The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2017-08-23 - SupplementalsPlanning Commission August 23, 2017 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20073 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. — A review of a proposed subdivision of a property of about 84 acres into twenty-seven (27) parcels and one (1) lettered lot located within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 4th Street, south of 6th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues - APNs: 0210-082-41, -491 and -52. D a-_ 71 BNSFIMetroI k Rail Line- rIMMM Empire Lakes Specific Plan "Planning Areas" 0 A Project Site SUBTT20073 LI • e L � ,rY-ate s.-�—C oil Street u •f"`�� J..r�M •., ��,��Cµ": 4.r r •.d Ziirei .. J�+rA /�'t 1, 7�" _ ��;�" �Z nb C(Y.. �. •3 �'�,- -d`9 r�L Proposed Project • Subdivide the project site into twenty-seven (27) parcels and one (1) lettered lot; • No building construction is proposed; • The parcels will be sold to various developers who will construct the Empire Lakes/The Resort mixed use project; • Development of the overall project will be in three (3) phases and is expected to occur over a period of 8-10 years; CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA �1 Proposed Project • The entire subject tract map, and Parcels 1 and 2 of related Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20105, are within the first phase, • The entitlement applications for the various components of the overall project will be submitted by each developer separately for review and action by the City at a later date. • Development within all parcels will be governed by the technical and design standards/guidelines described in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. �acu0" r.v .tea.....—...n•_ Wag o TENTATIVE TRACT NO.20073 UNTHEM MC80 CUCAMONGA CCAWOG SAN 89IIU1818tl, STAWOF wvoanu bzm naawmvnw,.:z nrnxma,ar mzraeuw>viwcsearo naruam. mssmm i�4aW�.bv 411 V'F6W,9 bWmav ND bbMi91E! IMIIaS01DI 9xTM 978ff7 PARCEL 12 219,768 S.F. / 5.04 AC. rD d a w,;t9LL I !F PARCEL 1 l 2,480,816 S.F. / 56.95 AC. �\' \ FFIH Err.OR �m.oxa 0-wxo.__ mrv� .. __ ._ - f4U8TH — __ 3[SEEf Ti P Z W Y H ST. Public Notification • Newspaper advertising; • Notice of Filing signs (11); • Mailed notices to owners of property located within 660 feet of the project site; • Comments received were limited to inquiries regarding the purpose of the subdivision Environmental Assessment • Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on May 18, 2016 in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-001149 Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015-00115. Environmental Assessment No subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project when: a) no substantial changes proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; b) no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicate new or more severe environmental impacts Environmental Assessment c) no new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; and d) no additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. Conclusion Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20073 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval. Planning Commission August 23, 2017 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT20105 — LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP. — A review of a proposed subdivision of a property of about 82 acres into five (5) parcels located within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, Planning Area 1, located north of 6th Street, south of the Metrolink/BNSF rail line, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues - APN: 0209-272-20. �� 1 yin,: r; _ f fi � Y I rcT.T-s.�R�t tom. � •' _ BNSF/Metrolink-Railline.- ;1 d' IT: - - Project Site Empire Lakes suBTT20105 Tth - Specific Plan -� "Planning Are Y-= >� • Fr �. 6th Street - 6th•Street C y� rotor nJ Rel SUBTT20U73 _ .� irk-- fi a . i u- /4 t acly — s 6r mil 4th Street it -- -, 4th Street ' a y� jk Y a ` ' ' P}�°(M 4 1,0 asp •i _. ..•. M .��,+-+I�+.:'t-: r4i: ra/j'S"�5`S14_-4v.�-r •s - w 1 I---M Industrial i Buildings Q l0 FFr! • �rr1 industrial Buildings ' :trolinkgRailjUnews—'"----- tPe, 'It FL dt•?NI � a Metrolink �4� Station/Parking Lot dffice Buildings LMM , t IL I.nnl tt talus l IN r Apartment .a F complexQ Y 6th Street; a Vacant (former - r golf coarse) q- Jaw, «,<i r- ^ 49 11 Proposed Project Subdivide the project site into five (5) parcels; No building construction is proposed; The parcels will be sold to various developers who will construct the Empire Lakes/The Resort mixed use project; Development of the overall project will be in three (3) phases and is expected to occur over a period of 8-10 years; Proposed Project • Parcels 1 and 2 of the subject tract map will be developed within the first phase; • The entitlement applications for the various components of the overall project will by each developer separately for action by the City at a later date; be submitted review and • Development within all parcels will be governed by the technical and design standards/guidelines described in the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. �— - — - — - — - - METROLINK / 9NSF RAIL LINE - — - ca �I al I PAR. 11 P.M. NO.14647 P.M.B.4 9 3 / l,l REMAINDER / / I I''191 IIr I 1 E� I r IWI � I�I I i I L -r artwa Now Public Notification • Newspaper advertising; • Notice of Filing signs (4); • Mailed notices to owners of property located within 660 feet of the project site; • Comments received were limited to inquiries regarding the purpose of the subdivision Environmental Assessment • Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on May 18, 2016 in connection with the City's approval of General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, and Development Code Amendment DRC2015- 00115. Environmental Assessment No subsequent or supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration is required in connection with subsequent discretionary approvals of the same project when: a) no substantial changes proposed to the project that indicate new or more severe impacts on the environment; b) no substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances under which the project was previously reviewed that indicates new or more severe environmental impacts Environmental Assessment c) no new important information shows the project will have new or more severe impacts than previously considered; and d) no additional mitigation measures are now feasible to reduce impacts or different mitigation measures can be imposed to substantially reduce impacts. Conclusion Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Tentative Tract Map SUBTT20105 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval. Sycamore Heights General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206 Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M Design Review DRC2012-00672 Variance DRC2016-00207 Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 Planning Commission August 23, 2017 '•'". CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA s•, D3- D7 Location Map C Previous Approvals • General Plan Amendment DRC2004-00339 — A request to amend the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope. • Development Code Amendment DRC2004-00352 — A request to amend the Development Code to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope. • Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16605 — An 8-lot residential subdivision for condominium purposes (206 units) on 21 acres. • Design Review DRC2003-00637 — The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 206 condominiums on 21 acres. • Variance DRC2005-01061 — A request to reduce the parking lot setback to allow improvements to an existing parking lot for the Sycamore Inn Restaurant. • Minor Development Review DRC2004-00826 — Parking lot, loading area modifications and covered patio area at the Sycamore Inn Restaurant. Plan Comparison • 206 D.U. • 21.3 AC. • 9.7 D.U./AC. PREVIOUS PLAN • 175 D.U. • 7.2 D.U./AC. CURRENT PLAN T Current Proposal • General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206 — A request to amend the General Plan to allow the development of land that contains a 30 percent slope. • Tentative Tract Modification SUBTT16605M — A 6-lot residential subdivision for condominium purposes (175 units) on 24 acres. • Design Review DRC2012-00672 — The design review of building elevations and detailed site plan for 175 condominiums on 24 acres. • Variance DRC2016-00207 — A request to exceed the 30-foot building envelope. • Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 — A request to remove 180 trees associated with the development of the project site. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GPA D RC2016=00206 • Proposed GPA is identical to the previously approved GPA. • General Plan Land Use Element establishes design, grading, and development criteria associated with various slope conditions. • General Plan establishes policy guidelines for the development of slopes ranging from "5% or less" up to "15% to 29.9%" and prohibits development on slope conditions "30% and over". GPA DRC2016-00206 • Development Code standard is applicable to slopes "30% and over" and states: • "This is an excessive slope condition and development is prohibited, unless all the following are satisfied: (i) the property is located south of Banyan Street; (ii) at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the lots or parcels that are the subject of the development application are surrounded by lots or parcels improved with structures; (iii) the proposed project is determined to appropriately address slope stability and other geological factors of the site; and (iv) vegetation fuel management for wildfire protection can be achieved and maintained." -- X GPA DRC2016=00206 • Proposed GPA is identical to previously approved GPA and adopted DCA. • "This is an excessive slope condition and development is prohibited, unless all the following are satisfied: (i) the property is located south of Banyan Street; (ii) at least seventy-five percent (75%) of the lots or parcels that are the subject of the development application are surrounded by lots or parcels improved with structures; (iii) the proposed project is determined to appropriately address slope stability and other geological factors of the site; and (iv) vegetation fuel management for wildfire protection can be achieved and maintained." lable U 19: Slope Decelopnient Gttideliue, Percent Natural Slope m lass This is not a hillside condition. Grading with conventional, fully padded lots and terracing its acceptable. S to 7.9 Development with grading is permitted in this zone, but existing landfoans must retain their natural character. Padded building sites are parmdted. however. techniques such as contour grading, combined slopes. limited cut and fill. and split level architecture, or padding for the structures only, may be required to reduce grading_ When in conjunction with the techniques described above, and for a project within a master plan which includes special design features such as a golf course, extensive open space, or significant use of green bells or paseos. the Planning Commission may consider the use of mass grading techniques adjacent to these special design features as partial compliance with this standard. fi to 14.9 This is a hillside condition. Special hillside architectural and design techniques that minimize grading are required in this zone. Architectural prototypes are expected to conform to the natural landrorm by using techniques such as split level foundations of greater than tE inches, stem walls, stacking and clustering- In conjunction with the ahemative techniques described above. and for a project within a master plan which includes special design features such as a golf course, extensive open space or significant use of green bells or paseos, the Planning Commission may consider padded building sees adjacent to those special features when it is found that said grading creates a better relationship between that special design feature and the adjacent lots. 15 to 29.9 Development within this zone is limited to no more than the less visually prominent slopes, and then only where it can be shown that safety, environmental and aesthetic impacts can be minimized. Use of larger lots. variable setbacks and variable budding structural techniques such as stepped, or pole foundations are expected. Structures shall blend with the natural environment through their shape, materials, and colors. Impact of traffic and roadways is to be minimized by following natural contours, or using grade separations. 30 and over This is an excessive slope condition and development is prohibited, Design Review DRC2012-00672 Site Utilization Map W2 GOLF F&"Ee 'AIL 60 SUBTT16605M TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 16605 FOR CON1DOA4INUM PURPOSES COUNTY Cr- Sf N BERNARDINO CIT" OF RANCHO CUCANIC N04. CA i L C L O 1 L C 7 3 -0- 3 I a SUBTT16605M LOT 4 _ O - I J - 6 .j Design Review DRC2012=00672 • Design review of a 175-unit multi -family attached condominium development on 24.19 acres. • Density of 7.23 du/ac. • Gated community with 1 vehicle entrance on Foothill Boulevard, and 1 EVA gate on RHCC. • Site Plan wraps around Sycamore Inn Restaurant providing a single right -in -right -out project driveway. • 9 Live/Work units are provided at project entrance, with adjacent parking and pedestrian access. i y�` CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ?• • Design Review DRC2012=00672 • Units are provided throughout the 24-acre site, with most units on two large relatively flat graded pads. • Building pads on the lower tier directly adjacent to Foothill Boulevard are approximately 6 to 21 feet above the existing street grade. • Building pads on the upper tier east are approximately 60 feet below the existing condominium project to the north. • A 30-foot-high Mechanically Stabilized Embankment (MSE) separates the lower and upper building tiers. k1sift � seN RK"ARDINO Site Plan Grading Plan -71 �_ -_______ Grading Plan y y_ k VL Grading Plan -. r r I Grading Plan 1AZ0 1380 E_-- 1360 1340 13z0 1300 1280 1260 _ 5htlne "TIT ] lzl7m U, _ PROPOSED DINING GRADE GRADE PROPOSED BLDG EL 1320' Grading Plan 187 TO PROPOSED BUILDINGS_ _ 23 TO SLOPE i 6' RETAINING WALL PROPOSED 2:1 MANUFACTURED R TRACT BOUNDARY 1420 1380 1360 134 1320 1300 I 1280 E3DSTING BLDG 126C EL. 1373' LOCATION OF BLDG. IN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLAN CLOSEST TO P.L. Design Review DRC2012-00672 • The 175 units are provided throughout the project site in 44 individual buildings, each containing between 3 and 6 residential units. • Units are provided in either a 2-story complex. • There are 26 two-story units, 29 feet tall, size from 1,296 square feet to 1,701 three-story units, 35 feet tall, with units 1,672 square feet to 2,108 square feet. or 3-story building with units ranging in square feet and 18 ranging in size from • Parking is provided in two -car garages providing 350 parking spaces, 9 parking live/work units, and 130 open parking spaces. for each unit, spaces for the Design Review DRC2012=00672 • Architectural styles include Santa Barbara and Provence, and include 360 degree architectural elements such as: tile roofs, stucco finish, multi -paned windows, metal balconies, wood shutters, and additional architectural embellishments. • The 175-unit mix consists of 28 two -bedroom units, 119 three -bedroom units, and 28 four -bedroom. • The 9 live/work units include 2 two -bedroom units and 7 three -bedroom. a CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Floor Plans & Elevations Front Elcvation 2-S"I ORY-rRIPI.I:X ELEVATIONS - SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Santa Barbara A-1.4 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC 'K-0 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA •.* *. Floor Plans & Elevations Rear Elevation tagnt ttcvauon SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Paritic Summit Foothill, LLC _-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATIONS: Santa Barbara A-1.5 Floor Plans & Elevations -al a al ' aff ■ •, If tt u P two A. Front Elevation Left Elevation SYCAMORE HEIGHTS I acific Summit Foothill, LLC STORY TRIPLEX EI I W' ", Pnn cncr Floor Plans & Elevations Rear Elevation Right Elevation SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC ,..,� 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATION`. Provence I Floor Plans & Elevations PJN 3A FLAN IA FLAN2A PLAN2P PUN IB FLAN 38 SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC sa.aex. in.9a�n PI`l+Il', k4 P/,v YN P )�I P! N" -I*"IP RA"a WaNQ TYPE T-B (ONITRUMON 0-9 OCCQ XCY Plan L 1.81'2 V Pb 10 1.89> 9F Plan U 1.970 W, P" Y9 L995 5P PL u 21109 9T PL OB 2.099 9 3-STORY MWNHOMES: BUILDING PI.AN� A-2. 1 Floor Plans & Elevations Eta LJUU < e I, LEFT ELEVATION RI -AR LLL%xrioh I'Rn\T I Ill 1T In\ 3 STORY SIXPLEX ELEVATIONS: SYCAMORE HEIGHTS XITRII'IR I'.LF:4 A'fl\3 A-_ 3 Pacific Summit Foothill, I..LC' 10-00M%, . '. Floor Plans & Elevations P: 3A FLAN'A ;LAN2A FAN2F !� ME V-0 COYSRROCIIOR V-2 B-2 OCCUCCUpA,gCY PLn 2A 1.918 0 + 249 V CO)OmBCAL = 2.155 W Plw 1A 1.521 V + 219 �V COfOdR = 1.080 V Plan ?A l.iB2 " + 2+9 ST CO)0828 2.091 .ST ('lan a 1.995 SF + 23B aP COf mcR = 2.Oi9 eR 3-SFORY LIVE WORK TOW NHOMES. SYCAMORE HEIGHTS BUILDING pl nNS A-3. I Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC Floor Plans & Elevations I I = 1= Ell --al In ORR wiT.ro w YSTORY LIV&WORR TOWKHOMES: SYCAMORE HEIGHTS EXTERIOR Pi.FV n OOV2' Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC Name. MMW Parking Type Number of Development Code Required Parking Units Standard CoveredSpaces i " M""' Provided Parking Required Parking Two Bedroom Units 28 2.0 Spaces+Unit 28 58 56 1 in ar a or car rt Three Bedroom Units 119 2.0 Spaces/Unit 238 238 238 (2 in gar a or carport) Four Bedroom Units 2.5 SpacesJUnit 546 70 70 28 (2 in garage or carport) (includes 14 uncoverd Retail Parking = �1 1 space for each 250 square 0 9 9 feet of leasable area Guest Parkin 1 75 1 per 3 units 0 59 116 Enclosed Garage Spaces 322 Total Oirk!rg Spaces Required 432 Total Parking Spaces Provided On -Site 489 1 I�— Parking r F i Sewoew -\ r I �vffa a I a a• / /' CCC -i tC � msx: N / ,c L�f 'MONO �yY33fYWY __ LLL W lokiwllli [�IIIYII CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Variance DRC2016-00207 • Hillside Development criteria establish a 30-foot maximum building height for all structures located in the Hillside Overlay District. • The applicant is proposing a total of including 26 two-story tri-plex units up to height, and 18 three-story four-, five-, an maximum of 35 feet in height. 44 condominium units a maximum of 29 feet in d six-plex units up to a • Roughly half of the three-story units are located within the Hillside Overlay District and exceed the allowable maximum 30-foot building height. • The applicant submitted a Variance to exceed the 30-foot maximum building height. "•• CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Variance DRC201 MO207 • Hillside standards were established to regulate maximum height on slope conditions when developing SFR. • Not intended to regulate multi -family development in the Mixed Use District. • Proposed large flat building tiers • Proposed development will not be located on a slope condition. • Enforcement of the Hillside development standards will be inconsistent with the objectives of the Development Code. • Mixed Use District accommodates a variety of uses, and was never intended to apply to properties in hillside conditions. • The intent of the Hillside Development criteria was to address the development natural slopes, here, we have a 24-acre fractured site surrounded by developed land. • The project site has been so altered by surrounding development, is not a natural slope, is outside the intent of the Hillside Development requirements of the Development Code, and is so unique that there are no other Mixed Use District slope conditions within the City. Tree Removal Permit DRC2012-00673 • The Arborist Report evaluated 198 trees on site. 64 meet Development Code criteria for Heritage Trees. Of those 64, 18 are recommended for preservation. • The 180 trees not identified as suitable for preservation are considered over -mature, have poor growth character, have advanced decay, some are dead or are in poor general health; many of these trees have further declined in health due to the prolonged effects of the drought. Additionally, several trees, although in good health, their location conflicts with proposed improvements and the applicant proposes to remove these trees. • Tree preservation priorities that should be considered include: 1) preserve -in -place healthy trees, 2) if trees cannot be preserved in place, then transplant elsewhere on -site, and as a last resort, 3) remove and replace with largest nursery grown stock available. Tree Removal Permit DRC2012=00673 • The remaining 18 trees that meet Heritage Tree criteria are recommended for preservation due to their location, mature form, good growth character, and vigorous health; these trees are principally located north of the Sycamore Inn restaurant. • Two of the trees proposed for removal are Coast Live Oak trees of "mature form and character, good vigor" (Arborist Report, Trees No. 76 and 175) and their location conflicts with proposed improvements. Conditions of approval require the trees to be either transplanted elsewhere on -site or removed and replaced with the largest nursery grown stock available. Landscape Plan Neighborhood Meetings • Three Neighborhood Meetings have been held to discuss the project. o May 9, 2016 o February 1, 2017 o August 17, 2017 • The first two meetings are discussed in the staff report. • The third meeting was conducted after the staff report was completed. Environmental Review • Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, City staff prepared an Initial Study (IS) of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that IS, City staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to aesthetics, agricultural resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, noise, and tribal cultural resources 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 (MND) was prepared and was circulated on July 3, 2017. Environmental Review • A comment letter was received from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) on July 27, 2017 in response to the circulated IS/MND. The only comment CDFW had was in relation to the possible Jurisdictional Waters on the project site. The applicant and their biologists prepared a Jurisdictional Delineation to address CDFW's comments. The Jurisdictional Delineation determined that jurisdictional waters were not present on the project site, but recommended compliance with the CDFW recommended mitigation measure prior to issuance of any grading permit. The Biological Resources section of the IS/MND, was revised to include a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to provide proof to the City that the Streambed Alteration Agreement (1602 Agreement) process has been concluded. Environmental Review • According to CEQA Section 15073.5(a), recirculation of a negative declaration is required prior to its adoption when it has been substantially revised after public notice of its availability has been given pursuant to Section 15072. • The IS/MND was revised to include a discussion of the Jurisdictional Delineation for the project site and a mitigation measure requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement was added to the MND and the project conditions of approval. The addition of a condition of approval requiring a Streambed Alteration Agreement is not considered substantial evidence in light of the whole record that cannot be mitigated. Therefore, the Streambed Alteration Agreement mitigation measure is not a substantial revision to the MND, and recirculation of the MND is not required. ''•• CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Revised Conditions of Approval Conditions of Approval ('�:."..�: .. C^rruef D^rwPrruMwrru Pr.'al. SUBTTIIitiO'M. DRC2012-0 V 0RC2010L 207 xv DRC_V12{0ETe ROPct Wme BKxfb[MNDIt6 ltt]mn APN 0M2-101 I), 12. 24 25, If if. ]m 41 V40.V1 t 12-09 10 Plge[I i( TlnOIr TfYl Mx, Ct r,R±vN `. ]rixICo An] T•�Ren,Iit <rr11X ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPL ✓ TO YOUR PROJECT- PI]nn1n0 Dlpa lnl lwar anrrmwrf 1pu,rCaWww I fiprOVY s la me M,DEMf%n d 2l.fb ores nm cplrzda aM M tlM aN<gp11Mt DI 175 a00GM0 Lvbmlmum AM n bb WMO UM 'WI Dever bcalM GI LI r MR d F."'. Bb]l MMeen RW HP CG Cn prrtmPx EML1rK TMq RMNaL&M Pg aO w uftm %m. n PR vr(pety 01 PW LMM•elf I,ni3 b Rtw. .X. put', 5 ]vyL'IOM ka [GIMINLY116e4. l PrOype a pNeSlnin camtcNr. n Pre P]Mc EIHMc Irv' )trp TP <as1 srpe Gee Dro1eG she fM 110 olYu Pp San HxlraOap Uxyfl TranSpOnMGl Avfl4Af rSBCif1 h0xre bLnpO1 L-<Wxapvp aOpYRnt t0 Te pgecl pemreser rfYl b IM Wnna2Y d Ile $y[aIIIGIW Fa sbpe Dzmsrq uMn d Ptf errfWj r<fben<es ]Ipq 1M prgefYs roll tbinCx/ MMe a uee fpfc¢5 ]rU SWC:Iq Pr3 Drofec[f M ve<r5 OI NnlMfell Mfp rXXN d Pre pglLt Sle SMgwe cw V eenr a <gr<r,t E Fm ]N r<1'lMn1 0n2t0menl gOnOe cbpwY Ircp e]:11 utnhY xt0 ] WI Wv C , o Xp .beef . 51 61 1. 1M WvnrD for u. nows@mweaq , p mm1. Calegor( -W@ Wire R)Up Glape dfWrS1 Lad! .Tp a [mbal b51[8N4T pgel ptel t0 rp— d GLbpatl[y rllpn-DtM Outln9 FT.Br Ndrt i tw wbltnM la P.Jn.M DKYgWtl llE BnYIIV OIOLOI revleW vO Npprwal P. ro Iszuann d Bwtlfp Permas ' Ae ft.'g M.as lore wor. Mp attMe w uearmmt ON]tmD ]tq ntlea.ea cemelNm d wNct v<]OeenL iuuleLl M Platnnq LYpi!vnm[ Levtew fY0 apgpvd pun b eSYpnF OI B.XUM Petmus B. m Naf apDYRN�arW)S, 4Khpnq ] .Adlner. aM Jbc: !W :Matletl BptpIMIK ]MIN prOkRYIi .M1YI M iLfllne0 fLOn1 tN SJEs xa Te 5[MO I'M M NA¢M1tl Vpn ptgeLlrs an0 .[tens 5ucn su[emy 5rr]a Ce s[INecwt]I:r regr'M`a Wtel ntE Wbny aspn aM epKnn['R] 10 5M 5]ISIXP'Jt d CIE PLYMLLrv] Db.WPlent Mi IWnCrp/I=a rML1pl@Lal Bbwpll m NOId Uw[btef.. NN WWIM Y2tytayy rtrG< N.N 16nNei ICON! JI< IW G IM WM(MI. 5N1 OF e[/PtlW nt Y ]I[bX(LraXy 0lYF'RO !nf]lfV[ fK]I f,lin[S a mY.MW naNIP WY P4 Dltm a i, aM .5 OEW. LOrIL@ICM WNn me WggflD >ny tppf4nWnVN t11K!15rYpl <OlrpmELrt xGG 0Y[teGl 'NI p+ L5s r@!n[]ay whf Otan II nLLrIS aWYe VF S 9Rw G r001 pb]pP! )1 M WInNO fOnSlStEn[ Wtln V! OI COr LIIMI! d MI)N .TE UNgf1Q fYL1115 fM naupnt m Wnng pant F10le.te i:.6'T sSEC'Sa1. DR�u12�BT2.ORC201v,-0020` aM f#iC.Y1X2A0d]3 Pmtecl Name Sg.iI, H." LOL APW 0 7-101-1]. I7,:4,25 11 M MIt W OM? 11240] 1D RRtTry Tv,Ww TIYt My[r<apn Renr< tWn* z Tree RemuvY wnlnrl ALL OFTHEFOLLOWING CONO NSAPPLY TO YOURPROJECT: Eno mb Serv¢e3 D[yallmMi II rl YNI ra �Yve Wers `e4NrM+nY ro v@1. [ MS FIRM Z. A JeyPrifprr rImOKG imm e p(ye[I YC) R.0 ce.HvY, .]II q@MF ba@opror pbgO golev'1XM MLpaf SYIA(mnl I. d.YN N Lrrir.]OeC -a' Oeirp o] T11 9lvek0Mf MprMn 4bY pBpY@ ]U rl@R88)h r8pp'S. p]M nprobD•CTyb]uIK cLL.Ir l COn .. LMK d MV RII. ICLOMRI MIS A renDir&1 pw !0 .2 N p 45 i LeMF N MV RC.IS li(H ) sNlr M r4yMp ny FEWI pl0r tllyeWplrf MQlrli 0lIGe CdnKtllrj N0 [n[ latlMN 9drn G]vl In R< F.IYrI BdrbaM4 tMm dY/]V f plrinanlM fMm1 Or]n 6]YnWI 4NF C< pxWJ b [II< ::tlY br 1. W!iK SIOrm Ma'n m!f arbin M O<r<Vptr1 pWerry pd b X[epWlCe d Ia .ngrs.emanb 4 ;n aplllNWe upIXM b Cmslucbq 11Y Wrnl ,k]n Ire aM aecullrl0 e]SInMrIH wllnul Te Ulerebp& s pbXRl. ]I .li Sd! pill Ntl ery<M< 'S! aheCQlr INY rntnbJY dN]m ) pllDllWr <]fMIMI PlGgll 1M pODIR( 10L]f1il ]I C)IBf WllYI BW IIr]M iByf]IMYe Nnr Id 3ULn ]IOIm Dr]n INM sroua me )a rel@Dx rwl Alban rrocessarr eaMmp+ prnr n [ro Mn9 d me m o ]I map w1n nle trry mrf an<mavr< OpIYXI s1Uf e rqJ erne el! ceEegx uM CdrSVIYI nNl zAllm wan I. • zaypwa I'. A SMrrN PI.SMI lW wan - Iqm Iu pn altlr0 brm n! YO LxrOfca YM LMnIX.1 DHbK4 ✓.al Gn eMC bfJl 'J! Er✓JIIMIND $MVCM DIpYNMz pqr M Iny map apgML 01 IlewM[< T BuriQrD >Fmb •MY[nNN OCLWS NT igbOOplr COMS ffy CP M'Ire w/ PR be.ebnr 15 TI W W Muw C00¢ SKOMI 16 Ji 010 re W. 5NI m9Le COIIne 1 bpn a 5[urte W w d p , n my WXDmp d svuun «ucn n repfaceP b, rs[nnual (OBeX am w Wnrm ] P!IW r. NDrWrGf IXue.f n amnm a xv aM ere drar Lois rlb,ibp+s ara uulun<e5 ]Y KpNNnIINS redle8] M 1. NMblri d ClvlbpnrPnl ]ppOYy Nre Men COeWe1M dq aLcepp p/ Pre cM CpnLw e.Lepp bLat n aevwlvnNrre cmn+wW mGe true ere tu+Ovq swCbpe q IK N< ONebpmM may nave a 21 <0mechvn maUe n nlwl gvWrtgn t0 P1e WI.MN d (bre*a W a rmprw@mpin Ie w br V. Nnww. d aev@bgtrar: W.. x beutmneo y Ne CAN' Enpbred ppvbeo bul lc] VN 3lM ana mantvnane attes tp VA We , .. n ro m .. INn w0,%pML d 1n< tWGyf zvucurts a latlls M [mM[tE W magv zbtQ. put b mmpklm ,trb aittparrCe d ali ngruvememz TAneO b/ P.l.e ¢NMIpH IX OevpOpmGr: 3ppraY Recommendation • Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: • Recommend that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project; and • Adopt the attached Resolution recommending that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment DRC2016-00206; and • Adopt the attached Resolutions approving Tentative Tract Map Modification SUBTT16605M, Design Review DRC2012-00672, Variance DRC2016-00207, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2012- 00673 contingent upon the City Council adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of the General Plan Amendment. Average Daily Trips in a 24 Hour Day (ADT) Walmart T Neighborhood Market VNSR� RED HILL G� Future Signal & Alignment of Red Hill r oar ............. c� U a m D San Bernardvio Rd < m ADT - 22,000 Ctdj CLUB DR Project ADT — 1,042 ADT - 23,000 Casa volante Mobile Home Park ADT - 25,000 DY b 7 Conditions of Approval RANCHO CUCAMONGA Community Development Department Project#: SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Planning Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 1. Approval is for the subdivision of 24.19 acres into 6 parcels and for the development of 175 attached condominium units in the Mixed Use (MU) District located on the north side of Foothill Boulevard, between Red Hill Country Club Drive and Pacific Electric Trail Right -of -Way 2. Provide additional parking spaces in the vicinity of the Live/Work units to ensure adequate parking is available for commercial uses. _� 3. Provide a pedestrian connection to the Pacific Electric Trail along the east side of the project site, ��' subject to approval by the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). 4. Provide additional landscaping adjacent to the project perimeter wall to the northwest of the Sycamore Inn. 5. For slope planting south of the existing residences along the project's north boundary utilize a tree species and spacing that protects the views of homeowners living north of the project site. Standard Conditions of Approval 6. For all residential development, provide conduit from each unit/lot and a pull box to connect to the street. Provide interior structured wiring for each house/building with minimum Category 5 copper wire, Radio Grade 6 coaxial cable, and a central distribution panel, prior to release of occupancy (fiber -to -the building, FTTB). Plans shall be submitted for Planning Department and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 7. All dwellings shall have the front, side and rear elevations upgraded with architectural treatment, detailing and increased delineation of surface treatment subject to Planning Department review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 8. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections shall be screened from all sides and the sound shall be buffered from adjacent properties and streets. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the Planning Department. Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically more than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet, shall be screened by an architecturally designed enclosure which exhibits a permanent nature with the building design and is detailed consistent with the building. Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment and/or ductwork, that projects vertically less than 18 inches above the roof or roof parapet shall be painted consistent with the color scheme of the building. Details shall be included in building plans. Printed: 8/23/2017 W .CllyoiRC.us -D3- 7 Project#: SUBTT16605M, DRC2012-00672, DRC2016-00207, and DRC2012-00673 Project Name: Sycamore Heights Location: APN: 0207-101-13, 17, 24, 25, 31, 34, and 41 and 0207-112-09 and 10 Project Type: Tentative Tract Map, Design Review, Variance, and Tree Removal Permit ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT: Engineering Services Department Please be advised of the following Special Conditions 13.It shall be the developer's responsibility to have the current FIRM Zone A designation removed from the project area. The developer shall provide drainage/or flood protection facilities sufficient to obtain an unshaded "X" designation. The developer's engineer shall prepare all necessary reports, plans, hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. A Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) shall be required prior to grading permits. A Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) shall be issued by FEMA prior to certificate of occupancy. 14. Master Plan Storm Drain Line III-1 shall be constructed and aligned so that it remains within the j/ developer's property before connecting into the existing storm drain in the Foothill Boulevard right-of-way. A permanent storm drain easement shall be granted to the City for the public storm drain lines within the developer's property prior to acceptance of the improvements. As an alternative option to constructing the storm drain line and securing easements within the developer's property, at its sole cost and expense, the developer may voluntarily obtain a perpetual easement through the property located at 8318 Foothill Boulevard (Sycamore Inn) for such storm drain lines. Should the developer not obtain the necessary easement prior to the filing of the final map with the City, this alternative option shall be void and the developer shall construct the storm drain lines exclusively within the developer's property. Standard Conditions of Approval 15. 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. 16. 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. w .CityofRC.us Printed: 8/23/2017 Page 10 of 20 SYCAMORE HEIGHTS PACIFIC SUMMIT FOOTHILL, LLC City of Rancho Cucamonga August 23, 2017 Project Team • Land Planner — TRG Land, Inc. • Civil Engineer — David Evans and Associates, Inc. • Landscape Architect - David Evans and Associates, Inc. • Architect — Lim Chang Rohling & Associates *Geologist— Langan Engineering & Environmental Services • Traffic Engineers - Linscott, Law & Greenspan Planning Objectives for Sycamore Heights • Work within the existing General Plan, Zoning, and physical planning parameters that came with the Property. • Create a community that meets the demand of the current Market for Multi -Family buyers. • Focus on the project edges and ensure that the views are owned by all who live in the community. • Provide a separate and distinct entry for the Community. • Elevate the Historical elements that make this area so special. • Create a walkable community including work live units. • Provide more parking than the current standards. • Locate multiple recreation opportunities onsite for the enjoyment of the residents. Regional Aerial w Pacific Summit Foothill, tic Site Aerial �7� OAVI 4 EN4 URI $ I EWIS INC VNGAV ENGpiEERING6ENVIRONMENiACSERNCES Sycamore Heights li4CN GRWLI GA WIAWS Pacific Summit Foothill, LLc Site Plan Illustrative �'OE�/v�. :uVN EVANS X'&f 111 AT!„ Nl: ktMiid. .ANC.ANENGINEERINO&ENVAONMENl4SE�S Sycamore Heights WCU RpLiNG 6 ASSOCIATES REC. CTR ADJACENTT00.5. ROAD AGAINST EDGE BEAR GULCH E.V.A. ONLY - COMMUNITY -WIDE /PEPE5TFJAN5Y5TEM LAN05CAPE 0.5. FEATURE BUFFER m .sue oxrvc CAL.E CAHAOE .r THROUGHOUT r.,. SS E ] tr d COMPONENTS 5YCAMOREINN UN1T551DE ON 10 THROUGHOUT E. FOOTHILL BLVD. �� ....,.�., / � 3 PACIFIC ELECTRIC BIKE TRAIL Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC Features Diagram AtTea oAho tvarvsAno,Assocures. inc. land,.Sycamore Heights uM CH R ING&ASSOCIATES Plan Comparison • 206 D.U. • 21.3 AC. - • 9.7 D.U./AC. ADDITIONAL 30 D.U. PREY OUS PLAN • 175 D.U. T. • 24.3 AC. • 7.2 D.U./AC. CURRENT PLAN F _ - Neighborhood Enlargement 1 REC.CENTER VA ONtY -PROPOSED ROADAND OPEN SPACE AGAINST 5TCAMOREu Ril {4 I i q/To Neighborhood Enlargement 2 OPEN SPACE FEATURE \ M5E WALL MAX EIGHT 30' LANDSCAPED ` MANUFACTUREDEDGE ,. ROAD AND PPOF05ED OPEN SPACE v 1 AGAIN5T5YCAMOREINN PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ALONG EDGE N a w ,w Neighborhood Enlargement 3 'ae__I PARKIN AB VE ANDA D ��.. � OPEN SPACE RIAN COURTYARD FEATURE J �., A •r ,.. E.Y.A./T IL ; r- - r: >' Neighborhood Enlargement 4 l PARKING A50VE STANDARD / Al"No lw1 ' �..= r' A./TRAIL Y �Y _R�J:_ - - TOT LOT / OPEN 5PACI PEDESTRIAN ACCE55 ALONG EDGE LANDSCAPED MANUFACTURED SLOPE MEANDERING TRAIL ALONG FOOTHILL BOULEVARD Bear Gulch Elevation ROAD @1267 MUUF. SLOPE I I MTUUL 1� Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC I& UANDEVNI9 ANU�69E01.4I'::. W Wl6Al1 fENNP�MYE�.it iLR✓iCES �N LNNIG NOeWNG 6A65YLul{5 Section A Sycamore Heights PL 6'TUBULAR STEELFENCE 3-5TORYTOWNK005E PRODUCT V yy f 57RET. WALLS _Eta }}jj77 NIS NATURAL MANUF. SLOFE PROPOSED PROPOSED ROADP1314 RES. @1315 EXISTING RE5,01370 f Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC Section B G OAVIOEMAN YSDASsofuTES. INc. Sycamore Heights -Ta�}na LMiGM1 E„ENGI NEERING 6 ENVINCNME„TA SERVICES TAU CNANG ROWING B ASSOCIATES 3•5TORYTOWNHOUSEPRODUCT 46"SECURITY �7 O1�r: D FENCE ,r e 1 T 11' PROPOSED PROPOSED PROPOSED lid 05 01315 ROAD@1276 PES01277 MANUF. SLOPE MANUF. SLOPE 30ASEWALL Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC Section C DAVID EVANS AND ASSOGIATES.,NC. Sycamore Heights �11ZG CillCi . LANGAN ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LIM CNANG ROWING &ASSOCIATES SWALE PL V OLOCK WALL WITH PLEXIGLA55 g WALL 4 RET. _. ° A P P WALL MEANDERING D T WALK PROP05EDRE5@1277 MANUF. FOOTHILL SLOPE 15LVD.®1250 PA5E0 MEANDERING (MIK15) TRAIL Pacific Summit Foothill.. LLC Section] D ,& ICDAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES. INC. Sycamore Heights 1an(J- LANGAN ENGINEERING & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES LIM CHANG ROHLING &ASSOCIATES Sample Section 18T 1420 - 1380 5iyhtline—__--_--- 1360 - _ _ _- 1340 1320 1300k/fL(ISTING PROPOSED GRADE 1280 RADE 1260 PROPOSED PROPOSED BLDG ROAD EL. 1320' 25' TO SLOPE 6' • RETAINING WALL 2:1 MANUFACTURED I 1420 - 1380 1360 1340 -1320 13W 1280 EXBISTINGLDG 1260 EL.1373' TRACT • LOCATION OF BLDG, IN PREVIOUSLY BOUNDARY APPROVED PLAN CLOSEST TO P. L Proposed Trail Connection PACIFIC ELECTRIC COMMUNITY OUTREACH 1st PSF Plan • June 2012 — Meet with interested neighbors • October 2012 — Meet with interested neighbors • April 2013 — Present 1st PSF Plan to Red Hill condo owners Revised (Current) PSF Plan • March 2015 — Meet with interested neighbors to discuss revised plan • May 2016 — Community Meeting @ Sycamore Inn (current plan) • Feb 2017 — Community Meeting @ Sycamore Inn with staff (current plan) • Aug 2017 — Community Meeting @ Lions Center (current plan) Questions and Answers 9 �p �� •'r �.i y. k � ° , A"I s R � tt "xt 77 try i``fi. �hY..1'�k�� APPENDIX Previous Plan (2006 T-7 cm CUF. Current Designations MIXED USE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MIXED USE ZONING h .o s.l. 4. `�•'. �•�. }s ] a 5 yam' `� z 1. i 1 �/ Walls flop A.��, �,� h♦ �.7"5� ciirry't 5•yi .�. �yf #•R .. �, � r: a A c a •mil ��yf - _._ �{J IU y `� M Rear Glcvation Kignt tsicvation _ 2-STORY TRIPLEX L"LE1'ATI01S: SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Santa Barbara r1-1.5 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC lrvauw:eM1Yni .11V:!�F PLIN 2 PLIN 3 7 111F— 3* 7.4 LU= Ll -a -A J /1' Ell lip 7� x 01.3 PLUN 11 j I'LLN 2 PL%.x 31 I q - - ----------------- I --------------- ti. TYPE V-0 CoNbITUMON H-2 occul'AlUly P. 1 pt 2 1.540 $F plyn 3 1,701 sr jowl 4.537 SF Lor conam 3.520 SF 2- STORY TRI-PLEX: BUILDING PLANS SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC IS. "16 I Front Elevation 2-STORYTRIPLEX ELEVATIONS: SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Stuua Barbara A-1.4 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC ( 1 �TiT�Y I?• VIIU 1N.11\Y Repn:/.i�.L �1)•�illlSL�♦ l�+ •` Y^..>'dth. Pam'.. . SGS•••'.L. ✓'••'.ti l - ti.Y •P Kf Front Elevation -, _ _.. :. ._ Left Elevation SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC wR.4. iaroin 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELEVATIONS: Provence A-1.6 r� uvet�o� vo�r� as. on......-,s..vc-. Rear Elevation - - .- Right Elevation, SYCAMOREHEIGHTS Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC tioc�o 11, 036 Y 2-STORY TRIPLEX ELENIATIONS: Provence A-1.7 INIII.•L[VY l{�I\11A`)� ............. .... ...... ....... -Au V > -------- . ..... PLAN 3A PLAN I A PLAN2A PLAM28 PLAN 18 PLAN 33 C 3 11� " — \, A 7 71 71 71 71 F1 V71 C a♦ A R PLAN13A PLAN I IAN 2A PLAN' PLAN�18 PLAW38 �s Ma I A z IFS Tyrr V-D ro,\wRUCTIO\1 M-2 OCCUPAXCY r . IA 1.672 SF P:.. In 1.607 sy M� 2A 1.076 SF P:.n 211 1.995 SF Pon 3.1 2.108 sr Plan 38 Z.Ow sr SYCAMORE HEIGHTS 3-STORY TOWNHOMES: BUILDING PLANS A-2.1 Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC .. I ETI 1 4 L : SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC ...... - ---- ----- 3-STORYTOWNHOMES: UNIT PLANS A-2.2 1, 1 L tZ "I 1, I I A S^r1�^.,��,�C ,� �',jI ��{•� _ rs 11113333JJJJ 1Iii'�] f r� d ,ati gL it' RIGFIT FUNATION RF1R ELIi ATION 13 fir ROD Il'� Lfit' LE17 ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION 3-STORY SIXPLLX UFVATIONS: F.XTF.RIOR ELEVATIONS SYCAMORE HEIGHTSp-,,; Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC IkIZ'\I PLAN 3A PLAN. I A PLAN 2A PLAN 28 SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC -Va.16a i9. 2W PLAN',3A PLANJA PIlAN2A PLAN26 177 t7' LCOR\D: TYPE V-31 CONgUATl[ON K-2 OCCUPAM"V Plan 3A 1.018 SF • ;:.10 SF COAl1ERCIAL = z.100 SF Plan IA 1.531 SF + 210 SP COMMERCM a 1.700 SF Plnn 2.t 1.m SF i 210 SF COMMEUM = 2.031 SF Mn 20 1.700 Sr - 249 SP COSIMMIAL a 2.00 Sr 3-STORY LIVEAVORR TO\VNIIONLES: BUILDING PLANS .d e SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC �'JIIJ{1}jL"'j,¶�� ,� j !Y • FJ�R-4 � � �1(. {�9ypl 9j`�{"� ` 3-STORY LIVEAIVORK TOWN11omm EXTERIOR ELEVATION'S A-3.2 F. F. LEFT ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION SYCAMORE HEIGHTS Pacific Summit Foothill, LLC J. 21. 2015 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS JA (NA\G RUOI.M id A S,'Aj — - - -- ,i AW CLUB DRIVE 1R� EVA o �. ONLv . RED NILL - - b l HISTORIC RTE 66 Pacific Summit Foothill, ttc Grove Avenue Aerial �yV DA"DEVRNSANOASSOCIATES. INC -la' LANGPN ENGINEERING 6 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Sycamore Heights LIM CW ROHLING B ASSOCIATES +IONAL 5 PHASE \ INO-WAY 3 PHASE E SGNAI �.STOP �� SICHAI GROVE AVE O RED Hill COUNTRY CLUB OR O CARNEUAN ST O SIN BERNARDINO RD O 8 P FOOTHILL BLVD FOOTHILL BLVD RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DR FOOTHILL BLw NP O m R i e ryy1 R an C N 8 Hr4 Cp3N na -p zz zz i v g NAY CLUB DR RED HILL L _ NP BLVD OO NP O r .. ::'� •/i E0�\y ' J\o •�NP•J'• Sp �g BERNARDINO RD Q STya 35 NP NP 45 a �x n= m D l KEY .- - APPROACH LANE ASSIGNMENT FIGURE 3-1 • - TRAFFIC SIGNAL P - PARKING. NP - NO PARKING N NO SCALE U - UNDIVIDED. D - OWED 2 - NUMBER OF TRAVEL LANES EXISTING ROADWAY CONDITIONS (Kx)- POSTED SPEED UMIT (MPH) AND INTERSECTION CONTROLS :]- PROJECT SITE SYCAMORE HEIGHTS, RANCHO CUCAMONGA KEY PROJECT SITE FIGURE 3-2 � r PRO (tNO SCALE `.� EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES SYCAMORE HEIGHTS, RANCHO CUCAMONGA o.--. o.�-, ® 4 994 \ / ggZ \ I 93ti 1 ` i `' 174 1 cs 1\ 1 Ji 1198'_ 1092 GROVE ST 0 RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DR 0 CARNELIAN ST a SAN BERNARD"O RO 0 FOOTHILL BLVD FOOTHILL BLVD RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DR FOOTHILL BLVD ,p 3 & 8 R N�y1 CLUB OR +pgj RED MIL GL_ O _ .- _ - - - _ _ _ _ BLVD P J / BERNARDINO RO 4 SPN Y m . �NO KEY F- - PROJECT SITE FIGURE 3-3 SCALE EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES SYCAMORE HEIGHTS, RANCHO CUCAMONGA I_ APPROACH LANE ASSIGNMENT FIGURE 8-1 n �;�. • . TRAMC SIGNAL ANED3PRN NO SCALE P PLANNED e PROJECT SITE YEAR 2035 BUILDOUT PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS SYCAMORE HEIGHTS, RANCHO CUCAMONGA O/ \ i � TWO --WAY STOP # RED HILL COUNTRY CLUB DR O FOOTHILL BLVD 3 ,p R 0 o � '1'Fo G o IIy h�k C�K�IY �I �N�yY CLUB DR g C --L RED HILL - _ _ — _ — — BLVD Ol O BERNAROINO RO 4 O KEY NOTE - APPROACH LANE ASSIGNMENT IAI INSTALL SIGNAGE TO RESTRICT FIGURE 8-2 • TRAFFIC SIGNAL NORTHBOUND AND SOUTHSOUND — - EXISTING WITH PROJECT LEFT -TURN AND THROUGH N NO SCALE RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS MOVEMENTS KERIODS. THE AM AND EXISTING WITH PROJECT =- PROJECT SITE RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS SYCAMORE HEIGHTS, RANCHO CUCAMONGA rim KEY- - APPROACH LANE ASSIGNMENT • - TRAFFIC SIGNAL N - YEAR 2018 VATH PROJECT NO SCALE RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT SITE _------------ --- -_-NOTE. (A] INSTALL SIGNAGE TO RESTRICT NORTHBOUND AND SOUTHBOUNO LEFT -TURN AND THROUGH MOVEMENTS DURING THE AM AND PM PEAK PERIODS_ FIGURE 8-3 YEAR 2018 WITH PROJECT RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS SYCAMORE HEIGHTS, RANCHO CUCAMONGA 4 \\ 5 PHASE SIGNAL SAN BERNARONO RD O FOOTHILL BLOD 3 m c gg HAS COUNTRY fi CEO BLVD 1 BERNAR04NO RD 5PN 4 a a w Y _ t m KEY . APPROACH LANE ASSIGNMENT • . TRAFFIC SIGNAL FIGURE 8-4 ~ - YWENOILDOUTEPROJECT SCALE RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT SITE YEAR 2035 RECOMMENDED SYCAMORE BUILDOUT WITH PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS HEIGHTS. RANCHO CUCAMONGA "S"", ` tr. v O—� � - _ -_ SrCLMOHE HEIGnr£. MHCno CUC.QIOHG. eua^rtcow a mc:a;zms�a r11EE wnvE. cwm r ��nnnvvv Ij I __m �J i Y -ru— syc0OP£NEIGMTS, RpNCMO LUCAM..u. iNkE 81NrvE7 ElniOrt FA81 SITE UTILIZATION PLAN W \ 1 ;�._4-ra ,r/f w(i�. �/ Y^�\ ',•. '�8 t� ` iLF //////�� R �F, �•�t N '��C� rJ �L (a 11, ' A! ar V Y �/ \. �T � � �.% � .• Y�r � �l . �`7T �fu Nz � tat �:la 1 ��`yj� �� pn .;t✓t+.�� w, � �!('.Su �� ,r y, � ya� Oq.F WjrIIFBE_ `S ^"12~ M. � L` � d"" - . �a � M +.., . ••3%Y�, �� >r„4�• � r •� !• � sa '® r �yy�'�t qL�$��V J�Y�i ^ ✓ `aL�i•5> ��I•��i Ry' ! �� ^�: ��q♦„j11F" - N. iA P FF •}�Y 2 �?� M '. .V.ry `^ li � ,�L f f (. y � !F L 1 �':., ✓ { 11• � � ur V� �!".. � ./ T—�%'y�f'L�^ /�yF ' ` �/t'\�\ 29) 191 41, / ea, � � a -B' `'� /'Fl � t j �vy. })yY, - y9. / �.:-� ✓ q� . I �'1/\_ ti�0 +�'4� n✓'.M� r yS�ttiY � k�sS, ry Y >�rrE F� .D ` "% 'A ',� .s � i � 5+`. -) _�. "� J, i..�R � r`•a:.20(�Q7 aq '' i�'" �'�� /L'a�`y � er, ' / v-.,. / � t`'t� }�I. 1f y Y' ��' � �ltCdF .• +y. ? 'fi.(`� �" J :. V'^ SAN frMNA RIDII1�19OAD fl. ti y% f�F � �r�1� rY�r a � �f`...r..�... �� ri1�a 4• � ✓�'��R� �q WZ f e 7Fn� •� c� �`.p �i � , a"� ~w � �ili j1 � / '7✓4�"" _ �. �',"'�4€ t `� '"31 a`t i i 1 a 0 ,•Jr Y `�'i r t N 1 II � ^'suemeens DRC3412) 72 ti� t; �r uerur.o ra -U—OF—BEWIAROINO iACFCSWMI`OOMYLLLS G •..r:� � mv_ SRE NTILWTION GIM _ __ _ SYfAWGEMFI!dRfi vm. •S y � ,._. a.. w.wncuuitDNr.0 aviv.�wmv. iEINTRl1VETNFfNN W.IN6 U �I 1! SITE PLAN ymy�LtNY� H f Y�YTa-"_ •, I -� I . ,,��-Y � '_ _ Y ^me:µ 1�,Tr l r� tJ 1 OFZ dv ti t 6 f 3 5 v v\ \1 L r I �� I O I li. _ai �///•"`�,.�.\�� F.I�.I� E• .1 i % �\/ � t�� ,�rl Jr M1 .12 � ^"o � �\"�S ✓! ��d-rw• uwXlc« `� � I �`�-- __ _� -r,. o• r -' � fide e4 � 4, - j �� /�% .a<la ��. - ' ^ _... , tpI-a��ti�` .. ( (t��L�R�• i��rY_r, N� ��I ..yji : � It BRE BIA4ti,X. PA@'3A>PACE tTN51N11'• _ - _ ••• 4 �w--r--�—L� SVaTT1BEM I� �!t •GAl]JOrtR II .�.•.ar •. � n_ `_ COWRVtFBVIBiWN1✓OND PIOCtLLYfiCO11l�UG — r'._� BrtE PLW II bYW0.F 101C rt6 +.+. s. :..� PAhbOI]T�Vp�GG � I -----J �/ PARKING STUDY /" I < K e` Ic PARKING SPACE 9JMMARP LEC7EN6 MESH Y f OOTNl LL 8 . PACIFIC % MMT FOOTHILL LLC _ '%` F•- 1 I . I _. WNA OF SA BERNARDINO - BYCAMORE XEIGXTG RANCHO cllfltrA . CA TETNTATNE TRACT~NO. IMS rye er: FmAi NO. 16605 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP FOR CONI]OMINIUM PURPOSES COUNTY OF A N ERNARIN OF RANCHOO CITY CA CAMONC A, 11 � I �iY"ti•� � � L O T 3 I LOT 4 LOT AFER a1RA'drtFlT lA\N, 0 `C 4" •.`�\a ��-� ' ^•. .un _ E5. pfi —._..—'—=---J---------.1:-._—�__._...J`-- - _. �,• `'--- oT4* —tea _ — r:. 1 " ...�. x., 1. 1 .m ...�............_m.,w_.a 1 I ' .... simTT,wos D4CA,x-0OB)x :t rra.0 '""`a n.eowa. a L NTYCl SYY2EA ,%D TCrvTRTrvFTMCT EV•o,� YYJC5,:191i1WIK:L,:L - ___ __ _ ..�".. ._. CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN SYCAMORE HEIGHTS RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO.16605 a fN{ rs. ma )[w_n,✓"r"` F I � NCINfIY MAP INDEX MAP ...................,+,a.,�,.,am, 0 wk m.eE. E1FJL eaee��nwr -� 9VB1T16605 pRC2012-0OB)) a � SOILS ENGINEEP /GE9LpG15l FEVIEW m s ¢+ o.+rti aw.m:wn � COVN)Y OF 5qN 6EPNM0IN0 GGNGEPNAL GRADING PLANS yLAN �N m. vr,nw un+ � �VC.MOXEXEWML$ LHOGN VIAONG4.GA 1EH)PTYE �Ci FUP NO.IbCS CCi1 r,so-ax .vmw on ea<v n.we w.vnnsav v. - li''.0. ►� +♦ C N A RHIN1oM119 CUCAMO NG< GENERAL VIAN Previously located in Section 2. t .2 Gelogtc Hazards s�«ai.ea�,oxoox S�YBed M.ava Changed from: 'No development is permitted in these areas. unless all the following are satisfied. (i) the property is located south of Banyan Street: (ii) at least 75°6 of the lots or parcels that are subject of the development application are surrounded by lots or parcels improved with structures: and (ill) the proposed project is delerrnined to appropriately address slope stability and other geological factors of the site' NYa � lQeSpa�nEabm NmL ng4N m,IDa6 vM mr buAno. vwJ u• �noe w o. ova e'Tro 14b tlF�+N'-ua'�YW IMi�e�t'.ok'el+E�9'�ie�4am n� �� Yli4brw.yavl�glav� `tea nY4��R�F'�FaMCa�[Ulntl�.Yn•Nv�a :4iU Lt Figure PS4: Slopes nil CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN L 5 SW BI[RN0.RDLwD AD yi - � P DiT/- I. - U9CP' WATER OUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN T.v ?..� � dr.• � - � �.t i WV(91 PROWS Wp S: � BMi'MEP/.RGIIY MIMEMRY ��. ♦ ...ur• .a.rrr.r _. r-_- ��'- IEM m[IMGtp WH — .r - _�v..r..- •vw.�u'IxMM1v.V[Yx�r _ PERVIOUS AREA MAP POST -DEVELOPMENT CONDMON EF AREA SLUAAW :0 N Source: USGS Year: 1977 AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH ; 10 & 8462 F IXN) Bo.Lwd 0. .&. Cu a• CA 91739 FIGURES Job NO: 284253 1 t'AO Z: W � k Pf _ « '{ -mow• l Sub)ect Site ■ ..F,' t .. `c =. T H r a';. — — ` rr � �..^ � � � C• 7t alit 1 �Pit"'7 ll� �- 21to + -A1 or ,err:. >• t �' �s - AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH 8410 & 8462 F othfll Boulevard N Rancho Cuca a, CA 91739 Source: USGS FIGURES f',AEI Year: 1980 10 No: 284253 4; vt C%14 PA 72 771 Sightline From Calle Carabe Street FROM FOOTHILL APPROXIMATE A SIGHTLINE s• WALTON 874 N. IOth Ave. • Upland, California 91786 • (909)532-2023 • notlaw_l7@msn.com August 23, 2017 Planning Department c/o Thomas Grahn, Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department: I am a local wildlife biologist who is concerned about the loss of native California vegetative communities and open space in our foothill communities. Below I am providing some comments regarding the Sycamore Heights Project being proposed by the applicant Pacific Summit Foothill LLC. Overall, I am very disappointed to learn that the character of Red Hill will be changed dramatically from a relatively bucolic area to a more urbanized development due to this housing development. I drive by this project location most every day as I frequent Rancho Cucamonga businesses like the Coffee Klatch and I am reminded of the history associated with Route 66 and the Sycamore Inn. Ideally, I would rather see this project site purchased by Rancho Cucamonga and converted to a city park that can be managed to protect the integrity of the >30% slope hillside, as well as the remaining native wildlife and vegetation, like desert cottontails (Syvilagus audubonit) and white sage (Salvia apiana), that are rarely found in our sprawling urban environment. However, since the passage of this project seems inevitable, I am glad that the landscape designer is including native plants in the project design ad preserving a few of the native trees. I encourage the landscape designer to use more native plants and trees than non-native plants and trees on the project site. For example, in areas where low -growing trees/large shrubs are desired, I hope that the landscaping includes more native western redbuds (Cercis occidentalis) and Blue elderberries (Sambucus mexicana) than non-native Crape myrtles (Lagerstroema indica). I am also happy to hear that Rancho Cucamonga and the applicant will be considering ways to remove trees in a way to allow bat species, such as the red bat (Lasiurus blossevillit), to safely abandon trees that they are likely using as roosts in the project site's riparian area. I will be providing RC City soon with any information I can find in regards to removing trees in a more ecologically sensitive manner. I am also pleased to see that the City of Rancho Cucamonga is trying to minimize light pollution (Rancho Cucamonga Development Code, Article 1V, Section 17.58.050) and, thus, preserve the visual resource of a dark night sky. Please note that some new developments, like the lights on the new bathrooms at the new Route 66 Trailhead Park, are not shielded and, thus, provide undesirable night time glare towards drivers along Foothill Blvd. Therefore, please make sure that all lights in this new development are properly shielded. In addition to requiring shielded lighting, please ask the applicant to use "warm -white" or filtered LED light bulbs that minimize the glare, or blue -light emission, of such bulbs whenever possible. Please note that LED lights can be so bright that shielding them alone does not minimize the amount of glare they can emit. For more information on minimizing light pollution, please refer to "Lighting Plan Guidelines" (http://ibiclub.com/downloaddocs/Lights/DarkSkySocietyGuidelines.pdf) provided by the Dark Sky Society. Thank you for your time and consideration, and please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Natasha Walton, M.S. CONTINUANCE OF PUBLIC HEARING At its regular meeting held on August 23, 2017 the Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission continued the following item(s) to its meeting to be held on September 13, 2017. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2017-00619— DR HORTON —A request for a Development Agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and DR Horton for the purpose of providing vested development rights and establishing permit thresholds and development timelines related to the construction of a mixed use project consisting of 380 residential units, a 71 room hotel and two restaurant buildings totaling 12,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Base Line Road —APN: 1090-331-05. The City Council adopted a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for this project on July 19, 2017. The California Environmental Quality Act provides that no further environmental review of a previously adopted 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 review and action The meeting will be held at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at the Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Said continuance was passed by the following vote: Ayes: FLETCHER, OAXACA, WIMBERLY Noes: NONE Absent: MACIAS, MUNOZ Abstain: NONE Date: August 24, 2017 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING I, Lois J. Schrader, declare as follows: I am the Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; that at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on August 23, 2017, said public hearing was opened and continued to the time and place specified in the NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE shown above; and that on August 24, 2017, at the hour of 4:00 p.m., a copy of said notice was posted in a conspicuous place near the door in which said meeting was held. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on August 24, 2017, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. Lois . Schr Planning Commission Secretary