various habitats that include alluvial fan sage scrub, white sage scrub, chaparral, and riparian habitat. Rancho Etiwanda/Henderson Creek Mitigation Area. This 308-acre property is surrounded by the North Etiwanda Preserve and San Bernardino National Forest. The Site was part of the mitigation requirements for the Rancho Etiwanda Estates Project and the Henderson Creek Project. The 308 acre Site is protected by a conservation easement. The above conservation areas total more than 3000 acres and are managed primarily for species and habitat values. The proposed project will remove approximately 9.13 acres of white sage scrub habitat. The proposed mitigation would provide protection in perpetuity for an additional 27.4 acres of relatively undisturbed habitat in the Etiwanda Fan area adjacent to existing conservation areas identified above. The proposed project is consistent with previously approved plans (ENSP and RC General Plan) reviewed and adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and it will provide mitigation that will contribute to the expansion of conservation lands within the Etiwanda Fan geographic area. Based on this information and given the relatively small size of the project site, the contribution to cumulative loss of habitat would be Item C —10 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 11 less than cumulatively considerable and the project's impact to cumulative loss of habitat would be less than significant." According to CEQA section 15073.5(c), recirculation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required under the following circumstances: (1) Mitigation measures are replaced with equal or more effective measures pursuant to Section 15074.1; (2) New project revisions are added in response to written or verbal comments on the project's effects identified in the proposed negative declaration which are not new avoidable significant effects; (3) Measures or conditions of project approval are added after circulation of the negative declaration which are not required by CEQA, which do not create new significant environmental effects and are not necessary to mitigate an avoidable significant effect; and (4) New information is added to the negative declaration which merely clarifies, amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications to the negative declaration. There were a total of three mitigation measures that were modified (Mitigation Measures 2, 4 and 9) that made the mitigation equally or more effective. This includes strengthening the required mitigation land from 1:1 to 3:1 and specifically defining the location of the land to be preserved in perpetuity as being habitat within the Day Creek area of the Etiwanda Fan along the northern boundary of the 175-acre conservation area for Tentative Tract 16072. The modification also adds approximately 1 acre of riparian habitat within the 27.4 acres of habitat discussed above. No new project revisions were added in response to the concerns. The design of the proposed subdivision remains the same as prior to receiving the comments that were submitted by CDFW. No new measures were added in response to the concerns. As previously stated, only existing measures were replaced with equal or more effective measures. Lastly, the only new information that was added to the negative declaration was for clarification purposes. This includes explanation of the appropriateness of measures for impacts to wildlife, clarification of the site's lack of threatened or endangered sensitive plant species, as well as discussion about the cumulative impacts to Alluvial Fan habitat. Therefore, recirculation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required. CEQA section 15074.1 requires that prior to deleting and substituting a mitigation measure, the lead agency shall hold a public hearing on the matter, and adopt a written finding that the new measure is equivalent or more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects and that it in itself will not cause any potentially significant effects on the environment. Consistent with this section, City staff determined that the new measures presented and discussed in this report relating to Cultural and Biological Resources are equivalent or more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects and that it in itself will not cause any potentially significant effect on the environment. A Mitigation Monitoring Program was also prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the mitigation measures for the project. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was re -advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was re -posted, and a second set of notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site. No correspondence has been received in response to these notices. Item C —11 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 12 Respectfully submitted, " bKwt�#- Candyce urnett City Planner X31'. I71p Attachments: Exhibit A - Aerial Photo Exhibit B - Site Utilization Plan Exhibit C - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit D - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit E - Design Review Committee Action Agenda & Comments Exhibit F - Initial Study (Parts I, II & III) Exhibit G - Text changes for Cultural Resources Mitigations Exhibit H - CDFW Letter (March 22, 2016) Exhibit I - M.J. Klinefelter Response Letter (June 10, 2016) Exhibit J - March 23, 2016 Planning Commission Staff Report (without exhibits) Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 Item C —12 Y ^' -. YwY. ♦�� �I q >5Y'• r ,k/yl Yam gy,�Q, �`-�y A yi(�}7 a� 1 M D S m x m 0 7" VACAMr 12 owN N5jMM ME WW Gmup M 114 27 22 1w L VlCNrrY MAP LEGEND C NOTES PREPAREDFOM' RICH�LID wo RICHLAND VENTURES, ING 4 �) SLAP PREPARED BYZ TENTATIVE m TRACT NO, 18908 CONCEPTUAL APN #'VACANT.-. GRADING PLAN ow , ATFX-P��pzN --, SUBTT18908 H AND "LF?t CORP. Sheet 2 of 7 MY OF RWO VJWJWX CGM OF W BUMMM WALE 6 CJLFM N. weer.-s mu tRti.t c\ YF) P� SEC�TONWA-A SEC WCNrrY MAP SECTON B-B r. Daxr .em nnv+rv. ux i I a\♦ t SP 16a0 �P SECnON CC SEMON E{ vu....n. v.. a.n. n I PREPARED MR. `^ o.xvr Roaan Lro ey `ja .E cv RICHLAND VEMIJRES, INC it N„dM1TD " SECTON D-0 PREPARED DY) TENTATIVE 2£ TRACT NO. 18908 r GRADING SECTIONS P W -x SUBTT18908 r SECCnON Fs Sheet 3 of 7 SECMN Bc OT' OF RAMO MUWAk WMY OF SAN MKM:A STAM 6 MFORM p� i r�mx,rawwmm�-Or mrn: (D 3 VACANT 4 a MIN 0Ol WNM2-1�2 ' rmE h'"ff Gmup M. - --------- "VAW'rr "APS4 M6�0-z D w 'INTtX PFIOPFRTES 4- VICNITY MAP LEGEND WOW NOTES PREPARED FOR, ora RPM., LM GIG RICHLAND VENTURES, NC 425 PREPAREDBY. ...... ......... ... TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18908 iEECFNtNL LOTS 1630 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN SUBTT18908 Sheet 4 of 7 CW T RkBA CLCA0KL% mum OF M BOWAM WAM 6 CRFGPN GENERAL INFORMATION TYPICAL STREET SECTIONS Llad.m+a�rvi-mn"N,mx �"uu� rmcm ����mwn mo I "�� r... m .r .a mm.� pm rm9 �. I S •,.� � 1I�� +' "m mn. macfmin Xrw"opm`mx,anmur.®.xw =a� c STREET 'A"B'S'C' WILSON AVENUE 124TH STREET) / p P."m ra.mm. �`am`r014o xr`"m�Lg'zmnw o m.ow, ..m ~ "S nu �`"v.mamroo.a osA �vz,am yy `�" nxcmoovn�.a I rmm�mmm J ®^- 3.. € "� EASTAVENUE "^� � " � o TYPICAL SECTION LEGAL DESCRIPTION STA M.10.69 TO STA 35+28.74 w¢�vaw SOUTH OF WILSON e��anv. N. ru.mrrirl,u Dora��`�`r LOTSUMMARY INCORPORATON BY (SQUARE FEET) REFERENCE APPLICANTANDDEVELOPER P ti M t, ADRICHL.4N n on F Wj orar Mi� o�ry jsuireas {&91AIVOrO CRY DEVIATONS ,o[ca+sa UTILRIES RDIA/3Li92 GS u �I a4N.'IIX" .nn f1fCIPlL 1FlE%«E �rL�Ha rmutm.nu: aomu ♦YELOi AVFA: tOL014F rmuv4o lRu m4Rss 4vE>IUM6\ .wLY G6 Yx• M Ei IAF.1 • LIIPL VICINITY MAP It F _-- EAST AVENUE TYPICAL SECTON 00 ]OObP WPtNeR STA, 35+28.74 TO STA 35+59.14 EAST AVENUE (NORTH OF WILSON AVENUE) SOUTH OF WILSON STREET W&'BYvT ENTRANCES PREPARED FOR: 0 r ibvv., Lm cro RICHLAND VENTURES, MC 9M N]05RL D+n"s sY1E 411 TM£ G B.TQ PREPAR . PREPAFFD RYt TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18908 RE80ENFNL LOTS }30 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 JY 44x Orb Rela"4 Mwr4MN Sheet 5 of 7 + vat QTY 6 BAm amwm COUIR OF SW SERAMMSGTE OFGVGH1 rD n TS VICMrrY MAP LEGEND ma y naree 0. NOTES PREPARED FOR. MM � M no RICHLAND VENTURES, INC d!I MLEIPM DNE 9IIE .36 PVIq G 4MQ �j/ PREPARED DY. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18908 iEGDFllINL LOTS Yw TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBM8908 o.l. Om..a Ngel § mw Sheet 6 of 7 COY OF RMM GCAWAI tt OF SAM®NAM STATE OF G R THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA RANCHO h CaUCAMONGA September 15, 2015 - 7:00 P.M. Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California L CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Regular Members: Richard Fletcher X Francisco Oaxaca X Candyce Burnett A Donald Granger X Alternates: Ray Wimberly _ Lou Munoz_ Rich Macias Additional Staff Present: Mayuko Nakamura, Assistant Planner; Tom Grahn, Assistant Planner II II. PROJECT REVIEW ITEMS III The following items will be presented by the applicant and/or their representatives. Each presentation and resulting period of Committee comment is limited to 20 minutes. Following each presentation, the Committee will address major issues and make recommendations with respect to the project proposal. The Design Review Committee acts as an advisory Committee to the Planning Commission. Their recommendations will be forwarded to the Planning Commission as applicable. The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Committee may open the meeting for public input. A. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES - A proposed subdivision of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots within the Low (L) R Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue; APN: 1087-081-25. 1 of 3 7:00 P m A. SUBTT18908 - Committee recommended approval and forwarded project to PC for review and action. EXHIBIT E Item C-20 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA "o IJ=ONCA September 15, 2015 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW DRC2015- 00165 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA - The proposed development of a 112-unit Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055-49. Related Files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, Development Code Amendment DRC2015- 00555, and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2015-00166 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA - The proposed development of a 112-Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055-49. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00165, Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00555, and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM19619 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to subdivide a 9.55 acre parcel into two (2) lots in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055-49. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015- 00165, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00555. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2015-00555 - MERRILL GARDENS AT RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the Development Code to conditionally permit Residential Care Facilities in the Low (L) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts for the proposed development of a 112- unit Residential Care Facility on 4.07 acres in the Low (L) Residential District, on the north side of Highland Avenue, between Archibald Avenue and Hermosa Avenue, located at 9944 Highland Avenue; APN: 0201-055- 49. Related Files: Design Review DRC2015-00165, Conditional Use Permit DRC2015-00166, and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM19619. 2 of 3 B, C, D and E. DRC2015-00165 DRC2015-00166 SUBTPM19619 DRC2015-00555 Committee recommended approval, subject to the following: In keeping with the overall architectural theme, the applicant should evaluate the project design to determine where additional arch elements could be located. Item C -21 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA CHO UGMONGASeptember 15, 2015 II III. PUBLIC COMMENTS III This is the time and place for the general public to address the Committee. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. IV. ADJOURNMENT III 7:22p.m The Design Review Committee 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 Committee. 1, Jennifer Palacios, Office Specialist 11 with the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on September 3, 2015, at least 72 hours prior to the meeting per Government Code Section 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. 3 of 3 Item C —22 DRC AGENDA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 - RICHLAND VENTURES September 15, 2015 Page 1 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS 7:00 p.m. Mayuko Nakajima September 15, 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 - RICHLAND VENTURES - A proposed subdivision of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots within the Low (L) Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue; APN: 1087-081-25, Proiect Description. Background and Design: The applicant is proposing to subdivide a property of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots within the Low (L) Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue; APN: 1087-081-25. The project site consists of approximately 10.6 acres of undeveloped land in the northern portion of the City, located west of the northern terminus of East Avenue and north of Wilson Avenue. The project site lies within the historic East Etiwanda Creek alluvial fan at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains. The site is characterized by vacant land to the north, east, south, and west. The zoning of the property and the surrounding properties to the north and west is in the Low (L) Residential District, ENSP. The surrounding properties to the east and south is in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, ENSP. The project is adjacent to an approved Tentative Tract Map 16072, which is consistent with the Low (L) Residential District. There is no house product proposed at this time. The average lot area is 10,007 square feet and the minimum net average for the Low (L) Residential District in the ENSP is 10,000 square feet. The site layout is consistent with the ENSP development standards such as street widths, landscape requirements, and wall designs. The slopes along East Avenue and Wilson Avenue will be a private landscape easement and will be maintained by an HOA. The "Upper Etiwanda" neighborhood entry monument will be installed at the northwest corner of Wilson Avenue and East Avenue in accordance with the attached Exhibit 25(A) of the ENSP. A 30-inch max cut stone wall with a concrete cap and low pilaster shall be used consistent with the Exhibit. The material and color of the wall will match with what is existing at the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and Wilson Avenue. The theme wall concrete block cap will be "natural gray," stucco color that will match with what is existing in the surrounding area; the stone used in the monument entry and theme wall columns is Coronado stone and the color is "chablis." The landscape palette for trees, shrubs and groundcover is generally consistent with the ENSP landscape standards. The final landscape plan shall be fully consistent with, "Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood entry," Exhibits 25 (A) & (B) (pages III-78 & 79). The applicant shall work with the Engineering and Public Works Department at plan check for any minor revisions such as changing the Sophora japonica 'Regent' (Chinese Scholar Tree) to Magnolia grandiflora 'D.D. Blanchard', since the Sophora is not on the list of the City's acceptable street tree species. The final landscape and irrigation plan shall show the exact location of, and irrigation for trees, shrubs, and ground cover. The final landscape plan shall include, at a minimum, plant name, plant quantity, plant size, location of impervious surfaces, utilities and lighting, irrigation system, and plans for tree retention and removal where applicable. The final landscape plan should also include a water budget that includes the estimate water use (in gallons), the irrigated area (in square feet), precipitation rate, and flow rate (in gallons per minute), consistent with Chapter 17.82 Water Efficient Landscaping. I WM (A-4 DRC AGENDA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 - RICHLAND VENTURES September 15, 2015 Page 2 The highest pad elevation is at 1,645 feet and lowest elevation at 1,635 feet. There are 2:1 slopes along the northern and northwestern portion of the site and also within the landscape easement along East Avenue and Wilson Avenue. The project will be irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by the Development Code shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 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. The street trees along East Avenue need to be changed from Sophora japonica 'Regent' (Chinese Scholar Tree) to Magnolia grandiflora 'D.D. Blanchard'. The Sophora is not on the list of the City's acceptable street tree species. 2. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. Policy Issues: The proposed plan is conceptually compliant with policy. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Committee recommend approval and forward the project to the Planning Commission for review and action. Design Review Committee Action: Staff Planner: Mayuko Nakajima Members Present: Fletcher, Oaxaca, Granger IttamG% -2A ELEVATION F w MAX cur s CAP % LANDSCAPE E ME'NALR PLAN v i ^mF REDEUD CANARY ISLAND PINE JAPANESE PAGODA TREE ON ` .1 srl �'r �w'�1a�1'C; i a EASEMENT ALL UPPER ET/WANDA NEIGHBORHOOD ENTRY EXHIBIT 25 (A) Etiwanda Nort, III-73 Specific Plan _ city of SECTION o S' CUT STONE VENEER WALL W/ CONCRETE CAP ..VAXCUT STONE VENEER SIGN WALL W/ CONCRETE CAP MAX. CJT STONE MEANCERING BATTERED `NALL UPPER ETIINANDA NE/Gho PHOOD ENTRY SECTION EXHIBIT 25(B) Etiwanda North III-79 Specific Plan 68 City of Rancho Cucmm ga ftauG43@ ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM (Part I - Initial Study) RANCHO (Please type or print clearly using ink Use the tab key to move from one line to the next line.) CUCAMONGA 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 geological reports may be required. The project application will not be deemed complete unless the identified special studiesireports 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 Initial Study Part II as required by CEQA. In addition to the filing fee, the applicant will be 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. nvwIWrL=IcHrrucAnvNZ:iwlu_NOT6EPROCESSED. Please note thatitis the responsibililyofthe 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. Tentative Tract Map No.. 18908 Project Tiffs: Tentative Tract Map No. 18908 Name &,Address of project owner(s): Oakville Reserve, Ltd., a Florida limited partnership, c/o Richland Ventures, Inc. 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 425 Irvine, CA 92612 Name& Address of developer orprojectsponsor Richland Ventures, Inc. 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite.425 Irvine, CA 92612 Updated 4111/2013 Page 1 of 10 EXHIBIT F �t Contact Person &Address: John Schafer/ Craig Cristina, Richland Ventures, Inc. 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 425 Irvine, CA 92612 Name &Address of person preparing this form (if different from above): Stan Morse, MDS Consulting 17320 Redhill Avenue, Suite 350 Irvine, CA 92614 Telephone Number. 949/251-8821 Information indicated by an asterisk O 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 Shest(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): The project Is a ten -acre parcel located at the northwest corner of East and Wilson Avenues. The parcel is covered with native vegetation except for the portion located within Wilson Ave. 4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers (attach additional sheet if necessary): 1087-081-25 '5) Gross Site Area (ac/sq. ft.): 10.00 Acres; 435,600 Square Feet '6). Net Site Area (total site size minus area of public streets & proposed dedications): 8.87 Acres 7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project.site (attach additional sheet if necessary): None. Updated 4/1112013 Page 2 of 10 C . t: _ 8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary from the City of Rancho Cucamonga and othergovernmental agencies in order to fully implement the project: City of Rancho Cucamonga - Grading and encroachment permit State and Federal Agencies - Environmental permits 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. a., geological and/orhydrologic studies, biotic and archeological surveys, tragic studies): The parcel is in a natural undeveloped condition except for Wilson Avenue. There are no structures on the site. There are no mature trees, trails, roads, or scenic aspects. See environmental surveys and reports. Updated 4/11/2013 Page 3 of 10 C, 10) Describe the known culturalandlorhistorical aspects of the site. Cite all sources of information (books, published reports and oral history): None. 11) Describe any noise sources and theirlevelsthatnowaffectthe site (aircraft, roadway noise, etc.) and how theywill affect proposed uses: There are no noise sources currently. Future noise sources would include traffic noise from Wilson and East Avenues. See acoustical report. 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 sheets) if necessary: The project proposes to develop thirty single-family detached residential lots ranging in size from 7,511 SF to 25,341 SF, averaging 10,016 SF and will be constructed in one phase. Wilson and East Avenues will be constructed with CFD 2005-01 in conjunction with the development of the adjacent Tract 16072. 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, aparfinenthouses, shops, department stores, etc.) and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.): North and West: Tentative Tract No. 16072 (see studies presented during the EIR for TTM 16072) East and South: Undeveloped land slated for SFD residential lots Updated 4/1112013 Page 4 of 10 14) Will the proposed project change the pattern, scale, or character of the surrounding general area of the project? The proposed project will conform to proposed and future projects surrounding it. 15) Indicate the type of short-term and long -tern noise to be generated, including source and amount. Now will these noise levels affect adjacent properties and on -site uses? What methods of soundproofing are proposed? Short term noise will be generated from normal land development construction activities. Long term noise will be generated from traffic entering and leaving the project. *16) Indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees: None. 17) Indicate any bodies of water (including domestic water supplies) into which the site drains; None. 18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further cladficafion, please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at (909) 987-2591. a. Residential (9 Y) al/da 21,150 42,300 Peak use (gal/Day) b. CommerclaUlnd. (gablday/ac) NIA Peak use (gal/min/ac) N/A 19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. © Septic Tank xl sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, attach percolation tests. If discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected dailysewage generation: (See Attachment A for usage estimates). Forfurther clarification, please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at (909) 987-2591. a. Residential(gal/day) 8,100 b. CommerciaUlndustriat (gal/day/ac) NIA Updated 411 V2013 Page 5 of 10 C% G RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of residential units.,30 Detach (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size: Maximum: 25,341 SF Minimum: 7,511 SF Average: 10,015 SF Attached (indicate whether units are rental or for sale units): 21) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents: Sale Price(s) $NIA to $NIA Rent (permonth) $ to $ 22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: Residential units are not proposed with this application. 23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit We: N/A 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: K-8= a. Elementary., 20 b. Junior High: _ 8 c. Senior High COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 26) Describe type of use(s) and majorfunction(s) of commercial, industrial or institutional uses: N/A Updated 4/11/2013 Page 6 of 10 26) Total floor area of commercial,industrial, or institutional uses by type: 27) Indicate hours of operation: 28) Numberof employees: Total: Maximum Shitt- Time of Maximum Shift., 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: '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 (a18) 572-6283): ALL PROJECTS 32) Have the water, sewer, fire, andflood control agencies serving the projectbeen contacted to determine their ability to provide adequate service to the proposed project? if so, please indicate their response. Water and Sewer - CVWD has capacity Fire - Plans submitted Drainage - City - hydrology study submitted Impact fees will be paid to the Flood Control District Updated 4/1112013 Page 7 of 10 33) in the known history of this property, has there been any use, storage; or discharge of hazardous andlortoxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include, but are not limited to PCBs; 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, if known. None. 34) MY the proposedprojectinvolve the temporary or long -tern use, storage. or discharge of hazardous andlortoxic 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. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fee. The project planner will confirm which fees 35 apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning CommissionlPlanning Directorhearing: 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 intormation presented are true and correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional inf�motion maybe required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made. by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. A Date; 8-25-2014 Signature: Title: Principal, MDS Updated 4/11/2013 Page 8 of 10 C) 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 Multi -Family Neighborhood Commercial General Commercial Office Professional Institutional/Government Industrial Park Large General Industrial Heavy Industrial (distribution) Sewer Flows Single -Family Multi -Family General Commercial Office Professional Industrial Park Large General Industrial Heavy Industrial (distribution) 705 gallons per EDU per day 256 gallons per EDU per day 1000 gal/day/unit (tenant) 4082 gal/day/unit (tenant) 973 gal/day/unit (tenant) 6412 gal/day/unit (tenant) 1750 gal/day/unit (tenant) 2020 gal/day/unit (tenant) 1863 gal/day/unit (tenant) 270 gallons per EDU per day 190 gallons per EDU per day 1900 gal/day/acre 1900 gal/day/acre Institutional/Government 3000 gal/day/acre 2020 gal/day/acre 1863 gal/day/acre Source: Cucamonga Valley Water District Engineering & Water Resources Departments, Urban Water Management Plan 2000 Updated 4/11/2013 Page 9 of 10 ATTACHMENT B Contact the school district for your area far 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 Ebwanda 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 Updated 411112013 Page 10 of 10 City of Rancho Cucamonga �n MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION The following Mitigated Negative Declaration is being circulated forpublic review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 Public Review Period Closes: September 28, 2016 Project Name: Project Applicant: John H. Schafer Project Location (also see attached map): The site is within the Low (L) Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue; APN: 1087-081-25. Project Description: The proposed project is a subdivision of a property of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots for the future construction of 30 single-family residences. IJh171kiK 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. September 28, 2016 Date of Determination Adopted By Item C —37 City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATION MONITORING Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 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 Item C —38 Mitigation Monitoring Program Tentative Tract Map 18908 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 Department. The Department 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. 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. Item C —39 City of Rancho Cucamonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART II BACKGROUND 1. Project File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 2. Related Files: N/A 3. Description of Project: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. — The proposed project is a subdivision of a property of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots for the future construction of 30 single-family residences within the Low (L) Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue; APN: 1087-081-25. 4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: John H. Schafer Richland Communities, Inc. 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 425 Irvine, CA 92612 5. General Plan Designation: Low (L) Residential 6. Zoning: Low (L) Residential District, Etiwanda North Specific Plan 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site consists of approximately 10.6 acres of undeveloped land in the northern portion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located west of the northern terminus of East Avenue and north of Wilson Avenue. The project site lies within the historic East Etiwanda Creek alluvial fan at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains. The site is characterized by vacant land to the north, east, south, and west. The zoning of the property and the surrounding properties to the north and west is in the Low (L) Residential District, Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The surrounding properties to the east and south is in the Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda North Specific Plan. 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: Dominick Perez Associate Planner (909) 477-2750, ext. 4315 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): N/A GLOSSARY —The following abbreviations are used in this report: CALEEMOD — California Emissions Estimator Model CVWD — Cucamonga Valley Water District EIR — Environmental Impact Report Item C —40 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 FEIR—Final Environmental Impact Report FPEIR - Final Program Environmental Impact Report NPDES — National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NOx — Nitrogen Oxides ROG — Reactive Organic Gases PM,o — Fine Particulate Matter RWQCB — Regional Water Quality Control Board SCAQMD — South Coast Air Quality Management District SWPPP — Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 2 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) Biological Resources (x)Greenhouse Gas Emissions (x) Land Use & Planning () Population & Housing () TransportatioNTraffic DETERMINATION (x) Agricultural Resources (x) Cultural Resources (x) Hazards & Waste Materials () Mineral Resources () Public Services () Utilities & Service Systems On the basis of this initial evaluation: (x) Air Quality (x) Geology & Soils (x) Hydrology & Water Quality (x) Noise ( ) Recreation (x) Mandatory Findings of Significance () I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. (X) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by, or agreed to, by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. () I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. () I find that the proposed project MAY have a 'Potentially Significant Impact' or 'Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standard and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. () I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Prepared By: Reviewed By: CJ, Date: T2r%()%�' 1 L Date: r'Cl Rev 4-7-15 Item C —41 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 3 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pp 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigattn Than Significant No Impact Incor .rated 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 () () () (✓) 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 significant vistas within or adjacent to the project site. The site is within a view corridor according to General Plan Figure LU-6. However, there is an approved housing tract development just west and north of the project site. The project will be similar to previously approved projects in the area and will conform to all Development Code and Etiwanda North Specific Plan requirements such as grading, view fencing requirement, all walls to be built to city standards, and future development of housing will need to conform to all Development Code requirements. Therefore, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact. 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. Therefore, the project will have no impact. c) The site is located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue characterized by vacant land to the north, south, east and west. The visual quality of the area will not degrade as a result of this project because this project is consistent with the existing previously approved projects, including the single-family residences within the vicinity, south of Wilson Avenue and west of Etiwanda Avenue. Design review is required prior to approval of house products, consistent with the Development Code and Etiwanda North Specific Plan Design Guidelines. There is no product to review at this time. City standards require the developer to underground existing (if any) 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. Therefore, the project will have no impact. d) The project would increase the number of streetlights and security lighting used in the immediate vicinity. The design and placement of light fixtures will be shown on site plans which require review for consistency with City standards that require shielding, diffusing, or indirect lighting to avoid glare. Lighting will be selected and located to confine the area of illumination to within the project site. Therefore, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact. Rev 4-7-16 Item C —42 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 4 Less Than Slgnificanl Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Im act incorporate Ihaact Im act 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 re -zoning 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 on the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue and is characterized by vacant land to the north, south, east and west. 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 the General Plan and the California Department of Conservation Farmland Map 2010. 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 were not retained as farmland in the 2010 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. The project will have less than significant impacts. b) There is no agriculturally zoned land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no Williamson Act contracts within the City. Therefore, the project will have no impact. 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 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. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —43 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 5 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant With Mitigation Siman gnificant No Impact incorporated Impact Im act d) There is no forest land or timberland within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Therefore no impacts would occur related of the loss or conversion of forest land to non -forest use. e) The site is located on the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue and is characterized by vacant land to the north, south, east and west with residential tracts in the larger vicinity. The nearest agricultural use is more than 2,000 feet southwest from the project site. Furthermore, there are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land. Therefore, there is no potential for conversion of forest land to a non -forest use. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated. 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 () (✓) () ( ) concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial () () () (✓) number of people? Comments: a) As discussed in subsection b, the project would not exceed any air quality standards and would not interfere with the region's ability 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 will have no impacts. 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 (SO2), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PMto), fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PM2.5) microns in diameter and lead. Among these pollutants, ozone and particulate matter (PMto 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. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —44 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 6 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentiaiiy Significant with Mitigation Than Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Im act 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 a 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 (03), 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. 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 Basin's compliance with the FCAA. The South Coast Air Basin is in Non -Attainment Status for Ozone, PMio 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 RK Engineering Group, Inc. on June 25, 2014 that utilizes CaIEEMod (Version 2013.2.2) 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 Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Short Term (Construction): Proiect Emissions and Impacts The project proposes to subdivide a property of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single- family detached lots within the Low (L) Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue; APN: 1087-081- 25. The project site is currently undeveloped. The potential emissions associated with construction of the project are described in the following sections. Item C —45 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 7 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp 9 Potentially significant With Mitigation Than Than No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act Summary of Peak Construction Emissions (Emissions Summary of Overall Construction with Best Available Control Measures) ;Emission..ss S.umma_ry;of Overall Construction (ILis:Iday) -Without, BACMS VOC NO. CO SO,t PM10 PM2.5 2015 5.34 56.99 43.9 0.04 21.35 12.8 2016 21.49 28.8 19.5 0.02 2.11 1.89 Maximum Daily Emissions 23.64 56.99 43.92 0.04 4.49 3.61 Threshold 75 100 550 150 150 55 Substantial? No No No No No No VOC = volatile organic gases; NO. = oxides of nitrogen; CO = carbon monoxide; SOx= oxides of sulfur; PMio and PM2.5 = particulate matter Source: Air Quality Impact Analysis - (Table 14) (CalEEMod Output) RK Engineering Group, Inc. - June 25, 2014 Construction activities associated with the project will result in emissions of CO, VOCs, NO., SOx, PM10 and PM2.5 and are expected from the following construction activities: site preparation, grading, building construction, painting (architectural coatings) paving (curb, gutter, flatwork, and parking lot), and construction worker commuting. Localized Significance Summary (Construction Emissions with Best Available Control Measures) "Table 15,' j � ConstructiofiGocaliied,Si nifican'ce � LST Pollutants) CO NOx PMto S02.5 Ibs/da Ibs/da Ibs/da Ibs/da On -site Emissions 43.92 56.99 4.49 3.61 SCAQMD Construction Threshold2 1,877 200 19 8 Exceeds Threshold (?) No No No No 1 Reference LST thresholds are from 2006-2008 SCAQMD Mass Rate Localized Significant Threshold for construction and operation Tables C-1 through C-6 for a disturbance area of 2 acres and at a receptor distance of 50 meters. 2 Reference. Source Receptor Area 32 Thresholds. 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; however, as shown in the tables above, the amount will not exceed any threshold of significance. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —46 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 8 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp 9 Potentially Significant with Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impart Impact Fugitive Dust Fugitive dust emissions are generally emissions 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. Architectural Coatings Architectural coatings contain VOCs that are similar to ROCS and are part of the 03 precursors. Based on the proposed project, it is estimated that the proposed project will result in a maximum of approximately 0.48 Ibs of VOC per day (combined for all construction sources) during construction. Therefore, this VOC emission is the principal air emission and is less than the SCAQMD VOC threshold of 75 Ibs/day. 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 asbestos (NOA) during project construction is small and less than significant. Table 15 illustrates the construction related LSTs for the project area. The emissions will be below the SCAQMD thresholds of significance for localized construction emissions. Therefore, the Project will not result in significant localized construction emissions. Cumulative Impacts: 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 Rev 4-7-15 Item C —47 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 9 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant with Mitigation Than Significant No Impact incorporated Im act Impact operate at one development site until their tasks are complete. Nevertheless, fugitive dust and equipment emissions are required to be assessed. 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.e and PM1o) 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. This city-wide increase in emissions was identified as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the Section 4.3 of the General Plan FPEIR. With implementation of the following best practices and mitigation measures from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR that are designed to minimize short-term air quality impacts, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts will be less -than -significant: 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) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 4) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction -grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 5) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 6) 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. 7) 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. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —48 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 10 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant with Mitigation Than Significant No Im act Incor craled Im act Im act • 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 25mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 8) 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 PMto emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 9) 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 PMig emissions. Project Long Term (Operational) Emissions and Impacts Long-term air pollutant emissions 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 amount of development in the 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. As shown in the following tables, project implementation will not exceed any significance thresholds. No long-term, operational impacts will occur as a result of the project. Summary of Peak Operational Emissions Maximum;Dail" Emissions` Ib'si/da "=tSumme without'Miti 'atioh VOC NOx CO Sox PMta PM2.5.. Area 1.26 0.029 2.5 1.3000e-004 0.01 0.01 Energy 0.029 0.2558 0.1 1.6300e-003 0.02 0.02 Mobile 1.16 3.36 13.79 0.03 2.24 0.63 Total 2.45 3.64 13.79 0.034 2.27 0.66 Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Significant Impact No No No No No No Rev 4-7-15 Item C —49 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 11 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potencally Slgnifcant with Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Maximum' Dail ,Erriissioris' Ibs./ddy .- Winter' without,Miti ation VOC NOx CO sox PMm PM2.5 Area 1.26 0.029 2.509 1'3000 a 0.013 0.013 Energy 0.029 0.255 0.108 1 -003 a 0.020 0.020 Mobile 1.198 3.537 13.497 0.0311 2.240 0.630 Total 2.492 3.822 16.116 0.032 2.274 0.664 Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Significant Impact No No No No No No Source: Air Quality and GHG Impact Study - (Table 2.2 (CaIEEMod Output) RK Engineering Group, Inc., September 11, 2015 Operational Activity: Emissions (pounds "' per day) _ 'NOx CO'. PMio PMzs•'- Maximum Daily Emissions 0.45 3.31 0.1 0.07 SCAQMD Threshold 200 1,877 5 2 Threshold Exceeded? No No No No Cumulative Impacts (Long Term/Operational Emissions) The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the potential impacts to air quality based on the future build out of the City. In the long-term, continued development 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, all developments would be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a less -than -significant level. This City-wide increase in emissions was identified as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the Section 4.3 of the General Plan FPEIR. With implementation of the following mitigation measures from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR that are designed to minimize long-term, operational air quality impacts, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts will be less -than -significant: 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. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —50 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 12 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Im act Incorporated Im act Impact 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. 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. With implementation of mitigation measures listed in subsection b) above from the City's 2010 General Plan FPEIR, which are designed to minimize long-term, operational air quality impacts, cumulative impacts will be less -than -significant. 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 closest existing sensitive receptors are residences located approximately 165 feet to the south of the Project. During construction, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be generated from grading the site. The mitigation measures listed under subsection b above and the following mitigation measure will reduce any potential 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. Operational odors (Long-term) are typically associated with the type of use. Odors from the proposed residential use would most likely be from activities such as cooking and gardening; however, these odors would be minimal and not considered to be significant. No adverse impacts are anticipated. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —51 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 13 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Inconscrated Impact Im act 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? 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 project site is located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue in an area that is vacant. The site has not been previously disrupted. According to the General Plan Figure RC-4, and Section 4.4 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore, development may adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals. The project site is located in an area identified for Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub Habitat. Per the Biological Resources Assessment prepared by M.J. Klinefelter on August 14, 2014, no special status plant species were detected at the site. One sensitive natural community (recognized by CDFW) is present at the Site - White sage scrub (WSS). Construction of the project as proposed would result in the direct removal of approximately 9.13 acres of White sage scrub, a sensitive habitat identified as a high priority natural community by CDFW. City Policy RC-8.1 requires the City to implement actions that result in the preservation of the integrity of riparian habitat areas, creek corridors, Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub, bogs, and sensitive wildlife habitat that supports biological resources. The City shall pursue these actions that provide appropriate long-term protection of areas within the City's sphere of influence (SOI) that contain sensitive habitat, and which are considered of unique value in enhancing the quality of the local environment (City of Rancho Rev 4-7-15 Item C —52 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 14 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PoternIaoy Signifcanl wuh Mitigation Than Signifcanl No Im act Incarporaled Im act Im act Cucamonga, 2010). WSS is sensitive habitat and the WSS at the Site represents one of the few remaining areas of WSS in the City. A number of special status wildlife species have the potential to occur on -site. The property is located within U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) designated critical habitat for the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat (SBKR), a federally endangered species. A small mammal live -trapping survey, employing USFWS survey protocol, was conducted by SJM Biological Consultants, Inc. (SJM) on August 19, 2014, in order to document the presence or absence of special status small mammal species at the Project Site. Although the subject property occurs within designated Critical habitat for the SBKR; however, no individuals of this species were captured on the property. Thus, no impacts to SBKR will result from development of this property. The trap results from this and previous adjacent field trapping surveys on Tract 14749 (adjacent tract above) indicate that this species of kangaroo rat presently occurs at very low densities or is absent in the general area of the subject property. In addition to SBKR (not detected), Coastal California Gnatcatcher (CAGN) (federally threatened) and Swainson's Hawk (state threatened) may occur on -site. These species were not detected during the MJK field investigation. USFWS-protocol focused surveys were conducted by Cereus Environmental (Cereus) on November 12, 2014, to document the presence or absence of CAGN onsite. No CAGN were observed within the study area during any of the focused surveys conducted. Potential indirect impacts to Swainson's Hawk through loss foraging habitat will be mitigated through mitigation described in Mitigation requirement number 2 below, through preservation of 27.4 acres of WSS. The Biological Resource Assessment prepared by M.J. Klinefelter also indicated that the site does not contain suitable habitat for Burrowing Owls due to the presence of relatively dense vegetation across the site. Although the site's vegetation density was observed during previous site visits and it was suggested that the site is not suitable for nesting habitat for the Burrowing Owl, mitigations are provided below that require proper surveys to be completed prior to ground disturbance regarding migratory birds and Burrowing Owls. Six special status wildlife species were detected during the MJK field investigation, and one was trapped by SJM (Los Angeles Pocket Mouse, (LAPM); a Species of Special Concern in California). None of the species detected on -site are listed as endangered or threatened at the federal or state levels. Although the LAPM is not currently listed as threatened or endangered by either the CDFW or the USFWS, CEQA requirements may dictate some sort of mitigation action to offset the loss of the population of this species residing on the property. For example, CEQA Article 20 Section 15380 indicates that a species or subspecies may be considered threatened/endangered if certain conditions exist, even if it is not formally listed as threatened/endangered. To offset the potential loss of LAPM on the property from development, mitigation is described below. Based on the BRA, special status plant species have a low potential to occur on -site. Two plants, Nevin's barberry and slender -horned spine flower, are listed as endangered at the federal and state levels. Slender mariposa lily, Parry's spine flower, mesa horkelia, Robbin's nemacladus, and Brand's star phacelia are not listed but have a CRPR rank of 1.13, and white rabbit -tobacco and chaparral ragwort have a rank of 2. Removal of on -site vegetation would result in the loss of potential habitat for these species as well as others with a CRPR of 4 (plants of limited distribution). A sensitive plant survey was conducted on March 18 and May 4, 2016. During his surveys of the site, he encountered a single sensitive plant species, Plummer's mariposa lily (Calochortus plummerae), a CRPR 4 plant. This species is not listed as "threatened" or "endangered" by either CDFW or Rev 4-7-15 Item C —53 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 15 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant with Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incor oraci Impact Im act USFWS. This species was recently downgraded by the California Native Plant Society from CRPR 1B.2 to CRPR 4.2, indicating that the distribution of this species is more widespread than previously thought. Impacts to Plummer's mariposa lily would not be considered significant especially in light of the project's relatively small size and the existence of the species in conservation open space within the region. Mr. Roberts did not observe any other sensitive species on the site. There were no new seedlings or young plants observed on the site that could be confused with later blooming sensitive species so Mr. Roberts concluded that further surveys were not necessary to ensure that the Site has been sufficiently surveyed for the 2016 year for the potential presence of sensitive plant species. Based on the results of Mr. Roberts' surveys and the analysis in the Biological Resources Assessment, the project would have a less than significant impact on any plant species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species and no further mitigation is required. Standard Condition 4.4-1 in Section 4.4 (Biological Resources) of the City's 2010 EIR (City of Rancho Cucamonga, 2010) states: .. Any CEQA project that involves the removal of habitat must consider if any special status species (e.g., Threatened or Endangered species, CNPS List I and 2 plants, or species protected under Section 15380 of CEQA) are potentially present on the project site and if the project impacts could be considered significant by the City. If potential habitat is present in an area, focused surveys shall be conducted prior to construction activities in order to document the presence or absence of a species on the project site. Botanical surveys shall be conducted during the appropriate blooming period for a species. If no special status species are found on the project site, no additional action is warranted. If special status species are found, appropriate mitigation would be required in coordination with the City as described below." Cumulative impacts for biological resources were analyzed in the context of the area defined by the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains from the San Gabriel River to the Cajon Wash/Lytle Creek confluence. The site is generally surrounded on three sides by urban development. Most of the properties in the immediate vicinity are already developed or zoned for future development, and development will likely occur at those parcels regardless of development of SUBTT18908. The project is an infill development and is typical of other activities in the region and is consistent with previously approved adjacent residential developments. Future conditions are expected to be similar. The goals of the project are in line with the guidance provided in the City's 2010 EIR (City of Rancho Cucamonga, 2010) as well as the San Bernardino County General Plan (San Bernardino, 2007) and the Etiwanda North Specific plan EIR (Rancho Cucamonga, 1992-b). Impacts related to buildout of the City and SOI are anticipated to be less than significant if projects comply with General Plan and Etiwanda North Specific Plan policies and standard conditions. 1) If vegetation removal, soil disturbance, or any other construction related activity is to occur during the avian nesting season (February 1 through August 31), a preconstruction nesting survey shall be conducted and submitted to the Planning Department for review and acceptance prior to initiation of construction. If nests are discovered, they should be avoided through establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist and consistent with CDFW protocols. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and left the nest, then construction in Rev 4-7-15 Item C —54 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 16 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp 9 Potentially significant With Mitigatlon Than Significant No hn acl Inoor orated Im act Im acl the area could resume. A biologist should be present on -site to monitor vegetation removal activities to ensure that any nests not detected during the initial survey are not disturbed. If initial ground disturbing activities or site clearing is proposed to occur outside of the nesting season (September 1 through January 31), then a pre -construction survey would not be required and construction could commence unimpeded. 2) Mitigation for the removal of white sage scrub on -site is required — preservation in perpetuity of 27.4 acres of habitat within APN 1087-051-02 in the Day Creek area of the Etiwanda Fan along the northern boundary of the 175-acre conservation area for Tentative Tract 16072 (a 3:1 mitigation ratio). If this mitigation measure is implemented, adverse effects to WSS habitat would be less than significant. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide documentation to the Planning Department that the property has been deeded to an approved conservation entity and a conservation easement or declaration of restricted covenants has been placed over the property. 3) Since there is habitat at the Site suitable to support special status plant species, including one endangered species and several CRPR 1B and 2 plants, focused surveys shall be conducted prior to issuance of a grading permit, during the appropriate blooming periods for the subject species, in order to document the presence or absence of those species at the Project Site. The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist using methodology based on the most current CDFW and CNPS rare plant survey protocols. The biologist shall identify all occurrences of sensitive species and shall consult with CDFW and USFWS, as appropriate depending on species status, to develop and execute a mitigation plan to relocate plants, gather seeds from the plants, and distribute to a suitable conserved habitat area. 4) To offset the loss of Los Angeles Pocket Mouse on the property from development, the Project applicant will preserve 27.4 acres of habitat that is adjacent to occupied LAPM habitat as identified in Biological Resource Mitigation Measure 2. 5) The following measures are required to minimize indirect impacts to vegetation in the vicinity of the project site: • Dust control measures designed to minimize effects to vegetation in the vicinity should be implemented. • Native plants should be used to the greatest extent feasible in landscaped areas. Many invasive non-native horticultural species can spread readily into natural areas and the local watershed. Landscaping should not include invasive plants identified by the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC). 6) No SBKR were detected on -site. The loss of SBKR critical habitat is not expected to compromise the long-term survival of the species; therefore, no mitigation measures for impacts to SBKR critical habitat are proposed. However, since there are impacts proposed to on -site WOUS regulated under the jurisdiction of the Corps, it is expected that the Corps will be required to consult with USFWS under Section 7 of the FESA. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —55 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 17 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act 7) Ten days prior to ground clearing activities, a breeding bird survey that is in conformance with the Migratory Bird Act shall be required to determine whether nesting is occurring. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, this survey shall be submitted to the City for review and acceptance. Occupied nests shall not be disturbed unless a qualified biologist verifies through non-invasive methods that either (a) the adult birds have not begun egg -laying or incubation; or (b) the juveniles from the occupied nests are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. If the biologist is unable to verify one of the above conditions, then no disturbance shall occur within 300 feet of non -raptor nests, and within 5,000 feet of raptor nests, during the breeding season to avoid abandonment of the young. If nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area shall be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume. 8) Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The survey shall include a habitat assessment, survey and impact analysis. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol: • Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D (Breeding and Non -breeding Season Surveys and Reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre -construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre -construction survey does not identify burrowing owls on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre - construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with CDFW to avoid Impacting occupied burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground -disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. • During the non -breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are occupied by migratory or non -migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre -construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines. • During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through establishment of an Rev 4-7-15 Item C —56 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 18 Less Than Signifcant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentiany Significant with Mitigation Than Signifcant No Im act Incorporated Impact Im act appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume. b) According to the Biological Resources Assessment prepared by M.J. Klinefelter on August 14, 2014, there is no riparian habitat on -site, the proposed Project would not impact riparian resources. Therefore, there will be no impact. c) A separate jurisdictional delineation was prepared by M.J. Klinefelter on October 25, 2014. Based on the delineation, jurisdictional non -wetland waters of the U.S. (WOUS) and waters of the state are present at the Site. There is a small unnamed ephemeral drainage at the Site which meets jurisdictional criteria for non -wetland waters of the United States (Corps), waters of the State (RWQCB), and jurisdictional streambed (CDFW). There are no jurisdictional wetlands present at the Site. Since the Project proposes to develop the entire Site, the full extent of Drainage A within the Site boundaries would be impacted. Table 1 below summarizes and Figure 6 in Appendix A shows the proposed permanent impacts to on -site jurisdictional waters that would result from Project development. . •Table 4.'Proposed Permanent Impacts,to _On site JuisdlctlonaI Waters .. I _ Drainage ID Non -wetland WOUS (linear feet/acres) CDFW Jurisdictional Streambed linear feeUacres Flow Classification (lbs/day) Drainage 831/0.113 831/0.216 Ephemeral Total Impacts 831/0.113 831/0.216 Ephemeral It should be noted that future flood control improvements in the area will continue to modify hydrologic inputs to the Site. Associated with development of the Tentative Tract 16072 project (SUBTT16072) located directly north and west of the Project Site (previously permitted by the Corps - File No. SPL-2005-00655-SJH), and as required by the City, is the extension of the 25th Street Drain. This interceptor channel is a City master planned facility and is designed to flood proof areas south of the drain. The drain would extend the existing 26th Street and 25th Street drains to the east to East Etiwanda Creek and collect channelized and sheet flows generated on the undeveloped lands north of Tract 16072. Flows from the existing 26th and 25th Street Drains currently discharge from developments to the northwest into a drainage/channel near the northwest corner of the Tract 16072 site northwest of the Project Site. Upon completion of the 25th Street Drain, these flows would be discharged eastward into the Etiwanda Creek Debris Basin, maintained by SBFCD. Thus, flows from the currently undeveloped areas upstream of the Site (SUBTT16072) will be rerouted into the Etiwanda Creek Debris Basin following extension of the 25th Street and 26th Street Drains, and future hydrologic inputs to the Site would be limited to direct on -site rainfall. Since impacts to Drainage A are proposed, the Project will require the following mitigation measures to ensure a level less than significant to federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act: Rev 4-7-15 Item C —57 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 19 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Im act Im act 9) Prior to approval by the City of any grading and/or construction permits, the Project applicant shall consult with the Corps to obtain a Jurisdictional Determination and, if necessary, acquire required permit authorizations from the regulatory agencies. These authorizations will include, but are not limited to, the following: CWA Section 404 Permit from the Corps (Nationwide Permit 29 for Residential Developments may be applicable) CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification from RWQCB, and • California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW. In addition to obtaining authorizations from regulatory agencies, the Project will preserve in perpetuity approximately 1 acre of riparian habitat within the 27.4 acres of habitat identified in Biological Resource Mitigation Measure 2. Additionally, a FESA Section 7 Consultation between the Corps and USFWS will be required. Copies of any correspondence and/or permit authorizations received shall be submitted to the City for review and record. d) Per the General Plan, the City is required to acquire and/or protect open space areas that provide strategic wildlife corridors to vital habitat areas. Based on the Biological Resources Assessment prepared for the project by M.J. Klinefelter on August 14, 2014, the following mitigations outlined in section a) are required to reduce the impacts to less than significant. e) There are no heritage trees on the project site; therefore, the proposed project is not in conflict with any local ordinance. There will be no impact. 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. There will be no impact. 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 () (✓) () ( ) 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? Rev 4-7-15 Item C —58 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 20 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sr PP g Sources: Potentially Significant with Mitigation Than Significant No Im act Incorporated Impact Im act e) Directly or indirectly affect a Native American tribal () (✓) () ( ) cultural resource? Comments: a) The project site has not been identified as a "Historic Resource" per the standards of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.18.020 (Historic Preservation - Designations. There will be no impact. b) There are no known archaeological sites or resources recorded on the project site According to the CRA and Paleontological Review conducted by FirstCarbon Solutions on September 5, 2014, no archaeological or historical cultural resources were found, and the proposed project is expected to have no impacts on any archaeological or historic resources. Per the Cultural Resources Assessment, "No historic or prehistoric resources were found during the course of the pedestrian survey. Ground visibility was approximately 75 percent, and the ground surfaces were exposed between natural vegetation cover. No resources have been recorded within the project area. FCS has assessed the effects of the proposed development on any local cultural resources. The results of the assessment indicate that the proposed project is expected to have no impacts on any archaeological or historic resources. Based on the results of the record searches and pedestrian survey, FCS considers the project area to have low sensitivity for prehistoric and historic resources, and archaeological monitoring is not recommended." 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. In order for the impacts to be less than significant, the following mitigation measures, some of which are 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, Rev 4-7-15 Item C —59 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 21 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Slgni any Signifcant with Mitigation Than Significant No Impact incorporated Impact impact 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) A RPA (Registry of Professional Archaeologists) -certified archaeologist shall be retained, at the expense of the future project developers, to monitor the initial grading in areas, sensitive for cultural resources, such as the mouths of the canyons and along the natural drainages. The frequency and duration of the monitoring shall be based on the professional judgment of the on -site archaeologist based on the materials being excavated. If significant cultural resources are uncovered, the archaeologist shall have the authority to stop or temporarily divert construction activities for a period of 48 hours to assess the significance of the finds. 3) In the event that significant archaeological remains are uncovered during excavation and/or grading, all work shall stop in that area of the site until an appropriate data recovery program can be developed and implemented. The cost of such a program shall be the responsibility of future developers. 4) All archaeological resources recovered during the project shall be donated to a local institution that has the proper facilities for curation, display, and use by qualified scholars and all tribal cultural resources that may be recovered during project development be returned to the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians. Costs for curation shall be covered by the project applicant. 5) The approved archaeological mitigation measures shall be affixed to all copies of the project grading plans. 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, in order to reduce the impacts to less than significant, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 6) If any paleontological resources (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 Rev 4-7-15 Item C —60 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 22 Less Than Slgnigcant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Im act Incomo,ated Impact Impact 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 proposed project is in an area that has not been disturbed by development. 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) The proposed project involves a subdivision of 10.6 acres of land into 30 lots for future single-family residential development. On November 9, 2015, per Assembly Bill AB52, the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians and the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians were notified of the project. Staff received a series of correspondences via letters and emails from both Tribes. Per a letter dated December 7, 2015, the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians indicated that the tribe does not have any specific concerns regarding known cultural resources in the specific area that the project encompasses. They also went on to request that the approved Native American Monitors be present during any future ground disturbing proceedings, including survey and archaeological testing, associated with this project. On November 17, 2015, staff received a response email from the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, requesting to review a Cultural Resource Assessment (CRA) for the site. After reviewing the CRA, the San Manuel Band requested to know why the issue of potential for subsurface cultural deposits was not specifically addressed. According to the CRA and Paleontological Review conducted by FirstCarbon Solutions on September 5, 2014, no archaeological or historical cultural resources were found, and the proposed project is expected to have no impacts on any archaeological or historic resources. Per the Cultural Resources Assessment, the recommendations section addresses the potential for subsurface archaeological materials based on the results of the records searches (2 records searches) and pedestrian survey. Based on the records searches and site surveys, FirstCarbon Solutions has determined the project to have a low potential for encountering buried prehistoric resources as none have been previously recorded within the project nor within a mile radius. The exact text from the study discussing this matter is as follows: Rev 4-7-15 Item C —61 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 23 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact inwreorated Impact Impact "No historic or prehistoric resources were found during the course of the pedestrian survey. Ground visibility was approximately 75 percent, and the ground surfaces were exposed between natural vegetation cover. No resources have been recorded within the project area. FCS has assessed the effects of the proposed development on any local cultural resources. The results of the assessment indicate that the proposed project is expected to have no impacts on any archaeological or historic resources. Based on the results of the record searches and pedestrian survey, FCS considers the project area to have low sensitivity for prehistoric and historic resources, and archaeological monitoring is not recommended." The proposed mitigation measures listed above in Sections B requires the developer to retain a SOPA-certified archaeologist shall be retained, at the expense of the future project developers, to monitor the initial grading in areas, sensitive for cultural resources, such as the mouths of the canyons and along the natural drainages. Mitigation measures in Section B and C above require a qualified paleontologist and/or archaeologist to be retained for monitoring purposes, upon discovery of an archaeological or paleontological resource. However, because this does not guarantee monitoring of the site for cultural resources, the following mitigations are included to ensure that the project will not have a significant impact on cultural resources: 7) Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the applicantlpermitee shall contact the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department to coordinate tribal participation in the archaeological monitoring of the project. Tribal participants shall coordinate with the Project Archaeologist to ensure that tribal cultural resources that may be encountered during ground disturbances are identified, assessed, and either protected in place or mitigated accordingly. 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? () (✓) () ( ) Rev 4-7-15 Item C —62 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 24 Less Than significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S pp g Sources: Potentially Significant with MtigaOon Than Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Im acl 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 () () () (✓) 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 Etiwanda Avenue Fault Scarp, passes within approximately 339 feet north of the site, and the Cucamonga Fault Zone lies approximately 0.8 miles north of the site. 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 miles northeasterly of the site and the San Andreas, capable of up to Mw 8.2 earthquakes, is more than 14 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 PIVlio 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,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 PM,a emissions from the site during such episodes. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —63 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 25 Less Than ' Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Inco om[ed Impact Im act 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. 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 Soboba Stony Loamy Sand (SpC, 2 to 9 percent slopes) 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 Soboba Stony Loamy Sand Soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. These soils are typically not expansive. 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? 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 6 key GHGs (carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)). The combined emissions of these well -mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and engines contribute to GHG pollution. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —64 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 26 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Signifcant with Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Inco prated Im act Im act 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 3 to 4 degrees Fahrenheit (OF) 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 qualitative analysis (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 Fontana -Arrow Highway station. The Upland station monitors all criteria pollutant except PM1o, PM2.5, and S02 which are monitored at the Fontana -Arrow Highway station. The ambient air quality in the project area for CO, NO2, and S02 are consistently below the relevant State and Federal standards (based on ARB and EPA from 2007, 2008, and 2009 readings). Ozone, PMto, and,PM2.5 levels all exceed State and Federal standards regularly. Proiect 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. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —65 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 27 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant with Mitigation Than Signifcant No Innact Incor prated Im and I, .,, The City of Rancho Cucamonga has not adopted a threshold of significance for GHG emissions. However, a screening threshold of 3,000 MTCO2e per year is based upon South Coast Air Quality Management District staff's proposed GHG screening threshold for stationary sources emissions for non -industrial projects, as described in the SCAQMD's Interim CEQA GHG Significance Threshold for Stationary Sources, Rules and Plans. Project related GHG's would include emissions from direct and indirect sources. Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. on June 25, 2014, total project related emissions would be 596 MTCOxeq/year, as shown in the following table: TABLE 19 Project Greenhouse Gas Emissions During Operation Emission Source Emissions,(Mi with Regulation' , Area Source 1 Energy Source 121 Mobile Source 432 Waste 16 Water 14 Subtotal (Operation) 582 Subtotal Construction (averaged over 30 years) 14 Total Annual Emissions 596 ' MTCO_e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents TABLE 20 Significance of Greenhouse Gases 'Rem Emissions With 'Regulation Units Total Annual Emissions' 596 MTCO,e/year SCAQMD Draft Tier 3 threshold 3,000 MTCO=e/year Exceed Tier 3 Threshold? No - Significant impact? No -- ' Refer to Table 19 for emissions "Regulation - Rule 403 (Fugitive Dust) from SCAQMD. CalEEmod incorporates other regulations that are implemented at the state level. Section 2.2.3 of the report describes in detail. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —66 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 28 Less Than signiOcant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g Sources: Polendaliy Significant Wlh Mltigadon Than Significant No Im act incorporated Impact Impact As shown in the table, direct and indirect operational emissions associated with the project as compared to the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance of 3,000 MTCO2e per year would result in a less than significant impact with respect to GHG emissions. Cumulative 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. Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. on June 25, 2014, no significant impacts to GHGs from short-term construction impacts would occur as a result of the project as shown in the table above. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. The proposed project would have less than a significant short-term cumulative impact with implementation of the following enforceable actions, which are included as mitigation measures in accordance with Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 2010 General Plan Update FPEIR: 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 contractor 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 the construction crew. Cumulative 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, Rev 4-7-15 Item C —67 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 29 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incarcerated Impact Im act 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 past performance 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. The project involves a subdivision of a property of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single- family detached lots and therefore would result in an increase in the net increases of 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: water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks. 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 proposed project will incorporate several design features including: water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks. 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. Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. on June 25, 2014, no significant impacts to GHGs from long-term, operational impacts would occur as a result of the project as shown in the table above. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts is also considered minimal. The proposed project would have less than a significant long-term operational impact with implementation of the following enforceable actions, which are included as mitigation measures in accordance with Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 2010 General Plan Update FPEIR: 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 develop site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —68 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 30 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Im act Inccr orated Im act 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. b) The project involves a subdivision of a property of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single- family detached lots within the Low (L) Residential District, which is consistent with the General Plan and the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. No other applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emission apply to the project. The 2010 General Plan Update includes 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 diverse opportunities. The proposed project includes water efficient landscaping, shade trees, and walkways that provide accessibility to public sidewalks and therefore is consistent with the sustainability and climate change 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. Based on the Greenhouse Gas Analysis prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. on June 25, 2014, no significant impacts to GHGs from short-term, construction impacts or long-term, operational impacts would occur as a result of the project. Because the project would result in minimal emissions that do not exceed the SCAQMD's interim threshold of significance, the project's contribution to GHGs from short-term construction and long-term operational cumulative impacts is also considered Rev 4-7-15 Item C —69 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 31 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant wth Miligah.n man Significant No Impact Incur oratetl Im act Im act minimal. With implementation of the mitigation measures listed in subsection a), less than significant impacts would occur as a result of the project. In addition, the proposed project would not hinder the State's GHG reduction goals established by Assembly Bill (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 () () (✓) ( ) 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? 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 or 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, which is considered a full service Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive than any other in the State. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —70 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 32 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant wun Mitigation Than Significenl No Impact incorporated Impact Im act 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. b) The proposed project does not include the use of hazardous materials or volatile fuels. The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition, which 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. c) There are no schools located within 1/4 mile of the project site. The project site is located within 0.48 miles of the nearest existing school, Etiwanda Colony Elementary School located at 13144 Banyan St, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739. Typically, the uses proposed do not create objectionable odors. No impacts are anticipated. d) The proposed project is not listed as a hazardous waste or substance materials site. Recent site inspections 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 7.6 miles northeast 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 and 1/2 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. Access will be provided as part of the project approval. 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 two 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 wind -driven fires in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone found in the northern part of the City. The project is located within 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. Furthermore, the project has prepared 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: Rev 4-7-15 Item C —71 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 33 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act 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. 2) The project shall comply with the Fire Protection Plan dated January 5, 2015. The plan includes specific vegetation management zones, required landscaping requirements, and construction standards. The Fire Protection Plan has been approved by the RCFPD on April 13, 2015. 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? () () () (✓) 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? Rev 4-7-15 Item C —72 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 34 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant wm Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incor crated Impact Im act j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? I () I () I () (✓) 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. 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 (NO]) 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) to 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 an SWPPP. To comply with the NPDES, the project's construction contractor will be required to prepare an 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 MDS Consulting on August 22, 2014, which identifies 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. With the following mitigation measures incorporated to control additional storm water effluent, impacts will be less than significant: Construction Activities: Rev 4-7-15 Item C —73 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 35 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information' Sources: pp 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Then .Significant No Im act Incorporated Im act Im act 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) 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. 6) Education of Property Owners, Tenants and Occupants on Stormwater BMPs - Educational Materials will be available to homeowners thru HOA. HOA will periodically provide homeowners with environmental awareness education materials which may include use of household chemicals, discharges of wastes via hosing or other direct discharge to gutters, catch basins and storm drains. See attached Education Materials in section 6.4 of the WQMP report. 7) Activity Restrictions - Once an HOA is formed, certain ,restrictions may be enacted thru the formation of conditions, covenants and restrictions (CCRs) to protect surface water runoff. 8) Landscape Management BMPs - See attached CASQA SD-12 in section 6.4 of the WQMP Report. 9) BMP Maintenance— Maintenance of BMPs implemented at the project shall be performed at the frequency prescribed in this WQMP. Records of inspections and maintenance shall be maintained by the HOA and documented with the Rev 4-7-15 Item C —74 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 36 less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP g Ponificain Sigifcant With Mitiga on Than Significant No Impact Incor prated Im act Im act WQMP, and shall be available for review upon request. 10) Local Water Quality Ordinances - Available to the home upon request at the City of Ranch Cucamonga. 11) Litter/Debris Control Program - Litter collection and removal shall be conducted on a bi-weekly basis by the HOA. 12) Catch Basin Inspection, Program - Catch basins will be inspected by the HOA and cleaned as necessary on an annual basis. Catch basin labeling shall be checked for legibility, replaced as necessary. 13) Vacuum Sweeping of Private Streets and Parking Lots - The City of Rancho Cucamonga shall sweep all streets and drive aisles on a weekly basis. 14) Provide storm drain system stenciling and signage (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-13) - See CASQA Detail SD-13 in Section 6.4 of WQMP. 15) Use efficient irrigation systems & landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control (Statewide Model Landscape Ordinance; CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-12) - See CASQA Detail SD-12 in Section 6.4 of WQMP. 16) Finish grade of landscaped areas at a minimum of 1-2 inches below top of curb, sidewalk, or pavement - Landscapedr areas are proposed to promote self -retaining areas to aid in surface runoff water quality. 17) Protect slopes and channels and provide energy dissipation (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-10) - See CASQA Detail SD-10 in Section 6.4 of WQMP. Post- Construction Operational. 18) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City 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. 19) 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. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —75 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 37 Less Than Signi(cant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No . Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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. Development of the site will require the grading and excavation, but would not affect the existing aquifer, estimated to be about 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 the 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 the ephemeral stream per the Biological Resources Assessment prepared by M.J. Klinefelter on August 14, 2014. 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. With implementation of the mitigation measures specified under subsection a), less than significant impacts are anticipated. 20) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by MDS Consulting on August 22, 2014 to reduce Rev 4-7-15 Item C —76 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 38 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Peientially Significant wu Mitigation man Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. g) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. No impacts are anticipated. h) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. No impacts are anticipated. 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. Therefore, there will be no impact. 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. Therefore, there will be no impact. 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 northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue characterized by vacant land to the north, south, east and west. This project will be of similar design and size to surrounding residential development to the southwest, and pending 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 is a subdivision of a property of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots. The project site land use designation is Low (L) Residential. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and does not interfere with any policies for environmental protection, or SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan. The proposed project is consistent with the zoning designation, Low (L) Residential District, of the project site which permits residential development with Rev 4-7-15 Item C —77 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 39 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant with Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incur orated Im act Im acl a density of between 2 to 4 units per acre. The proposed project will be within the required density range of the zoning district. As such, no impacts are anticipated. c) The project site is located within a habitat conservation or natural community plan area. According to 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; therefore, development will adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals. With the mitigation requirements provided in subsection 4 of the Biological Resources section above, the impacts will be less than significant. 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 () () () H 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? 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? Rev 4-7-15 Item C —78 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 40 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Significant with Mitlgabon Than Significant No Im act Incorporated fa act [mood Comments: a) The project site is not within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards according to General Plan Figure PS-9 at build -out. No adverse impacts expected b) The proposed project is a single-family residential subdivision. The normal operating uses associated with this type of project normally do not induce ground borne vibrations. As there will be grading and construction, there will be a temporary increase in ground -borne vibration and noise. The mitigation measures listed below in 12.d will mitigate these short-term impacts to a level of less -than -significant. c) The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. According to a Noise Impact Study prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. on June 25, 2014, the project site will experience exterior traffic noise levels that exceed the City's standard; therefore, the study recommends exterior noise barriers to shield traffic noise levels along the project site eastern and southern property lines. With incorporation of the following mitigation measures, the impacts will be less than significant. 1) The recommended height of the noise barriers is 6 feet. Noise control barrier may be constructed by a block wall and will be required at plan check by the Planning Department. A noise barrier must present a solid face from top to bottom. Preventable openings or decorative cutouts should not be made. All gaps (except for weep holes) should be filled with grout or caulking to avoid flanking. 2) The project site will require a "windows closed" condition. To ensure proper acoustical noise isolation the following are required at plan check and verified with the Building and Safety Department: • Upgraded windows and sliding glass doors for facades that face analyzed roadways. First row units directly facing East and Wilson Avenue: 1st floor: All windows and sliding glass doors directly facing East Avenue and Wilson Avenue will require a minimum STC rating of 25 or higher. 2nd floor: All windows and sliding glass doors directly facing East Avenue and Wilson Avenue will require a minimum STC rating of 28 or higher. • Attic facade vents or roof vents that directly face the subject roadway, if applicable, should include an acoustical baffle to prevent vehicle noise intrusion. Exhibit D and E illustrates an example of an attic facade vent and roof vent acoustical baffles. The Contractor may install similar measures to provide noise reduction. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —79 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 41 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant with Wigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Exhibit D Attic Facade Vent Acoustical Baffle Detail ae,r SECTION 'vv1r+W m1 +Y M•,ITun PLAN VIEW r (4-$ u .z va ,wA.na �IY•,+a1c•+a•Urlr,l dl^a /Jtx1+:, mnz qIr Ya.w^a u mlYme rl �,y � Eml•ru �.Jl En.Aa anl:.w z x ve p+bl.Tv, •r Eu+ITw n+blNi.+z?s I^.JNlen NCbG m e.a1+Y � Nwroa!Y awI�IMI exN+: u.,vaa � mYm Rev 4-7-15 Item C —80 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 42 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: PP g Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Im act Im act Exhibit E Roof Vent Acoustical Baffle Detail a , i r P 9i82$Sq In - Id I 15, Insulation Galy. Top Frame t" I255p. 1n 1 ' Plywood Eaa b .tfi" x 18, 14314' 9141 • For proper acoustical performance, all exterior windows, doors, and sliding glass doors must have a positive seal and leaks/cracks must be kept to a minimum. • Minimize cracks or leaks, any partition with a gap or hole will allow noise to flank and penetrate the partition. 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 to less than significant: 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. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —81 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 43 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Poten"'Y Signifcant With Mitigabon Than Significant Na Im act Incorporated Innact Im act 4) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050. 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. 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 measures 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 and include appropriate noise mitigation measures. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. 7) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a construction -related noise mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan shall depict the location of the construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction. 8) Stationary construction noise sources such as generators or pumps should be located as far away from sensitive land uses, as feasible. 9) Construction staging areas should be located as far from noise sensitive land uses as feasible. 10) During construction, the contactor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices. 11) Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. 12) Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. e) The site is not located within an airport land use plan and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The Project is located approximately 7.6 miles northeast of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —82 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 44 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially significant with Mitigation Than Significant No Im act. incorporated Impact Im act f) The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2 1/2 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? Comments: a) The project is located in a predominantly developed area and will not induce population growth. The project is located in a undeveloped area and will include the construction of 30 single-family homes. 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. The 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 significant 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? () () () (✓) b) Police protection? () () () (✓) c) Schools? () () () (✓) d) Parks? () () () (✓) e) Other public facilities? () () () (✓) Comments: a) The site, located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue would be served by a fire station #176 (5840 East Avenue) located approximately 0.18 miles from Rev 4-7-15 Item C —83 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 45 Less Than Significant Less and Supporting Information Sources: P.ai Significant With dtiga on rnanIssues Significant No Impact Inc. .rated Impact Im act 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 school impact fees. With this standard mitigation, impacts to the School Districts are not considered significant. d) The site is in an undeveloped area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park (Etiwanda Creek Park — 5939 East Avenue) is located 0.26 miles 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? Rev 4-7-15 Item C —84 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 46 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially significant with Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Iacor orated Impact Im act Comments: a) The site is in an undeveloped area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park (Etiwanda Creek Park — 5939 East Avenue b) ) is located 0.26 miles from the project site. This project is not proposing any 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. 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) Result in inadequate emergency access? () () () (✓) f) 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 286 vehicle trips daily. The proposed project includes the development of 30 single-family lots for the future construction of 30 single-family residences. The Rancho Cucamonga Traffic Model estimates that each single-family detached residential will generate 9.57 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 Rev 4-7-15 Item C —85 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 Page 47 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information S PP g Sources: Potentially . Signifcanl with Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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 single-family detached residential will generate 1.76 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 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 c6ndition 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) The project site is located approximately 7.6 miles northeast of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path and will not change air traffic patterns. No impacts are anticipated. d) The project is in an area that is mostly undeveloped. 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 will be designed to provide access for all emergency vehicles during construction and upon completion of the project and will therefore not create an inadequate emergency access. No impacts are anticipated. f) The proposed project includes the development of 30 single-family lots for the future construction of 30 single-family residences. The project will not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities. 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? Rev 4-7-15 Item C —86 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 48 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: pp 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant Nc Impact Incorporated Impact Im act 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 existingentitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? 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 buildout 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. No impacts are anticipated. 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 is at capacity. No impacts are anticipated. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —87 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 49 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Signifcant with Mitigation Than Signifmant No Im act Incorporated Impact Im act 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. 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. 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 project site is located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue in an area that is vacant. The site has not been previously disrupted. According to the General Plan Figure RC-4, and Section 4.4 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is within an area of sensitive biological resources; therefore, development may adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals. The project site is located in an area identified for Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub Habitat. Per the Biological Resources Assessment prepared by M.J. Klinefelter on August 14, 2014, no special status plant species were detected at the site. One sensitive natural community (recognized by CDFW) is present at the Site, White Sage Scrub. Construction of the project as proposed would ,result in the direct removal of approximately 9.13 acres of White sage scrub, a sensitive habitat identified as a high priority natural community by CDFW. City Policy RC- 8.1 requires the City to implement actions that result in the preservation of the integrity of riparian habitat areas, creek corridors, Riversidean alluvial fan sage scrub, bogs, and sensitive wildlife habitat that supports biological resources. The City shall pursue these actions that provide appropriate long-term protection of areas within the City's sphere of influence (SOI) that contain sensitive habitat, and which are considered of unique value in enhancing the quality of the local environment (City of Rancho Cucamonga, 2010). WSS is sensitive habitat and the WSS at the Site represents one of the few remaining areas of WSS in the City. Rev 4-7-15 rlii7' �C�F1 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 50 Less Than significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Pptentlally Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Im act incorporated Impact Impact A number of special status wildlife species have the potential to occur on -site. The property is located within U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) designated critical habitat for the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat (SBKR), a federally endangered species. A small mammal live -trapping survey, employing USFWS survey protocol, was conducted by SJM Biological Consultants, Inc. (SJM) on August 19, 2014, in order to document the presence or absence of special status small mammal species at the Project Site. Although the subject property occurs within designated Critical habitat for the SBKR; however, no individuals of this species were captured on the property. Thus, no impacts to SBKR will result from development of this property. The trap results from this and previous adjacent field trapping surveys on Tract 14749 (adjacent tract above) indicate that this species of kangaroo rat presently occurs at very low densities or is absent in the general area of the subject property. In addition to SBKR (not detected), Coastal California Gnatcatcher (CAGN) (federally threatened) and Swainson's Hawk (state threatened) may occur on -site. These species were not detected during the MJK field investigation. USFWS-protocol focused surveys were conducted by Cereus Environmental (Cereus) on November 12, 2014, to document the presence or absence of CAGN on -site. No CAGN were observed within the study area during any of the focused surveys conducted. Potential indirect impacts to Swainson's Hawk through loss foraging habitat will be mitigated through mitigation described in Mitigation requirement number 2 below, through preservation of 27.4 acres of WSS. Six special status wildlife species were detected during the MJK field investigation, and one was trapped by SJM (Los Angeles Pocket Mouse, LAPM; a Species of Special Concern in California). None of the species detected on -site are listed as endangered or threatened at the federal or state levels. Although the LAPM is not currently listed as threatened or endangered by either the CDFW or the USFWS, CEQA requirements may dictate some sort of mitigation action to offset the loss of the population of this species residing on the property. For example, CEQA Article 20 Section 15380 indicates that a species or subspecies may be considered threatened/endangered if certain conditions exist, even if it is not formally listed as threatened/endangered. To offset the potential loss of LAPM on the property from development, mitigation is described in Section 4 (Biological Resources) above. Based on the BRA, special status plant species have a low potential to occur on -site. Two plants, Nevin's barberry and slender -horned spine flower, are listed as endangered at the federal and state levels. Slender mariposa lily, Parry's spine flower, mesa horkelia, Robbin's nemacladus, and Brand's star phacelia are not listed but have a CRPR rank of 1.13, and white rabbit -tobacco and chaparral ragwort have a rank of 2. Removal of on -site vegetation would result in the loss of potential habitat for these species as well as others with a CRPR of 4 (plants of limited distribution). A sensitive plant survey was conducted on March 18 and May 4, 2016. During his surveys of the site, he encountered a single sensitive plant species, Plummer's mariposa lily (Calochortus plummerae), a CRPR 4 plant. This species is not listed as "threatened" or "endangered" by either CDFW or USFWS. This species was recently downgraded by the California Native Plant Society from CRPR 1B.2 to CRPR 4.2, indicating that the distribution of this species is more widespread than previously thought. Impacts to Plummer's mariposa lily would not be considered significant especially in light of the project's relatively small size and the existence of the species in conservation open space within the region. Mr. Roberts did not observe any other sensitive species on the site. There were no new seedlings or young plants observed on the site that could be confused with later blooming sensitive species so Mr. 'Roberts concluded that further surveys were not necessary to ensure that the Site Rev 4-7-15 Item C —89 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 51 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PP 9 Potentially Significant With Mitigation Than Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact has been sufficiently surveyed for the 2016 year for the potential presence of sensitive plant species. Based on the results of Mr. Roberts' surveys and the analysis in the Biological Resources Assessment, the project would have a less than significant impact on any plant species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species and no further mitigation is required. Standard Condition 4.4-1 in Section 4.4 (Biological Resources) of the City's 2010 EIR (City of Rancho Cucamonga, 2010) states: ... Any CEQA project that involves the removal of habitat must consider if any special status species (e.g., Threatened or Endangered species, CNPS List 1B and 2 plants, or species protected under Section 15380 of CEQA) are potentially present on the project site and if the project impacts could be considered significant by the City. If potential habitat is present in an area, focused surveys shall be conducted prior to construction activities in order to document the presence or absence of a species on the project site. Botanical surveys shall be conducted during the appropriate blooming period for a species. If no special status species are found on the project site, no additional action is warranted. If special status species are found, appropriate mitigation would be required in coordination with the City as described in Section 4 (Biological Resources) above. Cumulative impacts for biological resources were analyzed in the context of the area defined by the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains from the San Gabriel River to the Cajon Wash/Lytle Creek confluence. The site is surrounded on three sides by urban development. Most of the properties in the immediate vicinity are already developed or zoned for future development, and development will likely occur at those parcels regardless of development of SUBTT18908. The project is an infill development and is typical of other activities in the region. Future conditions are expected to be similar. The goals of the project are in line with the guidance provided in the City's 2010 EIR (City of Rancho Cucamonga, 2010) as well as the San Bernardino County General Plan (San Bernardino, 2007) and the Etiwanda North Specific plan EIR (Rancho Cucamonga, 1992- b). Impacts related to buildout of the City and SOI are anticipated to be less than significant if projects comply with General Plan and Etiwanda North Specific Plan policies and standard conditions and mitigation measures listed in Section 4 (Biological Resources) above. 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 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. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —90 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 52 However, it should also be noted that significant conservation efforts have taken place within the geographic area of the Etiwanda Fan from Deer Creek to San Sevaine Creek and include the following conservation areas: North Etiwanda Preserve. In 1998, the County of San Bernardino created a 763-acre conservation area in response to impacts to AFSS from the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) project. The Preserve and surrounding lands also contain significant amounts of other rare and threatened habitats that include Sycamore Alluvial Woodland, California Walnut Woodland, and Fresh Water Marsh. North Etiwanda Preserve Expansion Area. In 2009 an additional 440 acres of land was set aside for conservation purposes adjacent to the North Etiwanda Preserve and within the San Sevaine Creek area. Along with the original 763 acre preserve, these lands are managed with the intent of permanently protecting the alluvial scrub and other native communities and species that occupy the North Etiwanda Preserve. U.S. Forest Service Conservation Area. This 880-acre conservation area is located adjacent to the western edge of the North Etiwanda Preserve and includes land purchased by the Metropolitan Water District along Day Canyon and Day Creek as mitigation for the MWD's Inland Feeder Project. The land has been transferred to the U.S. Forest Service and is a part of the San Bernardino National Forest. The majority of this conservation area extends beyond the City's Sphere of Influence, into unincorporated territory. San Sevaine Preserve. This 137-acre conservation area was established by San Bernardino County as mitigation for floodwater diversion structures and debris basins. Day Creek Preserve. A 200-acre conservation area was set aside through a conservation easement to the San Bernardino County Flood Control District as mitigation for impacts from sand and gravel operations. Tract 16072 Mitigation Area. This mitigation area consists of 335 acres that will be conserved as habitat mitigation for Tentative Tract 16072. This area is within the Day Creek watershed and contains various habitats that include alluvial fan sage scrub, white sage scrub, chaparral, and riparian habitat. Rancho Etiwanda/Henderson Creek Mitigation Area. This 308-acre property is surrounded by the North Etiwanda Preserve and San Bernardino National Forest. The Site was part of the mitigation requirements for the Rancho Etiwanda Estates Project and the Henderson Creek Project. The 308 acre Site is protected by a conservation easement. The above conservation areas total more than 3000 acres and are managed primarily for species and habitat values. The proposed project will remove approximately 9.13 acres of white sage scrub habitat. The proposed mitigation would provide protection in perpetuity for an additional 27.4 acres of relatively undisturbed habitat in the Etiwanda Fan area adjacent to existing conservation areas identified above. The proposed project is consistent with previously approved plans (ENSP and RC General Plan) reviewed and adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and it will. provide mitigation that will contribute to the expansion of conservation lands within the Etiwanda Fan geographic area. 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. Proposed mitigation measures would further reduce emission levels. Rev 4-7-15 Item C —91 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 53 Additionally, impacts resulting from air quality would be short-term and would cease once construction activities were completed. The Initial Study 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 North Specific Plan EIR (SCH #89012314, certified April 1, 1992) Biological Resource Assessment M. J. Klinefelter August 14, 2014 Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment and Paleontological Review FirstCarbon Solutions, September 5, 2014 Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Impact Study RK Engineering Group, Inc, June 25, 2014 Coastal California Gnatcatcher Survey Report Cereus Environmental, November 12, 2014 Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation and Percolation/Infiltration Report Geo Soils, Inc, August 25, 2014 Jurisdictional Delineation M. J. Klinefelter, October 25, 2014 San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat Field Survey SJM Biological Consultants, August 19, 2014 Traffic Analysis RK Engineering Group, Inc, February 26, 2015 Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan MDS Consulting, August 22, 2014 Rev 4-7-15 Item C —92 Initial Study for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 Noise Impact Study RK Engineering Group, Inc, June 25, 2014 City of Rancho Cucamonga Page 54 Rev 4-7-15 Item C —93 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 Page 55 APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this initial Study. I acknowledge that 1 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 n significant environmental effects would occur. / Applicants Signature; Date: �r :2a )16 Print Name and Title: SGP14Fzh� ViCr2d5/w">-'r Rev 4-7-15 Item C —94 MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 Applicant: Richland Ventures Inc. Initial Study Prepared by: Dominick Perez Date: 2/18/2016 Mitigation Measures No. I Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring /Initials Compliance t Secgim 3 'AirQuality Short Term (Construction) Emissions 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating PD C Review of A/C 214 condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall plans 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 PD/BO C Review of C 2 construction plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and plans projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide m B evidence that low emission mobile construction equipment will be n utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction v, measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning Staff. 3) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel- BO C Review of A/C 4 powered equipment where feasible. plans 4) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction -grading plans BO C Review of A/C 2/4 include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in plans use. 5) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in BO B Review of A/C 2 SCAQMD Rule 1108. plans 6) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards PD C Review of A/C 2/4 noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied plans either by hand or high -volume, low-pressure spray. 7) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and BO C Review of A/C 214 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: plans • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding BO C Review of A/C 2/4 and watering. plans • Pave or apply gravel to any on -site haul roads. BO C Review of A/C 2/4 Page 1 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring /Initials Compliance plans • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to BO C Review of A/C 2/4 erosion over extended periods of time. plans • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated BO C Review of A/C 214 soil during and after the end of work periods. plans • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local BO C Review of A 4 ordinances and use sound engineering practices. plans • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if BO C During A 4 silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a construction result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds BO C During A 4 exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 construction requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or BO C During A 4 cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. Construction �) The site shall be treated with water or other soil -stabilizing agent BO C During A 4 (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board construction n [RWQCB]) daily to reduce Particulate Matter (PMio) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 9) Chemical soil -stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be BO C During A 4 applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 construction hours or more to reduce PM10 emissions. Long Term Emissions 10) Landscape with native and/or drought -resistant species to reduce water BO C During A 4 consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. Construction 11) Provide lighter color roofing and road materials and tree planting BO C During A 4 programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources MSC-01 Construction measure. 12) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate BO CID Review of C 2/4 high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and plans water heaters. 13) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate BO CID Review of C 2/4 thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. plans 14) All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply BO CID During C 4 with South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 445, Wood Construction Burning Devices. Rule 445 was adopted in March 2008 to reduce Page 2 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. I Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring /Initials Compliance 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. Section 4 Biolb ca.,Resources ;+ 1) If vegetation removal, soil disturbance, or any other construction related PD B Review of A/D 2/4 activity is to occur during the avian nesting season (February 1 through Report August 31), a preconstruction nesting survey shall be conducted and submitted to the Planning Department for review and acceptance prior to initiation of construction. If nests are discovered, they should be avoided through establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist and consistent with CDFW protocols. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and left the nest, then construction in the area could resume. A biologist should be present on -site to monitor vegetation removal activities to ensure that any nests not detected during the initial survey are not disturbed. If initial ground disturbing activities or site clearing is proposed to occur outside of the nesting n season (September 1 through January 31), then a pre -construction Vsurvey would not be required and construction could commence unimpeded. 2) Mitigation for the removal of white sage scrub on -site is required — PD B Review of B 2 preservation in perpetuity of 27.4 acres of habitat within APN 1087-051- Plans 02 in the Day Creek area of the Etiwanda Fan along the northern boundary of the 175-acre conservation area for Tentative Tract 16072 (a 3:1 mitigation ratio). If this mitigation measure is implemented, adverse effects to WSS habitat would be less than significant. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide documentation to the Planning Department that the property has been deeded to an approved conservation entity and a conservation easement or declaration of restricted covenants has been placed over the property. 3) Since there is habitat at the Site suitable to support special status plant PD B Review of D 2 species, including one endangered species and several CRPR I and 2 Report plants, focused surveys shall be conducted prior to issuance of a grading permit, during the appropriate blooming periods for the subject species, in order to document the presence or absence of those species at the Project Site. The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist using methodology based on the most current CDFW and Page 3 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring /Initials Compliance CNPS rare plant survey protocols. The biologist shall identify all occurrences of sensitive species and shall consult with CDFW and USFWS, as appropriate depending on species status, to develop and execute a mitigation plan to relocate plants, gather seeds from the plants, and distribute to a suitable conserved habitat area. 4) To offset the loss of Los Angeles Pocket Mouse on the property from PD B Review of D 2 development, the Project applicant will preserve 27.4 acres of habitat Report that is adjacent to occupied LAPM habitat as identified in Biological Resource Mitigation Measure 2. 5) The following measures are required to minimize indirect impacts to PD C Review of AC 2/4 vegetation in the vicinity of the project site: Plans • Dust control measures designed to minimize effects to vegetation in the vicinity should be implemented. • Native plants should be used to the greatest extent feasible in landscaped areas. Many invasive non-native horticultural species can spread readily into natural areas and the local watershed. Landscaping should not include invasive plants identified by the B California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC). 6) No SBKR were detected on -site. The loss of SBKR critical habitat is not PD C Review of AC 2/4 �o expected to compromise the long-term survival of the species; therefore, Plans OD no mitigation measures for impacts to SBKR critical habitat are proposed. However, since there are impacts proposed to on -site WOUS regulated under the jurisdiction of the Corps, it is expected that the Corps will be required to consult with USFWS under Section 7 of the FESA. 7) Ten days prior to ground clearing activities, a breeding bird survey that PD C Review of AC 2/4 is in conformance with the Migratory Bird Act shall be required to Plans determine whether nesting is occurring. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, this survey shall be submitted to the City for review and acceptance. Occupied nests shall not be disturbed unless a qualified biologist verifies through non-invasive methods that either (a) the adult birds have not begun egg -laying or incubation; or (b) the juveniles from the occupied nests are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. If the biologist is unable to verify one of the above conditions, then no disturbance shall occur within 300 feet of non -raptor nests, and within 5,000 feet of raptor nests, during the breeding season to avoid abandonment of the young. If nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife Page 4 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring /Initials Compliance biologist. The temporary "no construction" area shall be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume. 8) Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall perform a PD C Review of AC 2/4 Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Plans Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The survey shall include a habitat assessment, survey and impact analysis. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol: • Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D (Breeding and Non -breeding Season Surveys and Reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre -construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre -construction survey does not identify burrowing owls on the project site, then m no further mitigation is required. If burrowing owls are found to be 3 utilizing the project site during the pre -construction survey, n measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in LD coordination with CDFW to avoid Impacting occupied burrows iO during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground -disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. • During the non -breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are occupied by migratory or non -migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre -construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines. • During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the Page 5 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring /Initials Compliance nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume. 9) Prior to approval by the City of any grading and/or construction permits, PD B Review of B 2 the Project applicant shall consult with the Corps to obtain a Plans Jurisdictional Determination and, if necessary, acquire required permit authorizations from the regulatory agencies. These authorizations will include, but are not limited to, the following: • CWA Section 404 Permit from the Corps (Nationwide Permit 29 for Residential Developments may be applicable) • CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification from RWQCB, and • California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW. In addition to obtaining authorizations from regulatory agencies, the Project will preserve in perpetuity approximately 1 acre of riparian habitat within the 27.4 acres of habitat identified in Biological Resource Mitigation Measure 2. m Additionally, a FESA Section 7 Consultation between the Corps and i USFWS will be required. Copies of any correspondence and/or permit c authorizations received shall be submitted to the City for review and C record. Section 5 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 PD/BO C Review of A/D 314 demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the report City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of PD/BO C Review of A/D 3/4 archaeological sites within new developments, using their special report qualities as a theme or focal point. • Pursue educating the public about the archaeological heritage of PD/BO C Review of A/D 3/4 the area. report • Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with Section 21083.2 P/D B/C Review of A/D Page 6 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. / Implementing Action Responsibl a for Monitoring Monitoring Frequency Timing of Verification Method of Verification Verified Date /Initials Sanctions for Non - Compliance Archeological resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse project Plans/Repor effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, t During including but not limited to, avoiding archeological sites, capping or Construction covering site 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 PD C Review of A/D 3/4 the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources report 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. rf rD 3 n 0 Page 7 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. I Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring /Initials Compliance 2) A RPA (Registry of Professional Archaeologists) -certified archaeologist PD B Review of AID 4 shall be retained, at the expense of the future project developers, to report monitor the initial grading in areas, sensitive for cultural resources, such as the mouths of the canyons and along the natural drainages. The frequency and duration of the monitoring shall be based on the professional judgment of the onsite archaeologist based on the materials being excavated. If significant cultural resources are uncovered, the archaeologist shall have the authority to stop or temporarily divert construction activities for a period of 48 hours to assess the significance of the finds. 3) In the event that significant archaeological remains are uncovered BOIPD C During A 4 during excavation and/or grading, all work shall stop in that area of the Construction site until an appropriate data recovery program can be developed and implemented. The cost of such a program shall be the responsibility of future developers. 441 All archaeological resources recovered during the project shall be BO BIC Review of AID 4 m donated to a local institution that has the proper facilities for curation, Report q display, and use by qualified scholars and all tribal cultural resources n that may be recovered during project development be returned to the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians. Costs for curation shall be ro covered by the project applicant. 5) The approved archaeological mitigation measures shall be affixed to all PD B Review of C 2 copies of the project grading plans. Plans 6) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are PD B Review of AID 4 encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a Report 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 PD B Review of AID 4 rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site Report full-time during the interval of earth -disturbing activities. • Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, BO BIC Review of AID 4 divert earth -disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has Report completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, Page 8 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring !Initials Compliance the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for PD D Review of D 3 documentation in the summary report and transfer to an Report appropriate depository i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer PD D Review of D 3 collected specimens with a copy to the report to San Bernardino Report County Museum. 7) Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the applicant/permitee shall PD B/C Prior to D 2 contact the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Construction Department to coordinate tribal participation in the archaeological monitoring of the project. Tribal participants shall coordinate with the Project Archaeologist to ensure that tribal cultural resources that may be encountered during ground disturbances are identified, assessed, and either protected in place or mitigated accordingly. v$ Sb Section 6 Geology andxSoils ..ri' , The site shall be treated with water or other soil -stabilizing agent BO C During A 4 (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM,o emissions, construction n in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re -planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule BO C During A 4 established by the City to reduce PM,o emissions associated with construction 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 BO C During A 4 mph to minimize PM,o emissions from the site during such episodes. construction 4) Chemical soil -stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be BO C During A 4 applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 construction hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. Section 7r�G�eenhouse Gas"Emissions^ Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions 1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term BO C During A 4 air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding construction 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 contractor shall select construction equipment based BO C During A 4 on low -emission factors and high energy efficiency and submit a construction Page 9 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring /Initials Compliance 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. BO C During A 4 construction 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be utilized in lieu of gasoline- BO C During A 4 or diesel -powered engines where feasible. construction 5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak -hour BO C During A 4 traffic. construction 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged BO C During A 4 for construction crew. construction Long Term (Operational) GHG Emissions 7) Construction and Building materials shall be produced and/or BO A During C 2 manufactured locally. Use "Green Building Materials' such as materials Construction that are resource efficient, recycled, and manufactured in an environmentally friendly way including low -volatile -organic -compound f 1 (VOC) materials. B) Design all buildings to exceed California Building Code Title 24 energy BO A During C 2 standard including but not limited to any combination of: Construction c A • 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 PD/BO A//B Review of C/D 2 the project and include the following: Plans • Install water efficient landscapes and irrigation systems and devices in compliance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Page 10 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring /Initials Compliance • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available or as required by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). • 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 CE A Review of C 2 and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public plans areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. :. 'Secfion 8 Hazards andrV/aste Matenals 7 mi a`°" • [n a.. N r .s n ii'. a .. . M . `v a �' r. .e ! .' t.I o -. ate. . .. ... ... .} ... 2 1) The project shall comply with Chapter 7A of the California Building BO/FC C Review of C Code (CBC), which includes building standards for the Wildland-Urban Plans Interface Fire Area. The standards call for the use of ignition -resistant I materials and design to inhibit the intrusion of flame or burning embers m projected by a vegetation fire and help reduce losses resulting from 3 repeated cycles of interface fire disasters. The project shall comply with the Fire Protection Plan dated January 5, BO/FC C Review of C 2 0 2015. The plan includes specific vegetation management zones, Plans v, required landscaping requirements, and construction standards. 'The Fire Protection Plan has been approved by the RCFPD on April 13, 2015. Section59, Hydrology a�c1 Water Ouahty " r _ _y Construction Activities 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to BO B/C/D Review of A/C 2/4 Building Official for approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan plans (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, BO B/C/D Review of A/C 2/4 and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific plans 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 Page 11 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring /Initials Compliance 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 BO B/C/D Review of A/C 2/4 must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site plans when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be BO B/C/D Review of A/C 2/4 performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to plans control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. 5) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall obtain BO B/C/D Review of A/C 2/4 a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the plans 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 X Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City fD Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction nPermit. Education of Property Owners, Tenants and Occupants on Stormwater PD D On A 3 BMPs - Educational Materials will be available to homeowners thru Completion rn HOA. HOA will periodically provide homeowners with environmental awareness education materials which may include use of household chemicals, discharges of wastes via hosing or other direct discharge to gutters, catch basins and storm drains. See attached Education Materials in section 6.4 of the WQMP report. 7) Activity Restrictions - Once an HOA is formed, certain restrictions may PD D On A 3 be enacted thru the formation of conditions, covenants and restrictions Completion (CCRs) to protect surface water runoff. 8) Landscape Management BMPs - See attached CASQA SD-12 in PD D On A 3 section 6.4 of the WQMP Report. Completion 9) BMP Maintenance — Maintenance of BMPs implemented at the project PD D On A 3 shall be performed at the frequency prescribed in this WQMP. Records Completion of inspections and maintenance shall be maintained by the HOA and documented with the WQMP, and shall be available for review upon request. 10) Local Water Quality Ordinances -Available to the home upon request at PD D On A 3 the City of Ranch Cucamonga. Completion Page 12 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring /Initials Compliance 11) Litter/Debris Control Program - Litter collection and removal shall be PD D On A 3 conducted on a bi-weekly basis by the HOA. Completion 12) Catch Basin Inspection Program - Catch basins will be inspected by the PD/CE D On A 3 HOA and cleaned as necessary on an annual basis. Catch basin Completion labeling shall be checked for legibility, replaced as necessary. 13) Vacuum Sweeping of Private Streets and Parking Lots - The City of PD D On A 3 Rancho Cucamonga shall sweep all streets and drive aisles on a Completion weekly basis. 14) Provide storm drain system stenciling and signage (CASQA New CE B/C Plan Check/ A/C 2 Development BMP Handbook SD-13) - See CASQA Detail SD-13 in On Section 6.4 of WQMP. Completion 15) Use efficient irrigation systems & landscape design, water conservation, PD D On A 3 smart controllers, and source control (Statewide Model Landscape Completion Ordinance; CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-12) - See CASQA-Detail SD-12 in Section 6.4 of WQMP. 15) Finish grade of landscaped areas at a minimum of 1-2 inches below top PD D On A 3 rD of curb, sidewalk, or pavement - Landscaped areas are proposed to Completion B promote self -retaining areas to aid in surface runoff water quality. j) Protect slopes and channels and provide energy dissipation (CASQA PD D On A 3 o New Development BMP Handbook SD-10) - See CASQA Detail SD-10 Completion 14 in Section 6.4 of WQMP. Post -Construction Operational 18) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the BO/CE B/C/D Review of A/C 2/4 City Building Official for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan plans (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. 19) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and BO B/C/D Review of /✓C 2/4 minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped plans 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. Page 13 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring ilnitials Compliance Grading Activities 20) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality BO B/C/D Review of A/C 2/4 Management Plan prepared by (name/date) to reduce construction plans pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. Future Exterior 1) The recommended height of the noise barriers is 6 feet. Noise control BO/PD B Review of C 2 barrier may be constructed by a block wall and will be required at plan Plans check by the Planning Department. A noise barrier must present a solid face from top to bottom. Preventable openings or decorative cutouts should not be made. All gaps (except for weep holes) should be filled with grout or caulking to avoid flanking. Future Interior The project site will require a "windows closed" condition. To ensure BO B/C Review of C 2 3 proper acoustical noise isolation the following are required at plan check Plans n and verified with the Building and Safety Department: • Upgraded windows and sliding glass doors for facades that face 00 analyzed roadways. See Exhibit C in the Noise Impact Study prepared by RK Engineering Group, Inc. on June 25, 2014, for mitigation requirements. 1st floor: All windows and sliding glass doors directly facing East Avenue and Wilson Avenue will require a minimum STC rating of 25 or higher. 2nd floor: All windows and sliding glass doors directly facing East Avenue and Wilson Avenue will require a minimum STC rating of 28 or higher. • Attic facade vents or roof vents that directly face the subject roadway, if applicable, should include an acoustical baffle to prevent vehicle noise intrusion. Exhibit D and E illustrates an example of an attic facade vent and roof vent acoustical baffles. The Contractor may install similar measures to provide noise reduction. • For proper acoustical performance, all exterior windows, doors, and sliding lass doors must have a positive seal and leaks/cracks must Page 14 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring /Initials Compliance be kept to a minimum. • Minimize cracks or leaks, any partition with a gap or hole will allow noise to flank and penetrate the partition. Construction 3) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 BO C During A 4 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on construction Sunday or a national holiday. 4) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards BO C During A 4 specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the construction property line. The developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050. 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 the PD C During A A o first phase. In construction 6) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. PO/BO C During A 4/7 and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on construction 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. 7) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a construction -related noise BO B/C/D Review of A/C 2/4 mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. plans The Plan shall depict the location of the construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction. 8) Stationary construction noise sources such as generators or pumps PO/BO C During A 4/7 should be located as far away from sensitive land uses, as feasible. construction 9) Construction staging areas should be located as far from noise sensitive PO/BO C During A 4/7 land uses as feasible. construction Page 15 of 16 Mitigation Measures No. / Responsibl Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions Implementing Action a for Frequency Verification Verification Date for Non - Monitoring /Initials Compliance 10) During construction, the contactor shall ensure all construction PO/BO C During A 4/7 equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices. construction 11) Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. PO/BO C During A 4/7 construction 12) Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are PO/BO C During A 417 secured from rattling and banging. construction Key to Checklist Abbreviations Responsible Person Monitoring;Erewquency ;Method of,Venhcation Sanctions " z CDD - Community Development Director or designee A -With Each New Development A - On -site Inspection 1 -Withhold Recordation of Final Map PD - Planning Director or designee 6 - Prior To Construction B - Other Agency Permit / Approval 2 - WithholdGrading or Building Permit CE - City Engineer or designee C - Throughout Construction C - Plan Check 3 - Withhold Certificate of Occupancy BO - Building Official or designee D - On Completion D - Separate Submittal (Reports/Studies/ Plans) 4 - Slop Work Order PO - Police Captain or designee E -Operating 5 - Retain Deposit or Bonds FC - Fire Chief or designee 6 - Revoke CUP 7 -Citation Page 16 of 16 State of California - Natural Resources Aoencv EDMUND G. BROWN, Jr., Governor �. DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE CHARLTONH. BONHAM, Director Inland Deserts Region 3602 Inland Empire Blvd., Suite C-220 Ontario, CA 91764 (909)484-0459 www.wildiife.ca.gov March 22, 2016 Mr. Dominick Perez Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Subject: Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project SCH No. 2016021078 Dear Mr. Perez: The Department of Fish and Wildlife (Department) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the Initial Study (IS) and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project (project) [SCH No. 2016021078]. The Department is responding to the IS and MND as a Trustee Agency for fish and wildlife resources (California Fish and Game Code Sections 711.7 and 1802, and the California Environmental Quality Act [CEQA] Guidelines Section 15386), and as a Responsible Agency regarding any discretionary actions (CEQA Guidelines Section 15381), such as the issuance of a Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement (California Fish and Game Code Sections 1600 et seq.) and/or a California Endangered Species Act (CESA) Permit for Incidental Take of Endangered, Threatened, and/or Candidate species (California Fish and Game Code Sections 2080 and 2080.1). Proiect Description The approximately 10.6-acre project site is located north of the Wilson Avenue, approximately 2,000 feet east of the terminus of Etiwanda Avenue, and generally south of Golden Prairie Drive; within the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California; Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) 1087-081-25. The proposed project includes a subdivision of the site into thirty (10) single-family residential lots for the future construction of 30 single-family homes. (.'onservind Cafifornin's rW (dCtfe Since 1870 EXHIBIT H Item C —111 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project SCH No. 2016021078 Page 2 of 9 Comments and Recommendations Following review of the IS and MND, the Department has serious concerns related to the project's potential to impact sensitive species and natural communities, the adequacy and specificity of the proposed mitigation measures, and the analysis of the project's cumulative contribution to impacts to biological resources within the region of the Etiwanda alluvial fan. In the Department's opinion as a Trustee Agency for the State of California's fish and wildlife resources, the IS/MND understates the significance of the project's environmental impacts and fails to mitigate the impacts to a level that is'less than significant. The Department offers the comments and recommendations presented below to assist the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City; the CEQA lead agency) in adequately identifying and mitigating the project's significant, or potentially significant, impacts on biological resources, and recommends that the City revise and recirculate the CEQA document to address the Department's concerns. Because the project has the potential to contribute substantially to cumulatively significant adverse impacts, the Department recommends preparing an Environmental Impact Report [CEQA Guidelines section 15063(b)]. San Bernardino Kanoaroo Rat and Coastal California Gnatcatcher The IS/MND identified two Federally Endangered species with the potential to occur on -site, San Bernardino kangaroo rat and coastal California gnatcatcher. Although focused surveys for both species failed to find any individuals on the project site in 2014, the time lag between the survey dates and the likely start of construction is long enough to allow the potential for one or both species to naturally disperse on to the project site from surrounding habitat. Focused surveys for animal species are generally considered to be valid for a period of one year, and while recent surveys have not observed individuals on or adjacent to the proposed project site, the Department is aware that at least one San Bernardino kangaroo rat was identified less than two miles from the project site, in the San Sevaine spreading grounds, in 2010. In addition, the effects of the previous four years of severe drought conditions may have affected the likelihood of identifying one or either species on -site. Therefore, it is likely that the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) will require updated focused surveys to be conducted prior to starting construction. Los Angeles Pocket Mouse Mitigation Measure 4 proposes to prevent significant project impacts to Los Angeles pocket mouse (LAPM; Perognathus longimembris brevinasus), a California Species of Special Concern (SSC), by trapping and relocating individual LAMP prior to the issuance of a grading permit. The Department does not concur that this measure is sufficient to prevent significant project impacts to the species. The Department Item C —112 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project SCH No. 2016021078 Page 3 of 9 generally does not support the use of translocation or transplantation as the primary mitigation strategy for unavoidable impacts to plant or animal species, and we have found that permanent preservation and management of occupied habitat is often a more effective long-term strategy for conserving sensitive plants, animals, and habitats. The regional population of LAPM is primarily threatened by habitat loss and fragmentation (S. Montgomery 1998). Relocating LAPM would not address the project's contribution to loss of LAPM habitat, and may actually cause harm to an existing LAPM population by introducing competition, parasites, and/or disease from the relocated individuals. The Department recommends that the City mitigate project impacts to LAPM by identifying and preserving habitat that (a) is either already occupied by a viable population of LAPM or connected/adjacent to occupied habitat and accessible to the adjacent population, and (b) would not otherwise be preserved. This may contain or overlap with the white sage scrub habitat preservation area required by Mitigation Measure 2. San Dieao Pocket Mouse The focused trapping survey for San Bernardino kangaroo rat trapped several individual San Diego pocket mice (Chaetodipus fallax). Two subspecies of C. fallax are designated SSC: northwestern San Diego pocket mouse (C. fallax fallax) and pallid San Diego pocket mouse (C. fallax pallidus). Based on the location and habitat present in the project area, the Department considers it likely that the C. fallax individuals trapped belong to the subspecies C. fallax fallax. Please clarify whether the individuals were identified to the subspecies level, and if so, what subspecies they were found to belong to. If they were not identified to the subspecies level, the Department recommends assuming that northwestern San Diego pocket mouse is present on -site, and mitigating for project impacts to the subspecies in the same way as described for LAPM above. Listed and Sensitive Plant Species The Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) identifies several special -status plant species with potential to occur on -site, including Nevin's barberry (Berberis nevinii), slender mariposa lily (Calochortus clavatus var. gracilis), Parry's spineflower (Chorizanthe parryi var. parryi), slender -horned spineflower (Dodecahema leptoceras), mesa horkelia (Horkelia cuneata subsp. puberula), Robbin's nemacladus (Nemacladus secundiflorus robbinsii), Brand's star phacelia (Phacelia stellaris), White rabbit -tobacco (Pseudognaphalium leucocephalum), and chaparral ragwort (Senecio aphanactis). Mitigation Measure 3 proposes to reduce the potential for project impacts to these species by requiring focused plant surveys to be conducted over the project site, and by developing mitigation plans for all sensitive plant species discovered. However, without a) knowing which, if any, species are present on -site, b) knowing the population Item C —113 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project SCN No.2016021078 Page 4 of 9 sizes of any sensitive plant species present on -site, and c) seeing a detailed description of the mitigation plan(s), the Department cannot provide meaningful comment on whether implementation of the plan(s) will be adequate to mitigate the project's impacts to sensitive plant species. The IS/MND does not include survey results or specific mitigation measures, instead deferring the analysis and mitigation measure formulation to some unspecified time after circulation of the document. While it is not always possible to devise a complete, specific, and fully detailed mitigation plan while the project is still in the early planning stages, it is not appropriate to adopt an MND unless the lead agency is reasonably certain that the proposed project will have no significant effects. Such certainty is not possible if the analysis of the baseline conditions of the site (including the species present) and formulation of specific mitigation measures is deferred until after the adoption of the MND. Furthermore, the lack of public review of the mitigation plan deprives the public of the opportunity to comment on the mitigation plan's adequacy, feasibility, and enforceability. "[I]t is improper to defer the formulation of mitigation measures until after project approval; instead, the determination of whether a project will have significant environmental impacts, and the formulation of measures to mitigate those impacts, must occur before the project is approved" (California Native Plant Society v. City of Rancho Cordova (2009) 172 Cal.AppAth 603, 621 [91 Cal. Rptr. 3d 571] (CNPS), citing Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 296 [248 Cal. Rptr. 352] (Sundstrom) and Gentry v. City of Murrieta (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 1359 [43 Cal. Rptr. 2d 170] (Gentry).) The Department recommends that the revised and recirculated CEQA document include: a) the results of recent focused botanical surveys, including a list of any sensitive and special -status plant species found on -site or adjacent to the site and a complete inventory of plant species observed; b) a thorough and detailed analysis of the project's impacts to sensitive and special -status plant species, including, if applicable, potential indirect impacts to off -site populations; and c) a detailed, specific, and enforceable mitigation plan to address the project's reasonably foreseeable direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts to sensitive and special -status plant species. Please also note that the recent drought may have affected the assemblage of plant species visibly present on the site. Due to the ongoing drought, some sensitive plant species potentially present on the site fail to bloom during the usual blooming period, or at all during a given year. Other species may be present in the seedbank or in bulb form. Annual and short-lived perennial plant species and plants with persistent long- lived seed banks may not germinate every year. In addition, the phenological development of some plants may be altered because of the drought. Because of these conditions, the failure to locate a plant during the floristic surveys of one field season may not constitute sufficient evidence that the plant is absent from the surveyed location. The Department recommends that the potential changes in the visible plant species assemblage be discussed in detail in the forthcoming revised and recirculated Item C —114 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project SCH No. 2016021078 Page 5 of 9 CEQA document, and that the document contain the results of focused plant surveys from as many seasons as is necessary to form a complete inventory of on -site plant species. If there is potential for a plant species to be present but not visible or identifiable on -site or within the vicinity of the site, the species should be assumed to be present until it can be demonstrated to be absent. Nesting Birds and Migratory Bird Treaty Act Please note that it is the project proponent's responsibility to comply with all applicable laws related to nesting birds and birds of prey. Migratory non -game native bird species are protected by international treaty under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918, as amended (16 U.S.C. 703 of seq.). In addition, sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of the Fish and Game Code (FGC) also afford protective measures as follows: Section 3503 states that it is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by FGC or any regulation made pursuant thereto; Section 3503.5 states that is it unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birds -of - prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by FGC or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto; and Section 3513 states that it is unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the MBTA or any part of such migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the MBTA. Mitigation Measure 7 requires a breeding bird survey to be conducted ten days prior to ground -clearing activities. The Department recommends revising Mitigation Measure 7 to require the surveys to be conducted no more than three (3) days prior to vegetation clearing or ground disturbance activities, as instances of nesting could be missed if surveys are conducted sooner. Habitat Conservation Mitigation Measure 2 requires purchase and conservation of 9.13 acres of white sage scrub habitat to compensate for the removal of the same amount and type of habitat. The Department appreciates the City's consideration of this sensitive and declining habitat type. However, the Department does not concur that a the proposed mitigation, as it is described in the IS/MND, is sufficient to reduce the project's impacts to a level that is less than significant, because it would result in an overall net loss of 9.13 acres of white sage scrub without providing any compensatory gain in habitat function. Even in cases where habitat is created (e.g., installing a white sage scrub plant community in an area that had once supported it, but has since been cleared of vegetation or converted into a non-native plant community), the practice of installing the same acreage of habitat as was removed often falls short of the goal of replacing the functions and values lost, due to (a) the time lag between the time of impact and the new habitat reaching full functionality; and (b) uncertainty of success in creating fully Item C —115 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project SCH No. 2016021078 Page 6 of 9 functional habitat (Bendor 2008). To address these issues, we recommend that mitigation for habitat loss incorporate some level of enhancement, restoration, rehabilitation, and/or creation within the mitigation area, and that the size of the mitigation area be increased to account for the net loss in acreage, the time lag, and the uncertainty of success. Mitigation Measure 2 does not contain sufficient detail regarding the location and status of the habitat to be preserved. A simple requirement that the applicant preserve 9.13 acres of white sage scrub habitat does not guarantee that the habitat selected for preservation will be functional, accessible to wildlife, or close enough to the project site to be useful as mitigation. The requirement, as it is currently written, could potentially be fulfilled by preserving multiple small fragments of low-quality/disturbed white sage scrub habitat that are surrounded by development and inaccessible to the wildlife species that are likely to be impacted by the loss of habitat associated with the project's construction. In order to facilitate the Department's ability to review the mitigation proposal, provide meaningful comments, and determine whether the proposed mitigation would sufficiently reduce the impacts to a level that is less than significant, we recommend that the revised and recirculated CEQA document include: (a) the specific area to be conserved, enhanced, restored, and/or rehabilitated; (b) a summary of the proposed mitigation site's needs (e.g., invasive vegetation removal, installation of native plant materials, removal of rubbish and debris, etc.); and (c) the plan to meet those needs, including a rough timeline of restoration/enhancement activities, a plant palette, success standards, irrigation plans, and contingency measures should the mitigation site(s) fail to meet the success standards. Lake and Streambed Alteration Program For any activity that will divert or obstruct the natural flow, or change the bed, channel, or bank (which may include associated riparian resources) of a river, lake, or stream or use material from a streambed or lakebed, the project applicant (or "entity") must provide written notification to the Department pursuant to Section 1602 of the FGC. Based on this notification and other information, the Department then determines whether a Lake and Streambed Alteration (LSA) Agreement is required. The Department's issuance of an LSA Agreement is a "project" subject to CEQA (see Pub. Resources Code 21065). To facilitate issuance of an LSA Agreement, if necessary, the environmental document should fully identify the potential impacts to the lake, stream or riparian resources and provide adequate avoidance, mitigation, and monitoring and reporting commitments. Early consultation with the Department is recommended, since modification of the proposed project may be required to avoid or reduce impacts to fish and wildlife resources. To obtain a Lake or Streambed Alteration notification package, please go to htti)://www.dtci.ca.gov/habcon/l 600/forms.html. Item C —116 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project SCH No. 2016021078 Page 7 of 9 The following information will be required for the processing of a Notification of Lake or Streambed Alteration and the Department recommends incorporating this information into the revised and recirculated CEQA document to avoid subsequent documentation and project delays. Please note that failure to include this analysis in the project's environmental document could preclude the Department from relying on the Lead Agency's analysis to issue a LSA Agreement without the Department first conducting its own, separate Lead Agency subsequent or supplemental analysis for the project: 1) Delineation of lakes, streams, and associated habitat that will be temporarily and/or permanently impacted by the proposed project (include an estimate of impact to each habitat type); 2) Discussion of avoidance and minimization measures to reduce project impacts; and, 3) Discussion of potential mitigation measures required to reduce the project impacts to a level of insignificance. Please refer to section 15370 of the CEQA Guidelines for the definition of mitigation. Jurisdictional Delineation: Page 40 of the Jurisdictional Delineation (JD) prepared for the project states that the Department defines a "stream" as "a body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish or other aquatic life". This appears to refer to California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 14, Section 1.72, which was adopted by the Fish and Game Commission (Commission) in relation to a specific sport fish issue that was before the Commission at its December 5, 1986 meeting. Please note that this definition is not the definition of a stream used by the Department, and has no application to the Department's Lake and Streambed Alteration Program or Section 1600 et seq. of the California FGC. Rather, FGC Section 1600 et seq. applies to activities causing substantial alteration to any river, stream, or lake, including episodic and ephemeral streams, desert washes, and watercourses with subsurface flow. It may also apply to work undertaken within the flood plain of a body of water. Following review of the JD, the site photographs included with the JD, and aerial photography of the project site, the Department believes that the JD underrepresents the streambed resources present on the site. Specifically, the Department has identified what appears to be three additional stream features, one to the west of and connecting to the stream identified as "Drainage A" (shown in Photograph 9), and two to the east of "Drainage A". The feature shown in Photograph 9 is described as a "non -jurisdictional blowout channel". Please clarify how this channel was determined to be "non - jurisdictional". The Department recommends that the revised and recirculated CEQA document include a thorough and detailed updated JD that depicts all streambed resources on the site, and a description of the other features on -site that demonstrates that they are not streambed habitat. Item C —117 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project SCH No. 2016021078 Page 8of9 Mitigation for Impacts to Streambed: Mitigation Measure 9 requires the applicant to consult with the Department and obtain, if necessary, a Streambed Alteration Agreement, as well as any other appropriate permits from other regulatory agencies. The permits would, presumably, contain mitigation measures to offset the impacts to the streambed resources on -site. However, deferring the formulation of mitigation measures to future regulatory actions is, as explained above, inappropriate when preparing an MND. Due to workload and staffing constraints, the volume of Lake and Streambed Alteration Notifications we receive, and the timelines associated with the permitting process, we are not able to prepare an Agreement for every project for which we receive a Notification. Consequently, projects may be authorized automatically despite including little or no mitigation. In order to ensure that the City can be reasonably certain that the mitigation measures will be sufficient to reduce the severity of the impacts to a level that is less than significant, the Department recommends including a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to meet a specific minimum standard of mitigation for impacts to streambed resources with the revised and recirculated CEQA document. Cumulative Impacts to the Etiwanda Alluvial Fan The proposed site is located on an undeveloped portion of the Etiwanda Alluvial Fan, a feature of high ecological significance to the region which has been severely impacted by development. Due to the importance of the Alluvial Fan and the extent to which is has already been developed, the Department has concerns about the project's contributions to the cumulative loss of Alluvial Fan habitat. Page 18 of the BRA characterizes the proposed project as an "infill development", with urban development on three sides of the project site, because nearby properties are already zoned for development. The Department does not concur with this characterization. Whether or not the surrounding properties are zoned for development, their current condition is undeveloped, and the analysis of the project's impacts should represent this fact. However, it is appropriate to consider both past, present, and foreseeable future projects in a cumulative impacts analysis. The Department requests that the revised and recirculated CEQA document contain a thorough and detailed analysis of the cumulative impacts to the quantity, quality, and continuity of alluvial fan habitat; the species that depend on the alluvial fan habitat; and the continued viability of local populations of sensitive and special -status species within the region. The analysis should consider the impacts as a whole from this project in conjunction with other, similar projects, as well as this project's individual contribution to the cumulative effects. Further Coordination The Department appreciates the opportunity to comment on the IS and MND for the Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project (SCH No. 2016021078), and requests that the City address the Department's comments and concerns prior to adopting a final CEQA document. If you should have any questions pertaining to these comments, Item C —118 Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project SCH No. 2016021078 Page 9 of 9 please contact Gabriele Quillman at (909) 980-3818 or gabdele.quillman@wildlife.ca.gov. Sincerely, I Manager cc: Stat6 Clearinghouse, Sacramento Karin Cleary -Rose, USFWS Literature Cited Bendor, Todd. 2008. A dynamic analysis of the wetland mitigation process and its effects on no net loss policy. Landscape and Urban Planning 89 (2009) pp. 17- 27 Montgomery, Steve. 31 Aug. 1998/28 Sept. 1998, Personal Communication to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Referenced in the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan Volume II, Section 2, "Mammals", page M- 100. http://wrc-rca.org/Permit_Docs/MSHCP_Docs/volume2/vol2- secb_Mammals.pdf United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). August 14, 2009. 5-Year Review for San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus). https://www.fws.gov/carlsbad/SpeciesStatusList/5YR/20090814 5YR SBKR.pdf Accessed February 26, 2016. Item C —119 M.1. Klinefelter 40960 California Oaks Rd #316 Mordent, CA 92562 Phone 951.698.8374 M.J. Khnefelter June 10, 2016 Mr. Dominick Perez Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Subject: Response to Comments regarding Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project SCH No. 2016021078 Letter from California Department of Fish and Wildlife Dated March 22, 2016. Dear Mr. Perez: On March 22, 2016 the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) submitted to your office via email a letter (the "Letter") with comments on the Initial Study (IS) and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project (project) [SCH No. 2016021078]. You requested a response to each of the items discussed in the Letter. I am providing the following response to each of the comments identified by the underlined headings in the Letter. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or need any additional information. Sincerely, likeKlinefelter GIS and Environmental Consulting Services EXHIBIT Item C —120 Response to Comments regarding Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project City of Rancho Cucamonga June 10, 2016 - Page 2 Response to Comments CDFW Comments for Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project SCH No. 2016021078 San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat and Coastal California Gnateatcher Protocol surveys were conducted by qualified permitted biologists for both San Bernardino kangaroo rat and coastal California gnatcatcher with both species found to be absent from the Site. These surveys are further supported by numerous surveys previously conducted over the past 14 years on the adjacent Tentative Tract 16072 and 14749; in all instances these species were not detected on the properties. Results of the surveys were submitted to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in accordance with the qualified biologist's permit requirements. The survey results support the findings and conclusions in the initial study and mitigated negative declaration. Los Angeles Pocket Mouse The Los Angeles pocket mouse (LAPM) is known to occur across a broad area of permanently conserved habitat on the Etiwanda Fan from Day Creek to San Sevaine Creek. The LAPM has been documented to occur on portions of the 175-acre conservation area for Tentative 160721 as well as throughout the North Etiwanda Preserve, and portions of the San Sevaine Project conservation areas of East Etiwanda Creek and San Sevaine. Creeks. The comment from CDFW recommends that the City require that the project proponent mitigate project impacts to LAPM by identifying and preserving habitat that is either already occupied by a viable population of LAPM or connected/adjacent to occupied habitat and accessible to the adjacent population and would not otherwise be preserved. The revised Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 2 (see Habitat Conservation section below) would preserve in perpetuity 27.4 acres of habitat directly adjacent to the 175-acre conservation area for Tentative Tract 16072 that is occupied by LAPM. The following revisions to Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 4 are recommended: "To offset the loss of Los Angeles Pocket Mouse on the property from development, the Proiect applicant will preserve 27.4 acres of habitat that is adjacent to occupied LAPM habitat as identified in Biological Resource Mitigation Measure 9. :.a... preeenstnaetien intensive trapping, .. the prepei4y te reme�,e and relesate (into nearby suitable habitats) as many LAPM individuals as Yessible f of tl.e site. Details a fthis tr...:..4,1.e tier a i4 shall be m:tted by a GDFG miner to tr... and handle bielegists. PrieF to the issiiasee ef agrading This revised measure would accommodate DFW's preference and recommendation to forgo trapping and translocation of LAPM on the Site and would still provide mitigation to offset the project's impacts to the LAPM, such that the project would have a less than significant impact on the species, by preserving three times more conservation open space than would be impacted by 1 San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat (Dipodornys merriand parvus) Trapping Program — Klepper Property. Cadre Environmental. November 2002. M.J. Klinefelter GIS and Environmental Consulting Services Item C —121 Response to Comments regarding Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project City of Rancho Cucamonga June 10, 2016 - Page 3 the project and to do so in an area which will serve to further buffer habitat occupied by the LAPM in the region which is designated for long-term biological conservation. This revised mitigation measure would be expected to reduce the project's impacts on the LAPM to at least the same degree as the measure articulated in the original MND previously circulated. San Diego Pocket Mouse The letter report from permitted biologist Stephen Montgomery dated 6 August 2014 regarding "results of a live -trapping survey for the federally endangered San Bernardino Kangaroo rat (Dipodomys merriami parvus) (SBKR) on the approximately 10-acre Chen Property" identified the San Diego pocket mice trapped at the Site as Chaetodipus fallax fallas. In a phone conversation with Mr. Montgomery on March 23, 2016, he verified that the subspecies of all San Diego pocket mice trapped on the Site were identified to the subspecies level as C. fctllax fallax. As stated by Mr. Montgomery in the letter report "Although the San Diego pocket mouse also is listed as a California species of special concern (CSC), due to reductions in its preferred sage scrub habitat types in the general coastal regions of California, this species is generally considered to presently be common in sage scrub habitats and not in any danger of extinction." It should be noted that species listed as CSC have not been determined to be "endangered" or "threatened" with extinction by either the CDFW or USFWS; rather, this designation suggests a less vulnerable current status for the species or suggests that sufficient information regarding the distribution and robustness of the species in California is currently lacking, and that more information should be gathered. Based on this information, and given the relatively small size of the project site, impacts to San Diego pocket mouse would be less than significant, and no additional mitigation would be required. Listed and Sensitive Plant Species Botanist Fred Roberts conducted sensitive plant surveys on the site on March 18 and May 4, 2016. Mr. Roberts is a botanical consultant with more than 25 years of field experience surveying rare plants in southern California, and he previously worked as a botanist for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. During his surveys of the site, he encountered a single sensitive plant species, Plummer's mariposa lily (Calochortus plununerae), a CRPR 4 plant. This species is not listed as "threatened" or "endangered" by either CDFW or USFWS. This species was recently downgraded by the California Native Plant Society from CRPR 1 B.2 to CRPR 4.2, indicating that the distribution of this species is more widespread than previously thought. Impacts to Plummer's mariposa lily would not be considered significant especially in light of the project's relatively small size and the existence of the species in conservation open space within the region. Mr. Roberts did not observe any other sensitive species on the site. There were no new seedlings or young plants observed on the site that could be confused with later blooming sensitive species so Mr. Roberts concluded that further surveys were not necessary to ensure that the Site has been sufficiently surveyed for the 2016 year for the potential presence of sensitive plant species. Mr. Roberts is preparing a more detailed written summary, discussing the findings of his surveys and will include a complete species list of plants observed. Based on the results of Mr. Roberts' surveys and the analysis in the Biological Resources Assessment, the project would have a less than significant impact on any plant species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species and no further mitigation is required. Furthermore, CEQA does not require M.J. Klinefelter GIS and Environmental Consulting Services Item C —122 Response to Comments regarding Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project City of Rancho Cucamonga June 10, 2016 - Page 4 — nor does it favor— the speculative approach to current site conditions suggested by the Department. Sufficient surveying for sensitive plant species have been conducted to properly characterize existing Site conditions in this regard. Nesting Birds and Migratory Bird Treatv Act Comment noted regarding compliance with all applicable laws related to nesting birds and birds of prey. The applicant intends to comply with all applicable laws. Guidance and past recommendations from the Department regarding breeding and nesting bird surveys vary widely. We acknowledge the Department's current recommendation; however, we believe that the Mitigation Measure 7 meets the intent of compliance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503 and 3513. Habitat Conservation The proposed Mitigation Measure 2 is consistent with the Environmental Impact Report for the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP). The cumulative habitat losses in the ENSP area were considered in the EIR and additionally in the most recent update of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. However, in order to address CDFW's concern that Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 2 does not contain sufficient detail regarding the location and status of the habitat to be preserved, the Project applicant is proposing to conserve 27.4 acres (3:1 ratio) of habitat directly to the north of the approximately 175-acre conservation area proposed for Tentative Tract 16072. The 27.4 acres consists of relatively undisturbed native habitat within the Day Creek watershed directly adjacent to Day Creek and is within the proposed conservation area identified within Chapter 6, Resource Conservation section of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Habitat within the 27.4 acres includes mixed sage scrub, sycamore alder riparian woodland, and chaparral. The 27.4 acres is contiguous to and expands the size of the 175-acre conservation area intended to be preserved in perpetuity to offset biological impacts to Tentative Tract 16072 and increases the size and contributes to the functioning of the overall dedicated conservation lands within the Etiwanda Fan area providing protection of wildlife corridors and sensitive watersheds. The following revisions to Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 2 are recommended: "Mitigation for the removal of white sage scrub on -site is required — preservation in peMetuity of °.' °"r.,'�27.4 acres of habitat within APN 1087-051-02 in the Day Creek area of the Etiwanda Fan alone the northern boundary of the 175-acre conservation area for Tentative Tract 16072 designated for eefis n,af a (a 3:1 mitigation ratio) er payment eras lieu fees. If this mitigation measure is implemented, adverse effects to WzSS habitat would be less than significant Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide documentation to the Planning Department confirming the mitigation land is ,.,,...._,,., that the property has been deeded to an approved conservation entity and a conservation easement or declaration of restricted covenants has been placed over the property eer the in l ^ c es have been paid-." Lake and Streambed Alteration Program Jurisdictional Delineation: Fish and Game Code (FGC) Section 1602 states that "An entity may not substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of, or substantially change or use any material M.J. Klinefeltef GIS and Environmental Consulting Services Item C —123 Response to Comments regarding Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project City of Rancho Cucamonga June 10, 2016 - Page 5 from the bed, channel, or bank of, any river, stream, or lake, or deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it may pass into any river, stream, or lake.....", and we are unaware changes to the FGC that adds the language ...including episodic and ephemeral streams, desert washes, and watercourses with subsurface flow." The FGC itself does not define the term "stream." The only definition of the term "stream" adopted by the State of California is provided in California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 14, Section 1.722, and in fact this definition has a long standing acceptance for use in delineations of streams as they apply to FGC Section 1600 both by the Department and by professional biological consultants preparing delineations of streams for use with Section 1600 "Notifications" filed with the Department.3 Hydrology and fluvial field indicators, such as a break in slope and water cut benches along the active channel/floodplain, textural changes and sorting of sediment, reduced vegetation density within the active channel, and cut banks, were observed only in Drainage A. There were no indicators of recent fluvial processes found outside of Drainage A. These indicators were limited and weak even in Drainage A, possibly the result of reduced flows due to a portion of the watershed area being captured within the channel on the north boundary of the Rancho Etiwanda Estates project. Drainage A is an extension of a drainage feature previously delineated by PCR for Tentative Tract 160724 and appeared to be consistent in width with the PCR delineation. Photo 8 was taken of an erosional feature that appears to have been caused during a significant post -fire flood event. Using historic aerial photography from Google Earth, this erosional feature first appears on the Site after late 2003. Drainage A appears smaller and the erosional feature does not appear in the previous aerial photos. In the fall of 2003 several fires burned a large area of Western San Bernardino County including the Grand Prix Fire which burned the entire Site and its entire watershed area. There were significant rain storms in late December 2003 that caused flooding in much of Westem San Bernardino County and the winter of 2004-2005 was one of the wettest in recent times. Using Google Earth historical aerial photography, the erosional feature first appears in the aerial photo dated 3/2005. Previous to the post -fire flood events, this erosional feature does not appear in the Google Earth historic aerials dating back to 1994. A review of Google Earth historic aerial photos from 2007 through 2016 indicates vegetation growth similar to the surrounding uplands within the erosional feature. The field investigation and Photo 9 in the Jurisdictional Delineation report support the interpretation that there has been no flow within this erosional feature subsequent to the post -fire significant rainfall events. There were no indicators of recent fluvial activity. Plant species composition, density, Section 1.72 of Title 14 of the CCR's does not limit the definition of the term "stream" to only certain portions of the California Fish & Game Code, nor does it exclude Section 1600 through 1616 from its definition. 3 In fact, in the 1987 case of Rutherford v. State of California (1987) Cal. App. 3d 1276, the court interpreted the term "stream" as used in Section 1602 of the Fish and Game code shortly before Section 1.72 was added to the Code of Regulations to define "stream." In that case, the court found that the term "stream" would have been unconstitutionally vague, thus voiding the statute, except that the courtfound that the term "stream" (as used in Section 1602) should be understood to have its meaning as defined under common law. The court then explained the meaning of the term in the common law. d Verification of CDFG Jurisdictional Waters for the Etiwanda Subdivision, Tentative Tract 16072 in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California. PCR Services Corporation. June 15, 2011. M.J. Klinefelter GIS and Environmental Consulting Services Item C —124 Response to Comments regarding Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project City of Rancho Cucamonga June 10, 2016 - Page 6 and height is similar to the surrounding post -fire terrestrial vegetation. Therefore this erosional feature was determined to be non jurisdictional. We believe that the Jurisdictional Delineation accurately depicts the extent of active streams within the Site and accurately describes the potential impacts to streams subject to FGC Section 1602. Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 9 specifically addresses impacts to jurisdictional waters including streams subject to FGC Section 1602 regulation. The proposed project will permanently impact 0.216-acre of streambed. The applicant is proposing to preserve in perpetuity 27.4 acres of undisturbed habitat including approximately 1 acre of riparian habitat (4.6:1 mitigation ratio) that is directly adjacent to existing and proposed conservation areas. In order to address CDFW's concern that it may not be able to prepare a Streambed Agreement due to workload and staffing constraints, the following revisions to Biological Resources Mitigation Measure 9 are recommended: "Prior to approval by the City of any grading and/or construction permits, the Project applicant shall consult with the Corps to obtain a Jurisdictional Determination and, if necessary, acquire required permit authorizations from the regulatory agencies. These authorizations will include, but are not limited to, the following: • CWA Section 404 Permit from the Corps (Nationwide Permit 29 for Residential Developments may be applicable) CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification from RWQCB, and California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW." In addition to obtaining authorizations from regulatory agencies. the Proiect will preserve in perpetuity approximately 1 acre of riparian habitat within the 27.4 acres of habitat identified in Biological Resource Mitigation Measure 9. Additionally, a FESA Section 7 Consultation between the Corps and USFWS will be required. Copies of any correspondence and/or permit authorizations received shall be submitted to the City for review and record." Cumulative Impacts to the Etiwanda Alluvial Fan The Site is located on a portion of the historic alluvial fan known as the Etiwanda Fan that extends along the San Gabriel Mountain front from Deer and Day Canyons east to San Sevaine Canyon. A variety of habitats exist in the area generally considered to be part of the Etiwanda Fan. Both CNPS and CDFW have adopted the Second Edition of "A Manual of California Vegetation," (the "Manual") which provides a standardized, systematic classification and description of vegetation in the State. Based on the Manual, CDFW published the currently accepted "List of Vegetation Alliances and Associations" (the "List") that are accepted for vegetation classification and mapping. Using the Manual and the List, there is a broad mosaic of habitat associations across the Etiwanda Fan. The Department's comment does not refer to a specific habitat type from the currently accepted List or Manual and it is unclear if the term "Alluvial Fan habitat" refers to a particular type of habitat or the general region where the project is located. M.J. Klinefelter GIS and Environmental Consulting Services Item C —125 Response to Comments regarding Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project City of Rancho Cucamonga June 10, 2016 - Page 7 Tentative Tract 16072 was approved by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in 2004. After extensive review by the USFWS and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), both agencies issued approvals for the project in the form of the USFWS Biological Opinion (FWS-SB- 08130267- 08170270) and Corps Individual Permit (File No. SPL-2005-00655-SJH). The CDFW reviewed the notification of lake or streambed alteration (No. 1600-2011-0020-R6) and on November 1, 2011 the Department issued a letter stating that an agreement was not required because the Department did not respond within the required time period for an agreement to be necessary. Although construction of Tentative Tract 16072 has not begun, it has been reviewed and approved by regulatory agencies including CDFW. Tract 16072 includes residential development directly adjacent to the west and north boundary of the project site as well as the construction of Wilson Avenue and East Avenue along the southern and eastern boundaries of the project site. Because of these approvals and the fact that Tentative Tract 16072 will essentially surround the project site with development and roads, the Biological Resource Assessment took this into consideration when evaluating the cumulative impacts and identified the Project being surrounded by existing and approved development that will isolate the onsite sage scrub habitat. Significant conservation efforts have taken place within the geographic area of the Etiwanda Fan from Deer Creek to San Sevaine Creek and include the following conservation areas: North Etiwanda Preserve. In 1998, the County of San Bernardino created a 763-acre conservation area in response to impacts to AFSS from the Foothill Freeway (SR-210) project. The Preserve and surrounding lands also contain significant amounts of other rare and threatened habitats that include Sycamore Alluvial Woodland, California Walnut Woodland, and Fresh Water Marsh. 5 North Etiwanda Preserve Expansion Area. In 2009 an additional 440 acres of land was set aside for conservation purposes adjacent to the North Etiwanda Preserve and within the San Sevaine Creek area. Along with the original 763 acre preserve, these lands are managed with the intent of permanently protecting the alluvial scrub and other native communities and species that occupy the North Etiwanda Preserve.4 U.S. Forest Service Conservation Area. This 880-acre conservation area is located adjacent to the western edge of the North Etiwanda Preserve and includes land purchased by the Metropolitan Water District along Day Canyon and Day Creek as mitigation for the MWD's Inland Feeder Project. The land has been transferred to the U.S. Forest Service and is a part of the San Bernardino National Forest. The majority of this conservation area extends beyond the City's Sphere of Influence, into unincorporated territory.6 San Sevaine Preserve. This 137-acre conservation area was established by San Bernardino County as mitigation for floodwater diversion structures and debris basins.' Day Creek Preserve. A 200-acre conservation area was set aside through a conservation easement to the San Bernardino County Flood Control District as mitigation for impacts from sand and gravel operations. 5 USFWS and CDFG. North Etiwanda Preserve Management Plan. October 19, 2010. 6 City of Rancho Cucamonga. Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, Chapter 6, Resource Conservation. May 19, 2010. M.J. Klinefelter GIS and Environmental Consulting Services Item C —126 Response to Comments regarding Tentative Tract No. 18908 Project City of Rancho Cucamonga June 10, 2016 - Page 8 Tract 16072 Mitigation Area. This mitigation area consists of 335 acres that will be conserved as habitat mitigation for Tentative Tract 16072. This area is within the Day Creek watershed anc contains various habitats that include alluvial fan sage scrub, white sage scrub, chaparral, and riparian habitat. 7 Rancho Etiwanda/Henderson Creek Mitigation Area. This 308-acre property is surrounded by the North Etiwanda Preserve and San Bernardino National Forest. The Site was part of the mitigation requirements for the Rancho Etiwanda Estates Project and the Henderson Creek Project. The 308 acre Site is protected by a conservation easement.5 The above conservation areas total more than 3000 acres and are managed primarily for species and habitat values. The proposed project will remove approximately 9.13 acres of white sage scrub habitat. The proposed mitigation would provide protection in perpetuity for an additional 27.4 acres of relatively undisturbed habitat in the Etiwanda Fan area adjacent to existing conservation areas identified above. The proposed project is consistent with previously approved plans (ENSP and RC General Plan) reviewed and adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and it will provide mitigation that will contribute to the expansion of conservation lands within the Etiwanda Fan geographic area. Based on this information and given the relatively small size of the project site, the contribution to cumulative loss of habitat would be less than cumulatively considerable and the project's impact to cumulative loss of habitat would be less than significant. 7 PCR Services Corp. Conservation Plan, Etiwanda Subdivision Tentative Tract 16072, San Bernardino County, California. May 2013. M.J. Klinefelter GIS and Environmental Consulting Services Item C —127 STAFF REPORT r- PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE: March 23, 2016 RANCHO TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA FROM: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director BY: Dominick Perez, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT1.8908 - RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. - A proposed subdivision of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots within the Low (L) Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue - APN: 1087-081-25. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 and adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts by adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval with conditions. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Project Density: 2.83 dwelling units per acre. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Vacant; Low (L) Residential District, Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) South - Vacant; Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda Specific Plan (ENSP) East - Vacant; Very Low (VL) Residential District, Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) West - Vacant; Low (L) Residential District, Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) C. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Low Residential North - Low Residential South - Very Low Residential East - Very Low Residential West - Low Residential D. Site Characteristics: The project site consists of approximately 10.6 acres of undeveloped land located northwest of the intersection of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue. Both streets currently terminate at the intersection and do not continue northward (East Avenue) and westward (Wilson Avenue). The subject parcel has a linear dimension, from north to south, of approximately 659 feet and a linear dimension, from east to west of approximately 662 feet. With the exception of a residential subdivision to the southwest, the site is surrounded by vacant land in all directions. The zoning of the subject property and the properties to the north and west is Low (L) Residential District, while the zoning of the properties to the east and south is Very Low (VL) Residential District. The project site and all surrounding properties are within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP). EXHIBITJ Item C -128 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. March 23, 2016 Page 2 ANALYSIS A. General: The applicant, Richland Ventures, Inc., is proposing to subdivide a property of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 lots for single-family residential development; the applicant does not intend to construct the homes at this time. The lots will be developed in accordance with the development standards that apply to single-family residential development within the Low (L) Residential District, Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP) including density, lot width and depth, minimum and average lot area, street width, and wall design. For example, the proposed density for the project is 2.83 dwelling units per acre. The maximum density allowed is 4 dwelling units per acre. Individual lot areas will range between 7,451 square feet to 26,051 square feet; the average lot area is 10,007 square feet. The required minimum net average lot area is 10,000 square feet. The conceptual grading plan indicates the highest pad elevation is 1,645 feet at the northwest corner of the site, and lowest pad elevation is 1,635 feet at the southwest corner of the site. There are 2:1 slopes along the northern and northwestern portion of the site within the rear yard area of Lots 1 thru 13, and at the south and east perimeters of the site along East Avenue and Wilson Avenue. The slopes along East Avenue and Wilson Avenue will be within a private landscape easement that will be maintained by a homeowners association created for this subdivision. The subdivision will have two points of access, one along the future extension of Wilson Avenue and one along the future extension of East Avenue. The design of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the surrounding residential subdivisions including the adjacent subdivision, of 358 lots on approximately 150.8 acres, located to the north and west of the subject property that was approved by the City Council on June 16, 2004 (related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072). The lots within Tract 16072 are similar in size and layout to the lots of the proposed project. Per the ENSP, this site is located within the "Upper Etiwanda" neighborhood, which requires specific site design features. The Upper Etiwanda neighborhood entry monument will be installed at the northwest corner of Wilson Avenue and East Avenue in accordance with Exhibit 25(A) of the ENSP, which was included as an attachment to the Design Review Comments (Exhibit E). A stone wall 30 inches in height (maximum) with a concrete cap and low pilaster will be constructed. Also, per the ENSP, a theme wall is required along lots that abut Wilson Avenue and East Avenue. The theme wall will consist of a concrete block cap with a stucco color and finish that will match the existing walls in the surrounding area. The stone used in the monument entry and theme wall columns is Coronado stone. B. Technical Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Technical Review Committee (TRC) on September 15, 2015. Preliminary conditions were discussed. The Committee accepted the proposal and recommended approval. The Committee's conditions of approval, including dedication and construction of the northerly extension of East Avenue and westerly extension of Wilson Avenue, have been incorporated in the Resolution of Approval. Item C —129 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. March 23, 2016 Page 3 C. Design Review Committee: The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (DRC) on September 15, 2015. No major issues were discussed in the DRC Comments (Exhibit E). However, there were two secondary issues involving landscaping. To address these, the Committee added conditions of approval requiring a) the street trees for the project to be in accordance with the City's acceptable street tree list, and b) future development of this site to comply with the water efficient landscaping standards specified in Chapter 17.82 of the Development Code. The Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission. D. Neighborhood Meeting: On October 26, 2015, a neighborhood meeting was conducted by the applicant at Summit Intermediate School located at 5959 East Avenue. The intent of this meeting was to invite property owners within a 660400t radius of the project boundaries for input relating to the project. There were three attendees. During the meeting, the applicant presented the tentative tract map and conceptual grading plan for the proposed project. The attendees were generally curious about the project and, otherwise, did not identify any concerns or major issues with the application. E. Assembly Bill 52: On November 9, 2015, per AB 52, the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians and the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians were notified of the project. The purpose of that notice was to determine if either tribe desired consultation to discuss the proposal. Staff received a series of correspondences via letters and email from both Tribes. Per a letter dated December 7, 2015, the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians indicated that the tribe does not have any specific concerns regarding known cultural resources in the specific area that the project encompasses. They also went on to request that the approved Native American Monitors be present during any future ground disturbing proceedings, including survey and archaeological testing, associated with this project. On November 17, 2015, staff received a response email from the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, requesting to review a Cultural Resource Assessment (CRA) for the site. After reviewing the CRA, the San Manuel Band requested to know why the issue of potential for subsurface cultural deposits was not specifically addressed. According to the CRA and Paleontological Review conducted by FirstCarbon Solutions on September 5, 2014, no archaeological or historical cultural resources were found, and the proposed project is expected to have no impacts on any archaeological or historic resources. Per the Cultural Resources Assessment, the recommendations section addresses the potential for subsurface archaeological materials based on the results of the records searches (2 searches) and pedestrian survey. Based on the records searches and site surveys, FirstCarbon Solutions has determined the project to have a low potential for encountering buried prehistoric resources as none have been previously recorded within the project nor within a mile radius. The exact text from the study discussing this matter is as follows: No historic or prehistoric resources were found during the course of the pedestrian survey. Ground visibility was approximately 75 percent, and the ground surfaces were exposed between natural vegetation cover. No resources have been recorded within the project area. FCS has assessed the effects of the proposed development on any local cultural resources. The results of the assessment indicate that the proposed project is expected to have no impacts on any archaeological or historic resources. Based on the results of the record searches and pedestrian survey, FCS considers the project area to have low sensitivity for prehistoric and historic resources, and archaeological monitoring is not recommended. Item C —130 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. March 23, 2016 Page 4 Although mitigation measures are included that require an archaeologist to be retained to monitor the initial grading in areas, it is not guaranteed that monitoring of the site will continue beyond the initial grading of the site. Therefore, in an effort to reduce the direct and indirect impacts that this project could have on Native American tribal cultural resources to a "less than significant" status, a mitigation measure is included that requires the applicant to contact the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians to discuss monitoring of the project to ensure that cultural resources that may be encountered during ground disturbances are protected and preserved for study. This mitigation requires the applicant to submit the results of this consultation to the City prior to issuance of permits for grading of the site. The Initial Study for this project was circulated on February 18, 2016. The Planning Department received comments from the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians. The comments include revisions to the Cultural Resources mitigations numbers 2, 4 and 7 in the Initial Study Parts II and III. The comments received will not remove or change the intent of the previously proposed mitigations, but will ultimately make the mitigations stronger and more specific (Exhibit G). Staff has since updated the mitigations in the Cultural Resources section of the Resolution to reflect the comments received. F. Environmental Assessment: 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 related to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards and waste materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning 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, 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. Based on comments received from the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, mitigation measures relating to Cultural Resources were modified. Consistent with CEQA section 15074.1, City staff determined that the new measures are equivalent or more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects and that it in itself will not cause any potentially significant effect on the environment. 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 in response to these notices. Respectfully submitted, ?01,A(2 _A V Candyce B ett Planning Director Item C —131 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. March 23, 2016 Page 5 CB:DP/Is Attachments: Exhibit A - Aerial Photo Exhibit B - Site Utilization Plan Exhibit C - Conceptual Grading Plan Exhibit D - Tentative Tract Map Exhibit E - Design Review Committee Action Agenda & Comments Exhibit F - Initial Study (Parts I, II & III) Exhibit G - Text changes for Cultural Resources Mitigations Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 Item C —132 RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908, A SUBDIVISION OF APPROXIMATELY 10.6 ACRES INTO 30 SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED LOTS WITHIN THE LOW (L) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IN THE ETIWANDA NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF EAST AVENUE AND WILSON AVENUE; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1087-081-25. A. Recitals 1. Richland Ventures, Inc. filed an application for the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18908 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 23rd day of March, 2016, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. At the request of Staff, the review of the application was continued to a date unspecific. 3. On the 28th day of September, 2016, 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. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing on September 28, 2016, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to the property located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue with a linear dimension, from north to south, of approximately 659 feet and a linear dimension, from east to west of approximately 662 feet and is presently undeveloped; and b. With the exception of a residential subdivision to the southwest, the site is surrounded by vacant land in all directions. The zoning of the subject property and the properties to the north and west is Low (L) Residential District, while the zoning of the properties to the east and south is Very Low (VL) Residential District. The project site and all surrounding properties are within the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP); and Item C —133 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 2 C. The applicant, Richland Ventures, Inc., proposes to subdivide a property of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single-family detached lots. The proposed density forthe project is 2.83 dwelling units per acre. The maximum density allowed within the Low (L) Residential District, ENSP, is 4 dwelling units per acre. The average lot area for the project is 10,007 square feet and the minimum net average for the Low (L) Residential District in the ENSP is 10,000 square feet. The site layout is consistent with the ENSP development standards such as lot width and depth, minimum and average lot area, street width, and wall design; and d. The conceptual grading plan indicates the highest pad elevation is 1,645 feet at the northwest corner of the site, and lowest pad elevation is 1,635 feet at the southwest corner of the site. There are 2:1 slopes along the northern and northwestern portion of the site within the rear yard area of lots 1 thru 13, and at the south and east perimeters of the site along East Avenue and Wilson Avenue. The slopes along East Avenue and Wilson Avenue will be within a private landscape easement that will be maintained by a homeowners association created for this subdivision; and e. The subdivision will have two points of access, one along the future extension of Wilson Avenue and one along the future extension of East Avenue. The Engineering Department has included conditions that require dedication and construction of perimeter streets, including East Avenue and Wilson Avenue; and f. The design of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the surrounding residential subdivisions including the adjacent subdivision, of 358 lots on approximately 150.8 acres, located to the north and west of the subject property that was approved by the City Council on June 16, 2004 (related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072). The lots within Tract 16072 are similar in size and layout to the lots of the proposed project; and g. Per the ENSP, this site is located within the "Upper Etiwanda" neighborhood, which requires specific site design features. The Upper Etiwanda neighborhood entry monument will be installed at the northwest corner of Wilson Avenue and East Avenue in accordance with Exhibit 25(A) of the ENSP, which was included as an attachment to the Design Review Comments (Exhibit E of the staff report). A stone wall 30 inches in height (maximum) with a concrete cap and low pilasterwill be constructed. Also, perthe ENSP, a theme wall is required along lots that abut Wilson Avenue and East Avenue. The theme wall will consist of a concrete block cap with a stucco color and finish that will match the existing walls in the surrounding area. The stone used in the monument entry and theme wall columns is Coronado stone. h. The project was reviewed by the Design Review Committee (DRC) on September 15, 2015. No major issues were discussed in the DRC Comments. However, there were two secondary issues involving landscaping. As a result, conditions are included in the attached Conditions of Approval that require street trees to be provided that are indicated on the City's acceptable street tree list, and that require future development of this site to comply with the water efficient landscaping standards specified in the Development Code Chapter 17.82. The Committee recommended approval of the project to the Planning Commission; and i. The project was reviewed by the Technical Review Committee (TRC) on September 15, 2015. Preliminary conditions were discussed. The Committee accepted the proposal and recommended approval; and Item C —134 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 3 j. On October 26, 2016, a neighborhood meeting was conducted by the applicant at the nearby Summit Intermediate School. The intent of this meeting was to invite property owners within a 660 foot radius of the project boundaries for input relating to the project. There were a total of three attendees, in addition to the applicant, project Engineer, and Planning Department staff. During the meeting, the applicant presented the tentative tract map and conceptual grading plan for the proposed project. No concerns or major issues were brought up. k. On November 9, 2015, per AB 52, the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians and the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians were notified of the project. The purpose of that notice was to determine if either tribe desired consultation to discuss the proposal. Staff received a series of correspondences via letters and email from both Tribes. Per a letter dated December 7, 2015, the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians indicated that the tribe does not have any specific concerns regarding known cultural resources in the specific area that the project encompasses. They also went on to request that the approved Native American Monitors be present during anyfuture ground disturbing proceedings, including survey and archaeological testing, associated with this project. On November 17, 2015, staff received a response email from the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, requesting to review a Cultural Resource Assessment (CRA) for the site. After reviewing the CRA, the San Manuel Band requested to know why the issue of potential for subsurface cultural deposits was not specifically addressed. According to the CRA and Paleontological Review conducted by FirstCarbon Solutions on September 5, 2014, no archaeological or historical cultural resources were found, and the proposed project is expected to have no impacts on any archaeological or historic resources. Per the Cultural Resources Assessment, the recommendations section addresses the potential for subsurface archaeological materials based on the results of the records search (2 records were searched) and pedestrian survey. Based on the records search and site surveys, FirstCarbon Solutions has determined the project to have a low potential for encountering buried prehistoric resources as none have been previously recorded within the project nor within a mile radius. The exact text from the study discussing this matter is as follows: No historic or prehistoric resources were found during the course of the pedestrian survey. Ground visibility was approximately 75 percent, and the ground surfaces were exposed between natural vegetation cover. No resources have been recorded within the project area. FCS has assessed the effects of the proposed development on any local cultural resources. The results of the assessment indicate that the proposed project is expected to have no impacts on any archaeological or historic resources. Based on the results of the record searches and pedestrian survey, FCS considers the project area to have low sensitivity for prehistoric and historic resources, and archaeological monitoring is not recommended. Although mitigation measures are included that require an archaeologist to be retained to monitor the initial grading in areas, it is not guaranteed that monitoring of the site will continue beyond the initial grading of the site. Therefore, in an effort to reduce the direct and indirect impacts that this project could have on Native American tribal cultural resources to a "less than significant" status, a mitigation measure is included that requires the applicant to contact the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians to discuss monitoring of the project to ensure that cultural resources that may be encountered during ground disturbances are protected and preserved for study. This mitigation requires the applicant to submit the results of this consultation to the City prior to issuance of permits for grading of the site. The Initial Study for this project was circulated on February 18, 2016. The Planning Department received comments from the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians. The comments include revisions to the Cultural Resources mitigations numbers 2, 4 and 7 in the Initial Study Parts II and III. The Item C —135 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 4 comments received will not remove or change the intent of the previously proposed mitigations, but will ultimately make the mitigations stronger and more specific. Staff has since updated the mitigations in the Cultural Resources section of the Initial Study Parts II and III and the Resolution to reflect the comments received; and I. The Planning Department previously prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration that was circulated on February 18, 2016. Thereafter, City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration at a Planning Commission hearing that was scheduled for March 23, 2016. On March 22, 2016, the Planning Department received a letter from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), specifically involving the San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat and Coastal California Gnatcatcher, Los Angeles and San Diego Pocket Mouse, Listed and Sensitive Plant Species, Nesting Bird and Migratory Bird Treaty Act, Habitat Conservation, Lake and Streambed Alteration Program, and Cumulative Impacts to the Etiwanda Alluvial Fan. Staff requested a continuance to allow the applicant the time to adequately prepare a response to CDFW's comments/recommendations. The applicant and the applicant's biologist have since worked with Staff and submitted a response that addresses the concerns described in the letter. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above - referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The proposal involves a subdivision for residential development within the Low (L) Residential Zoning District of the ENSP and the Low Residential General Plan land use designation. The maximum density within this zone and General Plan land use designation is 4 dwelling units per acre. The proposed subdivision involves a density of 2.83 dwelling units per acre; and b. The design or improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Code, and Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The project involves a request to subdivide a 10.6 acre site into 30 lots for future residential development. The minimum lot size is 10,007 square feet and the minimum net average for the Low (L) Residential District in the ENSP is 10,000 square feet. The project site layout is also consistent with the ENSP development standards such as lot width and depth, street width, and wall design; and C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed. Currently the site is undeveloped. The project involves grading of the site to comply with the City requirements and to be consistent with previously approved tract maps within the vicinity of the subject property; and d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat. An initial study was prepared for the project that includes mitigation measures to reduce any potential impacts to humans or wildlife to less than significant; and e. The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems. The proposed project involves a residential subdivision. The included mitigation measures, along with the future single-family residential use, will not cause serious public health problems; and Item C —136 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 5 f. The design of the tentative tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. The project incorporates two points of access, one along Wilson Avenue and one along the future extension of East Avenue. East Avenue is currently not improved north of Wilson Avenue, along the east side of the project site. The Engineering Department has included conditions that require dedication and construction of perimeter streets, including East Avenue and Wilson Avenue. 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 (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. e. Based on comments received from the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians, mitigation measures relating to Cultural Resources were modified. Consistent with CEQA section 15074.1, City staff determined that the new measures are equivalent or more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects and that it in itself will not cause any potentially significant effect on the environment. Item C —137 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 6 f. According to CEQA section 15073.5(c), recirculation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required underthe following circumstances: (1) Mitigation measures are replaced with equal or more effective measures pursuant to Section 15074.1; (2) New project revisions are added in response to written or verbal comments on the project's effects identified in the proposed negative declaration which are not new avoidable significant effects; (3) Measures or conditions of project approval are added after circulation of the negative declaration which are not required by CEQA, which do not create new significant environmental effects and are not necessary to mitigate an avoidable significant effect; and (4) New information is added to the negative declaration which merely clarifies, amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications to the negative declaration. There were a total of three mitigation measures that were modified (Mitigation Measures 2,4 and 9) that made the mitigation equally or more effective. This includes strengthening the required mitigation land from 1:1 to 3:1 and specifically defining the location of the land to be preserved in perpetuity as being habitat within the Day Creek area of the Etiwanda Fan along the northern boundary of the 175-acre conservation area for Tentative Tract 16072. The modification also adds approximately 1 acre of riparian habitat within the 27.4 acres of habitat discussed above. No new project revisions were added in response to the concerns. The design of the proposed subdivision remains the same as prior to receiving the comments that were submitted by CDFW. No new measures were added in response to the concerns. As previously stated, only existing measures were replaced with equal or more effective measures. Lastly, the only new information that was added to the negative declaration was for clarification purposes. This includes explanation of the appropriateness of measures for impacts to wildlife, clarification of the site's lack of threatened or endangered sensitive plant species, as well as discussion about the cumulative impacts to Alluvial Fan habitat. Therefore, recirculation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required. CEQA section 15074.1 requires that prior to deleting and substituting a mitigation measure, the lead agency shall hold a public hearing on the matter, and adopt a written finding that the new measure is equivalent or more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects and that it in itself will not cause any potentially significant effects on the environment. Consistent with this section, City staff determined that the new measures presented and discussed in this report relating to Biological Resources are equivalent or more effective in mitigating or avoiding potential significant effects and that it in itself will not cause any potentially significant effect on the environment. A Mitigation Monitoring Program was also prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the mitigation measures for the project. 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 in the attached Conditions of Approval and the Mitigation Measures listed below. 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 Item C —138 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 7 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) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 4) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction -grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. 5) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 6) 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. 7) 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 25mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 8) 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 PMio emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 9) 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. Item C —139 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 8 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. 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.s 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) If vegetation removal, soil disturbance, or any other construction related activity is to occur during the avian nesting season (February 1 through August 31), a preconstruction nesting survey shall be conducted and submitted to the Planning Department for review and acceptance prior to initiation of construction. If nests are discovered, they should be avoided through establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist and consistent with CDFW protocols. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and left the nest, then construction in the area could resume. A biologist should be present on -site to monitor vegetation removal activities to ensure that any nests not detected during the initial survey are not disturbed. If initial ground disturbing activities or site clearing is proposed to occur outside of the nesting season (September 1 through January 31), then a pre -construction survey would not be required and construction could commence unimpeded. 2) Mitigation for the removal of white sage scrub on -site is required —preservation in perpetuity of 27.4 acres of habitat within APN 1087-051-02 in the Day Creek area of the Etiwanda Fan along the northern boundary of the 175-acre conservation area for Tentative Tract 16072 (a 3:1 mitigation ratio). If this mitigation measure is implemented, adverse effects to WSS habitat would be less than significant. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide documentation to the Planning Department that the property has been deeded to an approved conservation entity and a conservation easement or declaration of restricted covenants has been placed over the property. 3) Since there is habitat at the Site suitable to support special status plant species, including one endangered species and several CRPR 1 B and 2 plants, focused surveys shall be conducted prior to issuance of a grading permit, during the appropriate blooming periods for the subject species, in order to document the Item C —140 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 9 presence or absence of those species at the Project Site. The survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist using methodology based on the most current CDFW and CNPS rare plant survey protocols. The biologist shall identify all occurrences of sensitive species and shall consult with CDFW and USFWS, as appropriate depending on species status, to develop and execute a mitigation plan to relocate plants, gather seeds from the plants, and distribute to a suitable conserved habitat area. 4) To offset the loss of Los Angeles Pocket Mouse on the property from development, the Project applicant will preserve 27.4 acres of habitat that is adjacent to occupied LAPM habitat as identified in Biological Resource Mitigation Measure 2. 5) The following measures are required to minimize indirect impacts to vegetation in the vicinity of the project site: Dust control measures designed to minimize effects to vegetation in the vicinity should be implemented. Native plants should be used to the greatest extent feasible in landscaped areas. Many invasive non-native horticultural species can spread readily into natural areas and the local watershed. Landscaping should not include invasive plants identified by the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC). 6) No SBKR were detected on -site. The loss of SBKR critical habitat is not expected to compromise the long-term survival of the species; therefore, no mitigation measures for impacts to SBKR critical habitat are proposed. However, since there are impacts proposed to on -site WOUS regulated under the jurisdiction of the Corps, it is expected that the Corps will be required to consult with USFWS under Section 7 of the FESA. 7) Ten days prior to ground clearing activities, a breeding bird survey that is in conformance with the Migratory Bird Act shall be required to determine whether nesting is occurring. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, this survey shall be submitted to the City for review and acceptance. Occupied nests shall not be disturbed unless a qualified biologist verifies through non-invasive methods that either (a) the adult birds have not begun egg -laying or incubation; or (b) the juveniles from the occupied nests are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. If the biologist is unable to verify one of the above conditions, then no disturbance shall occur within 300 feet of non -raptor nests, and within 5,000 feet of raptor nests, during the breeding season to avoid abandonment of the young. If nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through the establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area shall be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume. 8) Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall perform a Burrowing Owl Survey that is in conformance with the Department of Fish and Wildlife Staff Report on Burrowing Owl Mitigation and submit the written report outlining Item C —141 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 10 the findings to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the Planning Department within 30 days of groundbreaking activity. The survey shall include a habitat assessment, survey and impact analysis. The Burrowing Owl Survey shall follow the following protocol: Burrowing Owl Survey methodology shall be based on Appendix D (Breeding and Non -breeding Season Surveys and Reports) of the CDFW Staff Report. Results of the pre -construction survey shall be provided to CDFW and the City. If the pre -construction survey does not identify burrowing owls on the project site, then no further mitigation is required. If burrowing owls are found to be utilizing the project site during the pre - construction survey, measures shall be developed by the qualified biologist in coordination with CDFW to avoid Impacting occupied burrows during the nesting period. These measures shall be based on the most current CDFW protocols and will at minimum include establishment of buffer setbacks from occupied burrows and owl monitoring. If ground -disturbing activities are delayed or suspended for more than 30 days after the pre -construction survey, the site shall be resurveyed for owls. During the non -breeding season from September 1 through January 31, if burrows are occupied by migratory or non -migratory resident burrowing owls during a pre -construction survey, burrow exclusion and/or closure may be used to exclude owls from those burrows. Burrow exclusion and/or closure should only be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist in coordination with CDFW using the most current CDFW guidelines. During the avian nesting season from February 1 through August 31, if nests are discovered, they shall be avoided through establishment of an appropriate buffer setback, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. The temporary "no construction" area would have to be maintained until the nest has completed its cycle, as determined by a qualified wildlife biologist. Once the nest cycle is complete and all nestlings have fledged and have left the nest, construction in the area may resume. 9) Prior to approval by the City of any grading and/or construction permits, the Project applicant shall consult with the Corps to obtain a Jurisdictional Determination and, if necessary, acquire required permit authorizations from the regulatory agencies. These authorizations will include, but are not limited to, the following: CWA Section 404 Permit from the Corps (Nationwide Permit 29 for Residential Developments may be applicable) CWA Section 401 Water Quality Certification from RWQCB, and • California Fish and Game Code Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement from CDFW. In addition to obtaining authorizations from regulatory agencies, the Projectwill preserve in perpetuity approximately 1 acre of riparian habitat within the 27.4 acres of habitat identified in Biological Resource Mitigation Measure 2. Item C —142 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 11 Additionally, a FESA Section 7 Consultation between the Corps and USFWS will be required. Copies of any correspondence and/or permit authorizations received shall be submitted to the City for review and record. 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 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) A RPA (Registry of Professional Archaeologists) -certified archaeologist shall be retained, at the expense of the future project developers, to monitor the initial grading in areas, sensitive for cultural resources, such as the mouths of the canyons and along the natural drainages. The frequency and duration of the monitoring shall be based on the professional judgment of the on -site archaeologist based on the materials being excavated. If significant cultural resources are uncovered, the archaeologist shall have the authority to stop or temporarily divert construction activities for a period of 48 hours to assess the significance of the finds. 3) In the event that significant archaeological remains are uncovered during excavation and/or grading, all work shall stop in that area of the site until an appropriate data recovery program can be developed and implemented. The cost of such a program shall be the responsibility of future developers. 4) All archaeological resources recovered during the project shall be donated to a local institution that has the proper facilities for curation, display, and use by Item C —143 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 12 qualified scholars and all tribal cultural resources that may be recovered during project development be returned to the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians. Costs for curation shall be covered by the project applicant. 5) The approved archaeological mitigation measures shall be affixed to all copies of the project grading plans. 6) If any paleontological resources (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. 7) Prior to issuance of any grading permit, the applicant/permitee shall contact the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians Cultural Resources Department to coordinate tribal participation in the archaeological monitoring of the project. Tribal participants shall coordinate with the Project Archaeologist to ensure that tribal cultural resources that may be encountered during ground disturbances are identified, assessed, and either protected in place or mitigated accordingly. 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 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 PM,o emissions from the site during such episodes. Item C —144 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 13 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,o 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 contractor 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 the 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 develop 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. Item C —145 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 14 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 burning embers projected by a vegetation fire and help reduce losses resulting from repeated cycles of interface fire disasters. 2) The project shall comply with the Fire Protection Plan dated January 5, 2015. The plan includes specific vegetation management zones, required landscaping requirements, and construction standards. The Fire Protection Plan has been approved by the RCFPD on April 13, 2015. 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) thatshall 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 Item C —146 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 15 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) 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. 6) Education of Property Owners, Tenants and Occupants on Stormwater BMPs - Educational Materials will be available to homeowners thru HOA. HOA will periodically provide homeowners with environmental awareness education materials which may include use of household chemicals, discharges of wastes via hosing or other direct discharge to gutters, catch basins and storm drains. See attached Education Materials in section 6.4 of the WQMP report. 7) Activity Restrictions - Once an HOA is formed, certain restrictions may be enacted thru the formation of conditions, covenants and restrictions (CCRs) to protect surface water runoff. 8) Landscape Management BMPs - See attached CASQA SD-12 in section 6.4 of the WQMP Report. 9) BMP Maintenance— Maintenance of BMPs implemented at the project shall be performed at the frequency prescribed in this WQMP. Records of inspections and maintenance shall be maintained by the HOA and documented with the WQMP, and shall be available for review upon request. 10) Local Water Quality Ordinances - Available to the home upon request at the City of Ranch Cucamonga. 11) Litter/Debris Control Program - Litter collection and removal shall be conducted on a bi-weekly basis by the HOA. 12) Catch Basin Inspection Program - Catch basins will be inspected by the HOA and cleaned as necessary on an annual basis. Catch basin labeling shall be checked for legibility, replaced as necessary. Item C —147 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 16 13) Vacuum Sweeping of Private Streets and Parking Lots - The City of Rancho Cucamonga shall sweep all streets and drive aisles on a weekly basis. 14) Provide storm drain system stenciling and signage (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-13) - See CASQA Detail SD-13 in Section 6.4 of WQMP. 15) Use efficient irrigation systems & landscape design, water conservation, smart controllers, and source control (Statewide Model Landscape Ordinance; CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-12) - See CASQA Detail SD-12 in Section 6.4 of WQMP. 16) Finish grade of landscaped areas at a minimum of 1-2 inches below top of curb, sidewalk, or pavement - Landscaped areas are proposed to promote self - retaining areas to aid in surface runoff water quality. 17) Protect slopes and channels and provide energy dissipation (CASQA New Development BMP Handbook SD-10) - See CASQA Detail SD-10 in Section 6.4 of WQMP. 18) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the City 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. 19) 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. 20) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by MDS Consulting on August 22, 2014 to reduce construction pollutants from entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. Noise 1) The recommended height of the noise barriers is 6 feet. Noise control barrier may be constructed by a block wall and will be required at plan check by the Planning Department. A noise barrier must present a solid face from top to bottom. Preventable openings or decorative cutouts should not be made. All gaps (except forweep holes) should be filled with grout or caulking to avoid flanking. Item C —148 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 17 2) The project site will require a "windows closed" condition. To ensure proper acoustical noise isolation the following are required at plan check and verified with the Building and Safety Department: Upgraded windows and sliding glass doors for facades that face analyzed roadways. First row units directly facing East and Wilson Avenue: 1 st floor: All windows and sliding glass doors directly facing East Avenue and Wilson Avenue will require a minimum STC rating of 25 or higher. 2nd floor: All windows and sliding glass doors directly facing East Avenue and Wilson Avenue will require a minimum STC rating of 28 or higher. Attic fagade vents or roof vents that directly face the subject roadway, if applicable, should include an acoustical baffle to prevent vehicle noise intrusion. Exhibit D and E (of Initial Study Part II) illustrates an example of an attic fagade vent and roof vent acoustical baffles. The Contractor may install similar measures to provide noise reduction. Forproper acoustical performance, all exterior windows, doors, and sliding glass doors must have a positive seal and leaks/cracks must be kept to a minimum. Minimize cracks or leaks, any partition with a gap or hole will allow noise to flank and penetrate the partition. 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 17.66.050, as measured at the property line. Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050. 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. 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 and include appropriate noise mitigation measures. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. Item C —149 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 16-48 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18908 — RICHLAND VENTURES, INC. September 28, 2016 Page 18 7) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a construction -related noise mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. The Plan shall depict the location of the construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction. 8) Stationary construction noise sources such as generators or pumps should be located as far away from sensitive land uses, as feasible. 9) Construction staging areas should be located as far from noise sensitive land uses as feasible. 10) During construction, the contactor shall ensure all construction equipment is equipped with appropriate noise attenuating devices. 11) Idling equipment shall be turned off when not in use. 12) Equipment shall be maintained so that vehicles and their loads are secured from rattling and banging. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 28TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 353 ATTEST: Francisco Oaxaca, Chairman Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, 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 28th day of September 2016, by the following vote -to -wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Item C —150 L3 Conditions of Approval Community Development Department Project #: SUBTT18908 CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. The "Upper Etiwanda" neighborhood entry monument shall be installed at the northwest corner of Wilson Avenue and East Avenue in accordance with Exhibit 25(A). 30" max cut stone wall with a concrete cap and low pilaster. Material and color shall match with what is existing at the intersection of Etiwanda Avenue and Wilson Avenue. 2. The street trees along East Avenue need to be changed from Sophora japonica 'Regent' (Chinese Scholar Tree) to Magnolia grandiflora 'D.D. Blanchard'. The Sophora is not on the list of the City's acceptable street tree species. 3. Approval is for the subdivision of approximately 10.6 acres into 30 single family detached lots within the Low (L) Residential District in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan located at the northwest corner of East Avenue and Wilson Avenue; APN: 1087-081-25, 4. This project is within subarea 2.2 of the Upper Etiwanda planning area per the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. a. The neighborhood theme wall shall be featured along the north side of Wilson Avenue and west side of East Avenue b. A neighborhood entry monument shall be installed at the northwest corner of Wilson Avenue and East Avenue c. The private landscape easement shall be consistent with "Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood entry" exhibits 25 A 8 B (page III-78 8 79). 5. Future house product for the subdivision shall adhere to the architectural requirements and guidelines of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. 6. Future house product shall require approval of a Design Review by the Planning Commission. 7. If a Home Owners Association is created for the maintenance of an equestrian facility, then the tract (SUBTT18908) shall be required to annex into the HOA prior to recordation of the final map. If a Community Facilities District is created for the maintenance of an equestrian facility, then the tract (SUBTT18908) shall be required to annex into the Community Facilities District prior to recordation of the final map. Standard Conditions of Approval 8. 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. Therefore, the tentative tract map will expire on March 24, 2019. Printed'. 9121/2016 www.CityofRC.us Item C -151 Project #: SUBTT18908 CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: Project Type: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 9. 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. 10. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval, 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. 11. The applicant shall be required to pay California Department of Fish and Wildlife Notice of Exemption and Mitigated Negative Declaration fee in the amount of $2,260.00. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to public hearing. 12, 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. 13. 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. 14. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and/or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. 15. 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. 16. 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 17. The Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) and Articles of Incorporation of the Homeowners' Association are subject to the approval of the Planning and Engineering Services Department and the City Attorney. They shall be recorded concurrently with the Final Map or prior to the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. A recorded copy shall be provided to the City Engineer. The Homeowners' Association shall submit to the Planning Department a list of the name and address of their officers on or before January 1 of each and every year and whenever said information changes. Printed: 9/21/2016 www.CityofRC.us Page 2 of 17 Item C —152 Project#: SUBTT18908CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 18. 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. 19. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include the tentative tract map and conceptual grading plan and details on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, the Development Code regulations and the Etiwanda Specific Plan. 20, 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. 21. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. 22.On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between walls/fences and sidewalk. The 5-foot wall/fence setback and the parkway shall have landscape and irrigation in addition to the required street trees. Detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted for Planning Director review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. The parkway landscaping including trees, shrubs, ground covers and irrigation shall be maintained by the property owner. The developer shall provide each prospective buyer written notice of the parkway maintenance requirement, in a standard format as determined by the Planning Director, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 23. 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 owners at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project perimeter. 24. Slope fencing along side property lines shall comply with the view fencing detail (Exhibit 25 C) provided in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan to maintain an open feeling and enhance views. 25. 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 for the development or prior final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision. For development occurring in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, the landscape plans will also be reviewed by Fire Construction Services. 26. 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. Printed: 9/2112016 w w.CityofRC.us Page 3 of 17 Item C —153 Project#: SUBTT18908CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Planning Department Standard Conditions of Approval 27. 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. 28. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department. 29. 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. 30. 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. 31. 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 $744 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. 32. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17,82. Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions www.CityofRC.us Page 4 of 17 Printed: 9/21/2016 9 Item C —154 Project #: SUBTT18908 CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT, Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Wilson Avenue improvements. shall be installed in .accordance with Etiwanda North Specific Plan "Special Divided Secondary Arterial" standards as follows: a. Construct north half of the street along the project frontage, including curb and gutter, asphalt pavement, curvilinear sidewalk, 9500 Lumen HPSV-equivalent streetlights, street trees and R26(s) "No Stopping" signs. b. On the south side, construct a paved 2-lane road for two way traffic from East Avenue to Etiwanda Avenue consistent with the design criteria used for Wilson Avenue east of East Avenue. Provide off site transitions to the satisfaction of the Traffic Engineer. c. The developer shall receive credit against, and reimbursement of costs in excess of, the Transportation Development Fee for ultimate permanent improvements, including the middle 38 feet of pavement, in conformance with City policy. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover the cost of other permanent off -site improvements from future development of the adjacent property. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within 6 months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. d. The City will share a portion of collected contributions in lieu of construction paid by the developer of Tract 16113. e. A contribution in lieu of construction shall be paid for half of the future median including landscaping. f. Interim roundabout at intersection with East Avenue to be in accordance with FHWA guidelines and CAMUTCD standards. If analysis reveals that the level of service for a roundabout is unacceptable, a traffic signal shall be installed. g. Provide a traffic signing and striping plan. h. When Tract 16072 completes Wilson Avenue, there will be no median breaks except at the entry to Tract 16072 midway between Etiwanda and East Avenues. Printed: 9/21/2016 www.cityofRc.us Page 5 of 17 Item C —155 Project#: SU BTT1 8908 CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 2. East Avenue improvements shall be installed in accordance with Etiwanda North Specific Plan "Collector" standards as follows: a. Construct west half of the street along the project frontage plus 18 feet of pavement east of the centerline, for a total width of 40 feet, along with a 2-foot wide graded shoulder. b. Frontage improvements will include curb and gutter, asphalt pavement, property line adjacent sidewalk, 5800 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED streetlights, street trees and R26(s) "No Stopping" signs. Install an asphalt berm along the east side of East Avenue. c. The developer may request a reimbursement agreement to recover the cost of permanent off -site improvements east of the centerline from future development of the adjacent property. If the developer fails to submit for said reimbursement agreement within 6 months of the public improvements being accepted by the City, all rights of the developer to reimbursement shall terminate. d. South of Wilson Avenue, East Avenue should be constructed 38 feet wide to northerly boundary of Tract 16113. The developer shall receive credit against, and reimbursement costs in excess of the Transportation Development Fee for these improvements, in conformance with City Policy. e. Dedication shall be made, a total of 33 feet on East Avenue (measured from street centerline). f. Provide a signing and striping plan. g.Offsite easements for improvements on east of East Avenue, including catch basins, shall be obtained prior to approval of final map or issuance of building permits, whichever comes first. 3. Interior street frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Local' standards as required and including: a. Provide curb and gutter, property line adjacent sidewalk and street trees. b. Proposed drive approaches to be in accordance with City Driveway Policy. c. Provide 5800 Lumen HPSV-equivalent LED street lights, as required. d. Provide traffic signing and striping, as required. e. Access to Wilson Avenue shall be in accordance with City "Collector" pavement widths and can taper down to City "Local' pavement widths. 4. A Homeowners Association (HOA) shall be created for the maintenance of the proposed landscaped areas on East and Wilson Avenues. Development shall also join appropriate public maintenance district(s), prior to map recordation. Printed: 9/21/2016 www.CityofRC.us Page of 17 Item C —156 Project #: SUBTT18908 CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: Project Type: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 5. Install local storm drains to convey development drainage -to the existing Master Plan Storm Drain in Wilson Avenue. Extend the local the local storm drain as far on -site as needed to contain Q100 within rights -of -way and provide a 10-foot dry lane in Q10. The cost of local storm drains shall be borne by this development with no fee credit. 6. The project applicant shall demonstrate they have received written approval from Metropolitan Water District for any proposed activities within Metropolitan fee property prior to proceeding with the proposed improvements to Wilson Avenue or proceeding with any other activity that may infringe upon or impact rights -of -way. Coordination with Metropolitan and submittal of design plans should be in accordance with the "Guidelines for Developments in the Area of Facilities, Fee Properties and/or easements of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California". 7. Dedicate 51 feet of right-of-way for Wilson Avenue, measured from the ultimate centerline. 8. Rights -of -way shall be obtained from Metropolitan Water District (MWD) for improvements south of the Wilson Avenue centerline, as well as a permit. 9. Provide design of roundabout for East/Wilson intersection in ultimate condition that is in accordance with FHWA guidelines and CAMUTCD standards. 10. If this tract is constructed prior to Tract 16072 installs their north property line channel, this developer shall demonstrate they are protected from off -site flows along north and west perimeter walls. 11. Equestrian Impact Fees in the amount of $1,000.00, per the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, shall be paid upon issuance of a Single Family Residential building permit. Standard Conditions of Approval 12. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards, 13. 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. 14. 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. Printed: 912112016 w w.CityofRC.us Item C —157 Page 7 of 17 Project#: SUBTT18908CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 15. 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. Permits issued on or after June 2, 2014, must complete the reimbursement process through the City's Accelerate online portal within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project or the deposit will be forfeited. Permits issued before June 2, 2014, require the following when applying for a deposit reimbursement: a completed CD-2 form, a copy of the cashier's receipt showing the deposit amount, and all weight tickets. Instructions and forms are available at the City's web site, www.CityofRC.us, under City Hall; Engineering; Environmental Programs. 16. 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 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:: Wilson Avenue median and south side parkway on Wilson Avenue 17. Public landscape areas are required to incorporate substantial areas (40 percent) of mortared cobble or other acceptable non -irrigated surfaces. 18. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by the developer until accepted by the City. 19. Dedication shall be made of the following rights -of -way on the perimeter streets (measured from street centerline): 51 total feet on Wilson Avenue 33 total feet on East Avenue 20. All existing easements lying within future rights -of -way shall be quit -claimed or delineated on the final map. 21. 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. Printed: 9/21/2016 www.CilyofRC.us Page 8 of 17 Item C —158 Project#: SUBTT18908 CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: Location: Project Type: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT., Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 22. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Wilson Avenue Curb & Gutter A.C. Pavement Sidewalk Street Lights Street Trees Median Island Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. 23. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: East Avenue Curb & Gutter A.C. Pavement Sidewalk Street Lights Street Trees 24. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Interior Streets Curb & Gutter A.C. Pavement Sidewalk Drive Approach Street Lights Street Trees Printed: 9/2112016 www.CityofRC.us Item C —159 Page 9 of 17 Project #: SUBTT18908 CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 25. 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. 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. Access ramps for the disabled 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 Manager prior to submittal for first plan check. 26. 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. Printed: 9/21/2016 www.CityofRC,us Page 10 of 17 Item C —160 Project #: SUBTT18908 CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 27.Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend public landscape plans are required, tree installation landscape improvement plans. Wilson Avenue Botanical Name - Lagerstroemia hybrid "Tuscarora" Common Name - Pink -Red Crape Myrtle Min. Grow Space - 2' Spacing - 35' O.C. Size - 15 gallon and standards as follows. The completed n the title page of the street improvement em within the construction legend stating: on Sheet _ (typically Sheet 1)." Where n those areas shall be per the public 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 City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance Department. 4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. report shall be furnished to the require backfill soil amendments, by the Engineering Services Printed: 9/21I2016 www.CityofRC,us Page 11 of 17 Item C —161 Project #: SUBTT18908 CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: Project Type: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 28. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title pal plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on Sheet _ public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those area landscape improvement plans. East Avenue Botanical Name - Magnolia grandiflora "D.D.. Blanchard" Common Name - NCN Min. Grow Space - 6' Spacing - 55' Size - 15 gallon 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 City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance Department. 4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. Printed: 9/21/2016 www.CityofRC.us as follows. The completed of the street improvement construction legend stating: (typically Sheet 1)." Where shall be per the public report shall be furnished to the require backfill soil amendments, by the Engineering Services Page 12 of 17 Item C —162 Project #: SUBTT18908 CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 29. 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. Interior Streets East and West Botanical Name - Prunus blireiana Common Name - NCN Min. Grow Space - 3' Spacing - 40' O.C. Size - 15 gallon Qty. 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 City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may as determined by the City inspector. 3) All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance Department. 4) Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. report shall be furnished to the require backfill soil amendments, by the Engineering Services Printed: 9/21/2016 �w.CityofRC.us Page 13 of 17 Item C —163 Project#: SUBTT18908 CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT., Engineering Services Department Standard Conditions of Approval 30. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title pag( plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on Sheet _ public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas landscape improvement plans. Interior Streets North & SOuth Botanical Name - Podocarpus macrophyllus Common Name - Yew Pine Min. Grow Space - 3' Spacing - 40' O.C. Size - 15 gallon as follows. The completed of the street improvement construction legend stating: (typically Sheet 1)." Where shall be per the public 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. 31. 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. 32. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. 33. 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. 34. 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. 35. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their right of way: Metropolitan Water District Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval Printed: 9/2112016 www.CityofRC.us Page 14 of 17 Item C —164 Project #: SUBTT18908 CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 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 geologic 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 Drainage 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 obtain written permission from the adjacent property owner(s) to construct wall on property line or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed offset from the property line. 11. All slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot offset from the public right of way or adjacent private property. 12. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the, latest adopted California Plumbing Code. 13. 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. 14. The precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout "Information for Grading Plans and Permit". Printed: 9/21/2016 www.CityofRC.us Page 75 of 17 Item C —165 Project #: SUBTT18908 CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. - Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 15. 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 grading inspections prior to continuing grading operations: i) The bottom of the over -excavation; ii) Completion of Rough Grading, prior to issuance of the building permit; iii) 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. 16. 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. 17. The Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. 18. The Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) has been deemed "Acceptable". Prior to the issuance of a grading permit a final project -specific Water Quality Management Plan shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building Official. 19. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Memorandum of Agreement of Storm Water Quality Management Plan" shall be submitted for review and approval by the Building Official and recorded with the County Recorder's Office. 20. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall obtain a Waste Discharge Identification Number (WDID). 21. If the depths of the infiltration pits is 10-feet or greater below grade the applicant shall provide a copy of EPA Form 7520-16 (Inventory of Injection Wells) with the Facility ID Number assigned to the Building and Safety Services Department Official prior to issuance of the Grading Permit. 22. If the depths of the infiltration pits is 10-feet or greater below grade the land owner shall provide an inspection report by a qualified person/company on a biennial basis for the underground infiltration pits to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Environmental Program Manager. The land owner shall maintain on a regular basis all best management practices (BMP"s) as described in the Storm Water Quality Management Plan prepared for the subject project. All costs associated with the underground infiltration chamber are the responsibility of the land owner. 23. Prior to issuance of a wall permit, on engineered combination garden/retaining walls along the property boundary the structural calculations for the wall shall assume a level toe/heel at the adjacent off -site property (i.e. a manufactured slope is not present). Printed; 9/21/2016 www.CilyofRC.us page 16 of 17 Item C —166 Project #: SUBTT18908 CEQA2014-00019 Project Name: NWC of East and Wilson Avenue Location: Project Type: 5650 EAST AVE - 108708125-0000 Tentative Tract Mao CEQA Review ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. Grading Section Standard Conditions of Approval 24. Prior to issuance of a wall permit, a copy of the Grading Special Conditions of Approval shall be included within the engineered wall plans and calculations. 25. Flow lines steeper than 6 percent could be erosive. The applicant shall provide hard lined gutters and swales where concentrated flows exceed 3fps, and anywhere that flow lines exceed 10 percent 26. This tract requires a connection to a publc sewer system. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide evidence from Cucamonga Valley Water Distruct that the proposed public sewer plans have been deemed 90% complete by Cucamonga Valley Water District. 27. This project has been conditioned by the Engineering Services Department for certain off -site improvements, such as Wilson Avenue, which are not shown on the Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan, deemed "Preliminary Only", by the City of Rancho Cucamonga on January 20, 2015. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit the applicant shall provide to the Building Official, or his designee, a final project specific water quality management plan for all proposed impervious areas associated with the proposed project. Prior to the issuance of grading permits the final water quality management plan shall be approved by the City and recorded with the County Recorder's office. The proposed storm water quality treatment devices shall have an approved funding mechanism(s) in place, i.e. a community facilities district, prior to the recordation of the project -specific water quality management plan. Printed: 9/21/2016 w w.CityofRC.us Page 17 of 17 Item C —167