Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-08-13-Agenda Packet-PC-HPC THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WORKSHOP OF WNCHO CUCAMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 13, 2014 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center ***RAINS ROOM" 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California FF� L. CALL TO ORDER 71 • Roll Call Chairman Howdyshell_ Vice Chairman Fletcher_ Munoz_ Wimberly_ Oaxaca _ 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. I FF"� III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION A. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2014-00617-KAMRAN BENJI-A request to review a conceptual site plan for a 193 unit multi-family apartment project with a potential future retail component on a 7.55 acre site located at the northwest corner of Foothill O Boulevard and East Avenue.The design would require a General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment to change the zone classification from Community Commercial to Mixed Use; APN; 1100-201-07 �.1 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP AUGUST 13, 2014 Page 2 IV." 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 August 7,2014,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. 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." . 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 J HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION HJ WORKSHOP GA AUGUST 13, 2014 Page 3 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$2,486 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.CitvofRC.us VicinityMap Historic Preservation and Planning Commission Workshop August 13 , 2014 �..-..�� �..�..���..� L y' r-. I..J C 22 0 E A p m I f = 0 c D • 19St i I Base Line Base Line 7Ch urch Church 1 Foothill I Foothill N E y 1 Arrow `°ow Arrow �Vc o o c r�ey t 8th DC w 1 a S 6th w A 4th a _ 4th Meeting Location: City Hall/Council Chambers 10600 Civic Center Drly,% Item A: PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2014-00617 STAFF REPORT • PL kNNING DEPARTMENT DATE: August 13, 2014 RANCHO TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission C;UCAMONGA FROM: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager BY: Steve Fowler, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: PRE APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2014-00617— KAMRAN BENJI -A request to review a conceptual site plan for a 193-unit multi-family apartment project with a potential future retail component on a 7.55-acre site located at the northwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue. The design would require a General Plan Amendment and Development Code Amendment to change the zone classification from Community Commercial to Mixed Use—APN: 1100-201-07. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission provide input and direction to guide the applicant for a Mixed Use development proposal. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Vacant Land — Foothill Boulevard Overlay Community Commercial (CC) District South - Multi-Family Residential - Foothill Boulevard Overlay Medium (M) Residential • District East - Single-Family Residential —City of Fontana West - Southern California Edison Corridor- Foothill Boulevard Overlay Open Space B. General Plan Designations: Project Site - General Commercial North - General Commercial South - Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) East - City of Fontana West - Utility Corridor\Flood Control C. Site Characteristics: The project site is comprised of three parcels that make up a rectangular-shaped project area situated at the northwest corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue. The site is located on the alluvial plain at the base of the San Bernardino Mountains and in close proximity to the Etiwanda Creek in San Bernardino County. This site is currently vacant with a water facility operated by the Cucamonga Valley Water District near the northwest corner of the property and contains a diminished grove of Eucalyptus camaldulensis trees that were planted prior to 1938. The site is bordered by vacant land to the north; a utility corridor to the west; single-family homes to the east; and multi-family homes to the south. BACKGROUND: The project site was originally utilized as a grove for growing Eucalyptus camaldulensis trees dating • back to 1930. This grove has diminished over the years and currently contains approximately Item A-1 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT DRC2014-00617 — KAMRAN BENJI August 13, 2014 • Page 2 190 trees with approximately 123 of those trees being viable and subject to preservation requirements according to an arborist's report prepared by Geocon Consultants in February of 2009. It is believed that these trees were originally planted to make railroad ties. This grove has been identified in the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan with the intent to allow for partial preservation of the existing grove. On January 14, 2009, the Planning Commission at a Planning Commission workshop reviewed a 61,800 square foot commercial retail center proposed for a major portion of this site. At that workshop, the Commission provided guidance to the applicant on the commercial project and requested the applicant attempt to preserve as many trees along the perimeter as possible. The Commission also stated that they wanted the applicant to attempt to acquire the parcel to the east of his project area and master plan the parcel to the north so connectivity could be established in the future. On March 23, 2011, the Planning Commission approved the project. Shortly after the meeting the former owner of a strip of property to the east of the site appealed the project. The applicant has since purchased the property to the east and is now included in this application. Since the approval and subsequent appeal of the original project, the applicant has since decided to pursue a different direction given that there are multiple commercial vacancies within a mile of the project site. The applicant is proposing to construct a mixed use project and transit-oriented development (TOD) for this site which essentially serves as the City's easterly Gateway on the Foothill corridor. • A. General Plan: The General Plan identifies policies and goals to establish Mixed Use areas and higher intensity urban centers where there are convenient modes of transportation or future transit stops within identified areas and along identified corridors. Additionally these policies encourage the support of projects that are designed to facilitate access to multiple modes of transportation and reduce total vehicle miles traveled by automobiles. Within the Community Mobility element of the General Plan, a future Bus Rapid Transit expansion is identified along Foothill Boulevard. A transit stop has been generally identified at major intersections along Foothill Boulevard. Per the General Plan Transit Plan the closest stop to the project area is located at the Victoria Gardens Lifestyle Center. Staff received a Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) grant for the Compass Blueprint project and prepared an additional study of the future BRT route. That study was presented to the Planning Commission and City Council in 2013. The study identified Etiwanda Avenue and Foothill Boulevard as a proposed stop and conclude that East Avenue and Foothill Boulevard would not be a preferred stop because of the commercial zoning and lack of residential units. The proposed project will increase the residential units and potential ridership of future transit opportunities. Although this site is not identified as a proposed BRT stop at this time, it is at the Gateway of the easterly City limits and maybe considered for a BRT stop once the final route is defined. It is also a current stop for the existing bus system. Project sites within %4 to 'h mile of transit stops can be considered as TOD sites. The proposed projects is located within a % mile of the Etiwanda Avenue/Foothill Boulevard stop and would still be considered a TOD. Item A-2 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT DRC2014-00617- KAMRAN BENJI August 13, 2014 Page 3 The General Plan also identifies this corner as a major gateway which includes specific design goals and policies. Per the City's General Plan, a City gateway monument sign will be required to be installed at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue. B. Foothill Boulevard Design Standards: The project site is located within the Foothill Boulevard Specific Plan and Foothill Boulevard Visual Improvement Plan (VIP). These two documents provide unique design guidelines for this project. The project is located at the eastern gateway to the City of Rancho Cucamonga from the City of Fontana. The unique location requires the site to adhere to the requirements of the VIP. One such requirement is for the applicant to participate in installing curb adjacent sidewalks with integral accent colored concrete and double rows of brick banding starting near the comer of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue and traveling west approximately 105 feet. This area will contain a double alternating row of Crape Myrtle trees in grates. The applicant will provide funds to install an'arch that spans across Foothill Boulevard just west of the project site and also install the historically inspired post and cable along the north side of the street. Stamped asphalt will also be installed in the west bound lanes, as it has already been installed on the east bound lanes. Currently, a Route 66 monument sign is located in the center median. All projects in this vicinity will be required to provide the enhancements noted in the Visual Improvement Plan (VIP). C. Proiect Description and Design Parameters: • The applicant submitted a preliminary layout that proposes two-, three-, and four-story apartment buildings. An amenity will be a club house with a pool. The plan currently shows two units that could to be converted from livable units to commercial units near the comer of Foothill Boulevard and East Avenue. The convertible units are designed so the applicant retains flexibility while the BRT system is established or other public transportation systems become available. Although the plans do not indicate it, a bus stop is required along Foothill Boulevard on the north side of the street. The parking requirement for the residential portion of the development has been met but the retail parking standard has not been addressed. Future commercial uses would be geared toward neighborhood services and would be supported by the TOD development and adjacent residents as well as public transit riders once this is a transit stop. Therefore, minimal parking may be required to support the commercial uses. The proposed development will require several amendments. The zoning designation in both the General Plan and the Development Code will need to be amended to Mixed Use from Community Commercial to allow this type development. The Development Code currently does not have standards and guidelines to address Mixed Use/High Density/TOD developments. Code amendments are necessary to not only allow these developments but to encourage these projects within identified areas consistent with the General Plan. Height requirements, parking standards, densities, etc. need to be studied and developed to support these types of projects. For example building heights are currently limited to 20 feet within 50 feet of the curb face and 35 feet beyond that distance, which would not allow four-story structures. Further, the Development Code has specifications in Section 17.38.060-H-8 for the preservation • of the grove of trees on-site. The applicant would like to remove all the trees and plant a Item A-3 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP STAFF REPORT DRC2014-00617 —KAMRAN BENJI August 13, 2014 Page 4 different species on-site along with the option to donate some of the removed trees to a park in the area. He is making this proposal because of the high number of trees currently on-site (126) and the replacement trees required by the Development Code. The applicant is seeking input as to what the City would like to see at the location architecturally and the ratio of commercial uses to residential uses. Respectfully submitted, r Candyce Burnett Planning Manager CB:SF/Is Attachment: Conceptual Plans Item A-4 THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF PAN, HO CMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION AUGUST 13, 2014 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Council Chambers _10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California F= I. CALL TO ORDER OPledge of Allegiance Roll Call Chairman Howdyshell_ Vice Chairman Fletcher_ Munoz_ Wimberly_ Oaxaca_ 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. . ANNOUNCEMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS 0 HISTORIC 'PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA C AUGUST 13, 2014 `�' Page 2 _ IV. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION. �. COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION: A. Approval of minutes dated July 9, 2014 B. VACATION OF PORTIONS OF 25TH STREET, LOCATED WEST OF HAVEN AVENUE AND SOUTH OF ARROW ROUTE (V-224) - A request to vacate the south side of 25th Street, west of Haven Avenue and south of Arrow Route-APNs 209-104-02,-37. C. VACATION OF PORTIONS OF 24TH STREET, LOCATED WEST OF HAVEN AVENUE AND SOUTH OF ARROW ROUTE (V-225) - A request to vacate the north side of 24th Street, west of Haven Avenue and south of Arrow Route -APNs 209-122-19,-18 V:. :. PUBLIC I3EARINGS/PLANNINGCOMMISSIOW 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. D. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912 — MANNING HOMES-A review of a proposed 45-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres in the Medium (M)and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road;APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre-Application Review DRC2013-00545, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, Minor Exception DRC2014-00161, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083 — MANNING HOMES-A review of a proposal for 45 single-family residences in conjunction with a 45-lot subdivision of about 7.16 acres in the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue,at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road;APN: 1076- 181-01. Related files: Pre-Application Review DRC2013-00545, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912,Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887,Tree Removal Permit DRC2013- 00889, Minor Exception DRC2014-00161,and Development Code Amendment DRC2014- 00626. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA Cao AUGUST 13, 2014 Page 3 F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2013-00887— MANNING HOMES-A request to change the zoning designation of part of a property about 7.16 acres located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue,at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road from Low Medium (LM)Residential to Medium(M)Residential District in conjunction with a proposed 46 lot subdivision; APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre-Application Review DRC2013- 00545, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, Minor Exception DRC2014-00161, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. G. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00889—MANNING HOMES -A request to remove trees in conjunction with a proposed 45-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres in the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road;APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre Application Review DRC2013-00545, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013 00887, Development Review DRC2013-01083 Minor Exception DRC2014-00161, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. H. MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2014-00161 — MANNING HOMES - A request to allow the construction of interior property line and project perimeter walls that will exceed the maximum height limit of 6 feet (but not exceed 8 feet in height) due to grade differences between lots in conjunction with a proposed 45-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres in the Medium (M)and Low Medium (LM)Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road;APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre-Application Review DRC2013-00545, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912,Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2014- 00626 — MANNING HOMES - A request to amend the Development Code to incorporate development standards such as minimum lot dimensions, setbacks, lot coverage, etc. for single-family residential development within the Medium (M)Residential Districts. Related files: Pre-Application Review DRC2013-00545, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912,Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Development Review DRC2013-01083,Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA AUGUST 13, 2014 CION°'' Page 4 J. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION DRC2014-00678 - GAGGLES INC - A request to modify the floor plan and hours of operation to an existing Conditional Use Permit DRC2013-00519 at a restaurant with a full service bar and entertainment in the Neighborhood Commercial District, located at 6321 Haven Avenue;APN:020127206. This item is categorically exempt per Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines- Existing Facilities. EVI. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION K. INTER-AGENCY UPDATES L. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS F= VII. ADJOURNMENT THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL IMMEDIATELYADJOURN TOA WORKSHOP TO DISCUSS PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2014-00617 IN THE RAINS ROOM. 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 7,2014,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. oHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA �O AUGUST 13, 2014 GA Page 5 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$2,486 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 VicinityMap Historic Preservation and Planning Commission Meeting August 13 , 2014 ZZ W I w—. t `1 06 V _ je 00 = o 1 , 46— ;%S�S6!NE-E 0�f V I 1< o 1 C d o 19th St ti e Base Line Ni I Base Line 1 r Church 1 Church Foothill a Fo III N E � � I Arrow B 1° 1 Arnow cD C e mey 8th o°C w I J o � • a In ic 6th W 61 10 B � C 4th a _ 1 4th * Meeting Location: City Hall/Council Chambers 10500 Civic Center Drlyok Item A: Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes dated July 9, 2014 Items B & C: Vacation V-224 and Vacation V-225 Items D-I: SUBTT18912; DRC2013-01083; DRC2013-00887; DRC2013- 00889; DRC2014-00161; and DRC2014-00626 lc&mn I. r1QP"9n4 d-nnR7R r THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CR UCMONM THE MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 9, 2014 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Council Chambers 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER • Pledge of Allegiance 7:00 PM Roll Call Chairman Howdyshell X Vice Chairman Fletcher X Munoz X Wimberly X Oaxaca X Additional Staff Present: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager; Jeff Bloom, Deputy City Manager/Economic and Community Development,Steven Flower,Assistant CityAttorney,Steve Fowler,Assistant Planner,Betty Miller, Associate Engineer,Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary 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 rive 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 R m JULY 912014 CIJCAMONGA Page 2 III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION. A. Approval of minutes dated June 25, 2014 Moved by Wimberly, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 5-0 to adopt the Consent Calendar as presented. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION.COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/or posted 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. B. CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DRC2014-00419- MALOOF FOUNDATION-A request to construct ADA accessibility improvements including a graded walkway,retaining walls, and stairs at the guesthouse on the historic Maloof property in the Very Low Residential(VL)District located at 5131 Camelian Street-APN: 1061-281-16.The project is categorically exempt under Section 15301 as a Class 1 exemption of the guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act. Mayuko Nakajima, Assistant Planner gave the report and PowerPoint presentation(copy on file). Robert Chattel, of Chattel Architecture said he is a volunteer preservation architect and, consultant and Board Member of the Maloof Foundation. He also gave a short PowerPoint presentation further explaining the improvements. He noted alternative plans were considered and what is before the Commission appears to be the best option. Chairman Howdyshell asked for a timeline for the proposed ADA compliancy alterations to be completed. Mr. Chattel said the project is primarily funded by a grant and they plan to move forward quickly and the work will take several months. Chairman Howdyshell opened the public hearing. Earl Anderson, 8552 Bella Vista, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he had no real concerns with what is being proposed. He said he believes the wording implies additional actions could be taken. He expressed concerns about bright lighting and he had heard a rumor that the Item A-2 • HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANcHO JULY 9, 2014 CPage 3 Foundation has purchased the property across the street and they are going to increase their operations with another parking lot and that this will be an excuse to change the rules with respect to how many vehicles and busses are allowed and could alter the frequency of visitation to the museum. He wanted to be assured none of these other changes would take place. Chairman Howdyshell closed the public hearing. Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager, confirmed that the only changes are the ADA ramp improvements described on the plans submitted for this application and directly noted in the Resolution of Approval. Chairman Howdyshell confirmed that none of the other issues Mr. Anderson noted are not on the agenda and are not being considered with this approval. Vice Chairman Fletcher noted that there is not much we can do about speculation about the • property. He suggested if there are any problems or things are occurring that are outside their current permits, they should contact the Planning Department. Commissioner Munoz remarked that this is a remarkable place with national prominence and he supports the changes. He confirmed that any additional changes would have to be reviewed and approved by the Commission. Chairman Howdyshell commented on the National recognition of the facility and its founder, Sam Maloof. She said we are lucky to have this crown jewel of a facility in Rancho Cucamonga. Vice Chairman Fletcher concurred it is a jewel of world importance; those who have not toured the facility are missing out. He said he is happy to see the improvements. He also said he had no problem with replacing the 3 Jacaranda trees as suggested by the applicant. Commissioner Oaxaca complimented the applicant on their consideration of several alternatives to resolve the issues and still respect the historic aspects of the property. He mentioned their desire to replace the Jacaranda trees rather than relocating the old trees. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Fletcher, carried 5-0 to adopt Historic Preservation Resolution 14-01 as amended with Condition #2 found on Page B-14 to read: The three Jacaranda trees shall be replaced on a one to one basis. All other trees shall be retained in place. Item A-3 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ;tm O JULY % 2014 N`�' Page 4 V. PUBLIE H.EARINGS/PLANNING COMMISSION The following items have been advertised and/orposted as public hearings as required by law.'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. DESIGN REVIEW DRC2013-00966 - RANCHWOOD HOLDINGS LLC - A request to develop a 23,675 square foot industrial building located on a 1.25-acre site within the General Industrial(GI)District south of and abutting 9th Street approximately 200 feet east of Lanyard Court at 8705 and 8725 9th Street-APNs: 0207-271-14 and 28. This action is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15332, in-fill development projects. The project is consistent with the applicable General Plan and zoning designations, and is located within the City limits on a project site less than 5 acres. The site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species and the site is adequately served by all required utilities and public services and will not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality or water quality. Steve Fowler, Assistant Planner, presented the report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). He noted a correction to the Resolution noting a corrected DRC case file number that should read DRC2013-00966. Taylor Gerry 2033 Shipway Lane, Newport Beach said they are pleased to process through a dilapidated run down site bring a lovely office building that includes beautiful views of the mountains. He noted paragraph D of the staff report on page C-2-of the agenda is erroneous. Chairman Howdyshell opened the public hearing and stated it is a great design and architectural detail. Seeing and hearing no public comment closed the public hearing. Commissioner Wimberly said he looks forward to seeing the new development in this area. Vice Chairman Fletcher also noted the good design and appropriate for the area. Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney confirmed that the erroneous paragraph does not appear in the resolution and that the record only needs to reflect the error. Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Wimberly, carried 5-0 to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 14-24 and approve Design Review DRC2013-00966 as presented by staff. Item A-4 • HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES C JULY 99 2014 Page 5 VI. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HiSTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION INTER-AGENCY UPDATE: ORAL REPORT BY COMMISSIONER MUNOZ ON THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES POLICY COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES Commissioner Munoz reported that he attended the recent Policy Committee meetings for Transportation Communications Public Works(TCPM. The committee reviews and makes recommendations to the League of California Cities, which lobbies in Sacramento and across the state on behalf of "local self-government." He reported on only a few of the many bills discussed during the meetings and gave a sample of the items that were on their agenda to discuss: • AB2417-This bill would grant a CEQA exemption for recycled water pipelines. He said it would remove some roadblocks for removal, replacement, installation, maintenance etc. of pipelines for recycled water- He said the committee adopted to "oppose unless amended" position. Amendments would give the city and/or county, the ability to approve or deny the CEQA exemption. AB1064-This bill enacts provisions relating to how the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC)handles safety recommendations/advisories from the National Transportation Safety Board(NTSB) and the Federal Transit Administration(FTA) for PUC-regulated rail facilities. The committee made two recommendations in response to this bill and the broader issues surrounding the transport of oil by rail by voting to support the position and to expand information sharing in support of the NTSB in their enforcement efforts. SB1151-This bill imposes an additional$35 fine for various traffic violations in a school zone and directs the revenue from the increased fine to the state's Active Transportation Program (ATP) to fund school zone safety projects. He said the committee recommended an OPPOSE position with a vote of 18-4. He reported on discussions re:new transportation networking companies-like Lyft, Sidecar, Instant Cab and UberX that provide opportunities to find a ride for a reduced price over a typical taxi cab. He said traditional cab companies have obvious financial impact concerns, there are public safety concerns and there are no regulations for these services right now. Ab2293 and AB612- support safety recommendations and managing this type of transportation. The Committee made no recommendation at this time and they agreed to continue to monitor these activities. • He also reported on the League Draft Telecommunications Policy. The committee unanimously recommended adoption of the draft policy. However, it came to the committee's attention that one issue was inadvertently left out of the draft. The League has existing policy to support the expansion of eligible uses of PEG fees on the federal level. Item A-5 HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES ICHO JULY 912014 Page 6 Staff will develop a policy statement on PEG Fees and bring it to the committee for consideration at the next policy meeting. He gave an update on the California Vehicle Miles Traveled Pilot Program. He said this is a CA vehicle miles traveled pilot program wherein the driver would be taxed on the number of miles driven per year. He said this was removed from the agenda and not discussed because there is so much work needed regarding the implementation of such a program. Chairman Howdyshell thanked him for the report and noted the controversy around the idea of managing unregulated transportation companies. She asked for a follow-up program. Commissioner Wimberly noted the impact of electric vehicles on the collection of gas tax. He also noted with respect to hazardous materials on trains the "Black Ops"transport of goods that no one knows about. Commissioner Oaxaca noted the disasters that can occur with trains that are hauling hazardous materials. He said our land use decisions were made around our existing rail systems so we are in a better position than many cities. He said there are opportunities to review alternatives to make it safe as possible. He said the exchange of information is a great thing. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS: Chairman Howdyshell announced that she attended the Classic Car Show held at the Sycamore !nn on June 28. She said it was an amazing event and a huge success. VII. ADJOURNMENT 7:58 PM 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 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. Item A-6 • HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CAH° JULY 912014 ucAMoN`A Page 7 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 nextto 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$2,486 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.CitvofRC.us • Item A-7 STAFF REPORT • ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT RANCHO DATE: August 13, 2014 CUCAMONGA TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Carlo Cambare, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: VACATION OF PORTIONS .OF 25TH STREET, LOCATED WEST OF HAVEN AVENUE AND SOUTH OF ARROW ROUTE (V-224)-A request to vacate the south side of 25th Street, west of Haven Avenue and south of Arrow Route —APNs: 209-104-02,-37 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the finding, through minute action, that the proposed vacation is in conformance with the General Plan. This finding will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. • BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS In conjunction with the.review for a new single-family residence at 10215 25th Street, it was determined that there is an excess right-of-way of ten feet on the south side of 25th Street, west of Haven Avenue, south of Arrow Route. 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 Lots 27 and 29 of Block 59 of the North Cucamonga Township. The vacation is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code because said excess right-of-way is not required for street, highways and related purposes anymore and therefore will be part of Lots 27 and 29 of Block 59 of the North Cucamonga Township. Respectfully submitted, Dan James Senior Civilngineer DJ/CC:rlf Attachments:. Exhibit "A" - Legal Description Exhibit "B"- Plat Item B-1 EXHIBIT "A" • LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR VACATION OF A PORTION OF 25TH STREET THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY IS SITUATED IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA; BEING MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 27,SAID CORNER ALSO BEING A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 25TH STREET,AS SHOWN ON MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 4 PAGE 8, OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE,ALONG SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE,NORTH 89050'00"WEST 57.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THAT CERTAIN DEED RECORDED MAY 29, 1981 AS INSTRUMENT No. 81-117346; THENCE,LEAVING SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE AND ALONG SAID EAST LINE,NORTH 13019'21"EAST 10.27 FEET TO A POINT ON A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND 10.00 FEET, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES,NORTH OF SAID RIGHT OF WAY LINE; THENCE,ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, SOUTH 89°50'00"EAST 54.60 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00011'33"EAST 10.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCEL IS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT"B"ATTACHED HEREWITH AND • BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF. PREPARED BY: LAND P Anthony Haro,PLS 7635 cw ANTHONY G�c� Exp: 12/31/2014 cr HpRo 9 JN: 14-0130 L No.7635 T�OF CAS-SFO t Page 1 of 2 Item B-2 J ® EXHIBIT "B„ SHEET 2 OF 2 > Q W W r > W Q z NORTH < _ 25TH STREET �- N89'50'00"W 785.00' - J 0 I � = Q (558 SF)--\ L4 I J 1 L31777772,7751) ry a- � j N8 9'5207'00"W J 50.00' W W � >Q o i 0 Q o Ln 0) (0 �Q Ll.j � 2 0 P.O.B25. J3 ao z U J 6 -E zM 0 26' - - CL W I O z o " 0 0 Lv o 0 O LL- z z z 19' 50.00' 30' 30' N 89 I 69.00' O 30 28 26 L1 = N00'11'33"W 40.00' L2 = N89'50'00"W 57.00' L3 = N13'19'21"E 10.27' ��pp1ALLgj L4 = N89'50'00"W 54.60' ��.ONY y L5 = N00'11'33"W 10.00' L6 = N89'50'00"W 7.00' No. 7635 ¢ Exp: 12-31-2014 LEGEND q OF CAM AREA TO BE VACATED Item B-3 STAFF REPORT ® ENGINEERING SERVICES DEP:IRT WENT RANCHO DATE: August 13, 2014 CUCAMONGA TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Carlo Cambare, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: VACATION OF PORTIONS OF 24TH STREET, LOCATED WEST OF HAVEN AVENUE AND SOUTH OF ARROW ROUTE(V-225)-A request to vacate the north side of 24th Street, west of Haven Avenue and south of Arrow Route — APNs: 209-122-19,-18 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the finding through minute action, that the proposed vacation is in conformance with the General Plan. This finding will be forwarded to City Council for final action. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS ® In conjunction with the review for new single-family residences at 10360 & 10370 24th Street, it was determined that there is an excess right-of-way of ten feet on the north side of 24th Street, west of Haven Avenue, south of Arrow Route. 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 Lots 22 and 24 of Block 58 of the North Cucamonga Township. The vacation is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code because said excess right-of-way is not required for street, highways and related purposes anymore and therefore will be part of Lots 22 and 24 of Block 58 of the North Cucamonga Township. Respectfully submitted, A'7_t". Dan James Senior Civil Engineer DJ/CC:rlf Attachments: Exhibit "A"- Legal Description Enhibit "B" - Plat Item C-1 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ROADWAY VACATION ® PARCEL"A" BEING A PORTION OF 24TH STREET,80.00 FEET WIDE,PER MAP OF THE NORTH CUCAMONGA SUBDIVISION AS SHOWN FILED IN BOOK 4, PAGE 8 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA,IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 22 OF BLOCK 58,PER MAP OF THE NORTH CUCAMONGA SUBDIVISION AS SHOWN FILED IN BOOK 4,PAGE 8 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO,SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER ALSO BEING ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID 24'STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 24TH STREET SOUTH 89°50'00"EAST,A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 22 OF BLOCK 58 OF SAID MAP; THENCE SOUTH 000 12'00"EAST,A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 22 OF BLOCK 58; THENCE NORTH 89050'00"WEST AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID 24TH STREET,A DISTANCE OF 50.00,TO THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 22 OF BLOCK 58; THENCE NORTH 00012'00"WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 22 OF BLOCK 58,A DISTACE OF 10.00 FEET,TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. • CONTAINING 500 SQUARE FEET OR 0.01 ACRES MORE OR LESS. PARCEL"B" BEING A PORTION OF 24TH STREET,80.00 FEET WIDE,PER MAP OF THE NORTH CUCAMONGA SUBDIVISION AS SHOWN FILED IN BOOK 4,PAGE 8 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA,MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 24 OF BLOCK 58,PER MAP OF THE NORTH CUCAMONGA SUBDIVISION AS SHOWN FILED IN BOOK 4,PAGE 8 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, SAID SOUTHEAST CORNER ALSO BEING ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID 24'STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP; THENCE SOUTH 00012'00"EAST,A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 24 OF BLOCK 58; THENCE NORTH 89050'00"WEST AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID 24TH STREET,A DISTANCE OF 50.00,TO THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 24 OF BLOCK 58; THENCE NORTH 00°12'00" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 24 OF BLOCK 58,A DISTACE OF 10.00 FEET,TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 24 OF BLOCK 58; Page 1 of 2 Item C-2 EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ROADWAY VACATION THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 24TH STREET SOUTH 89050'00"EAST,A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET,TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 500 SQUARE FEET OR 0.01 ACRES MORE OR LESS. SEE EXHIBIT"B"ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE PART HEREOF. THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME,OR UNDER MY DIRECTION,IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS ACT. SIGNATURE lh f DATE �/ZD I 4 I �pt1p�COs+ SH�O. �o PLSAKID 0 EXP- 9�OF CAL\FOQ Page 2 of 2 Item C-3 VICINITY MAP EXHIBIT "B" NOT TO SCALE W 26774 STREET Q 19 21 23 25 � 25TH STREET s � z NORTH CU,CAMONGA U � 247H STREET M. B. 4/8 BLOCK 58 HUMBOLT AVENUE (N 89 5000 W 100.00' (50.00) (50.00) �. �u� �Eo cc v p . CL P.Ls.sm Qi O .� U') F 18 20 3 22 24 26 o o CN 0 0 DA TA TABLE o 0 0 NO BEARING LENGTH Z z z 1 N 00'12'00" 1#1 10.00 P.O.B. (S 89 50'00" E 100.00') P.O.B. PARCEL A 50.00' (50.00' �JRARCEL `B' N 00'12'00" W PARCEL 'A' t PARCEL 'Bs 10.00' 50.00' 4 50.00' 0 o N 89 50'00" W 100.0 0'b S 00"12'00" E 10.00' SURNMR'S NO 24TH STREET ( ) INDICATES RECORD DATA PER M.B. 4/8. GRAPHIC SCALE 40 0 20 40 1 inch = 40 ft. THIS PLAT IS SOLELY AN AID IN LOCATING THE PARCEL(S) DESCRIBED IN ,HE w.o. # ATTACHED DOCUMENT. SHEET 1 OF 1 SUBENG225 SCALE4 : ,-= 40DRAWN BY MAV DATE 02 18 14 EXHIBIT FOR ROADWAY VACATION Item C-4 STAFF REPORT ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT RANCHO DATE: August 13, 2014 CUCAMONGA TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Carlo Cambare, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: VACATION OF PORTIONS OF 24TH STREET, LOCATED WEST OF HAVEN AVENUE AND SOUTH OF ARROW ROUTE(V-225)-A request to vacate the north side of 24th Street, west of Haven Avenue and south of Arrow Route — APNs: 209-122-19,-18 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make the finding through minute action,that the proposed vacation is in conformance with the General Plan. This finding will be forwarded to City Council for final action. • BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS In conjunction with the review for new single-family residences at 10360 & 10370 24th Street, it was determined that there is an excess right-of-way of ten feet on the north side of 24th Street, west of Haven Avenue, south of Arrow Route. 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 Lots 22 and 24 of Block 58 of the North Cucamonga Township. The vacation is consistent with the General Plan and the Development Code because said excess right-of-way is not required for street, highways and related purposes anymore and therefore will be part of Lots 22 and 24 of Block 58 of the North Cucamonga Township. Respectfully submitted, Dan James Senior Civil Engineer DJ/CC:rif Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Legal Description Enhibit "B" - Plat i 1 EXHIBIT"A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ROADWAY VACATION PARCEL"A" BEING A PORTION OF 24TH STREET,80.00 FEET WIDE,PER MAP OF THE NORTH CUCAMONGA SUBDIVISION AS SHOWN FILED IN BOOK 4,PAGE 8 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA,MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 22 OF BLOCK 58,PER MAP OF THE NORTH CUCAMONGA SUBDIVISION AS SHOWN FILED IN BOOK 4, PAGE 8 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO,SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER ALSO BEING ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID 24TH STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 24TH STREET SOUTH 89050'00"EAST,A DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 22 OF BLOCK 58 OF SAID MAP; THENCE SOUTH 00°12'00"EAST,A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 22 OF BLOCK 58; THENCE NORTH 89050'00"WEST AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID 24TH STREET,A DISTANCE OF 50.00,TO THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 22 OF BLOCK 58; THENCE NORTH 000 12'00"WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 22 OF BLOCK 58,A DISTACE OF 10.00 FEET,TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. • CONTAINING 500 SQUARE FEET OR 0.01 ACRES MORE OR LESS. PARCEL"B" BEING A PORTION OF 24TH STREET,80.00 FEET WIDE,PER MAP OF THE NORTH CUCAMONGA SUBDIVISION AS SHOWN FILED IN BOOK 4,PAGE 8 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA,MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 24 OF BLOCK 58,PER MAP OF THE NORTH CUCAMONGA SUBDIVISION AS SHOWN FILED IN BOOK 4, PAGE 8 OF MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, SAID SOUTHEAST CORNER ALSO BEING ON THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID 24TH STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP; THENCE SOUTH 000 12'00"EAST,A DISTANCE OF 10.00 FEET ALONG THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID LOT 24 OF BLOCK 58; THENCE NORTH 89050'00"WEST AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SAID 24TH STREET,A DISTANCE OF 50.00,TO THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 24 OF BLOCK 58; THENCE NORTH 000 12'00" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 24 OF BLOCK 58,A DISTACE OF 10.00 FEET,TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 24 OF BLOCK 58; Page 1 of 2 14---P 1 AA EXHIBIT"A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR ROADWAY VACATION THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF 24..STREET SOUTH 89°50'00"EAST,A . DISTANCE OF 50.00 FEET,TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 500 SQUARE FEET OR 0.01 ACRES MORE OR LESS. SEE EXHIBIT`B"ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE PART HEREOF. THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME,OR UNDER MY DIRECTION,.IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS ACT. SIGNATURE DATE 0114 ... I �pt1PL LANO'q O�yMWEL A. � o * PLS-8m A �•. �OF CAL��OQ► Page 2 of 2 r VICINITY MAP „ „ NOT TO SCALE EXHIBIT B W 26TH STREET z � 25TH STREET W 19 21 23 25 z srmNORTH CUCAMONGA U 24TH STREET M.B. 4/8 HUMBaT AVENUE BLOCK 58 N 89 50'00 W 100.00' (50.00) (50.00) �W MK'wa A. `i% cc CL PL8.ow o 0 0 0 Lo to Lo FI ., 20 22 3 24 3 26 0 0 , 0 0 N cV DA TA TABLE o o r NO BEARINGLENGTH z z 1 N 0072'00" 10.00 P.O.B. (S 8950'00" E 100.00) P.O.B. PARCEL A 50.00' (50.00' PARCEL 'B' FN 00'12'00" W PARCEL 'A' 1 PARCEL v10.00' 50.00' 50.0 o N 8950100" W 100.00'b S 0072'00" E ~' 10.00' SURMM's Nom 24TH STREET ( ) INDICATES RECORD DATA PER M.B. 4/8. GRAPHIC SCALE ,o 20 40 1 inch = 40.M HIS PLAT IS SOLELY AN AID IN LOCATING THE PARCEL(S) DESCRIBED IN THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT. SHEET 1 OF , W.0. # SCALE 1"= 40' DRAWN BY MAV DATE 02/18/14 SUBENG225 EXHIBIT FOR ROADWAY VA CA TION STAFF REPORT PLANNNG DEPARTIVIETIT Date: August 13, 2014 ]?,ANCHO To: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA From: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager By: Mike Smith, Associate Planner Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912 - MANNING HOMES - A review of a proposed 45-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road -APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre-Application Review DRC2013-00545, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, Minor Exception DRC2014-00161, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083 - MANNING HOMES - A review of a proposal for 45 single-family residences in conjunction • with a 45-lot subdivision of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium(LM) Residential Districts, located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road - APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre-Application Review DRC2013-00545, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, Minor Exception DRC2014-00161, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2013-00887- MANNING HOMES - A request to change the zoning designation of part of a property of about 7.16 acres located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road from Low Medium (LM) Residential to Medium (M) Residential District in conjunction with a proposed 46-lot subdivision; APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre-Application Review DRC2013-00545, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, Minor Exception DRC2014-00161, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00889 - MANNING HOMES - A request to remove trees in conjunction with a proposed 45-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts, located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire • Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road - APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre-Application Review DRC2013-00545, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Zoning Map D-I pg. 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18912, DRC2013-01083, DRC2013-00887, DRC2013-00889, DRC2014-00161 AND DRC2014-00626— MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 2 Amendment DRC2013-00887, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Minor Exception DRC2014-00161, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2014-00161 — MANNING HOMES - A request to allow the construction of interior property line and project perimeter walls that will exceed the maximum height limit of 6 feet (but not exceed 8 feet in height) due to grade differences between lots in conjunction with a proposed 45-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts, located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road - APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre-Application Review DRC2013-00545, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2014-00626 —.MANNING HOMES: A request to amend the Development Code to incorporate development standards such as minimum lot dimensions, setbacks, lot coverage, etc. for single-family residential development within the Medium (M) Residential Districts. Related files: Pre-Application Review DRC2013-00545, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Zoning Map Amendment DPRC2013-00887, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. This item will be forwarded to the City Council for final action. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission take the following actions: • The Planning Commission adopt the resolutions approving Tentative Map Subtt18912, Development Review DRC2013-01083; Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00889 and Minor Exception DRC2014- 00161 • Recommend the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolutions recommending the City Council approve Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. BACKGROUND: A conceptual version of this project was initially reviewed by the Planning Commission as workshop item on August 14, 2013 (Exhibit T, Related file: Pre-Application Review DRC2013-00545). At that time, the applicant proposed a subdivision comprised of 42 single-family residential lots with gated access at Ramona Avenue and an extension of La Vine Street that terminated in a cul-de-sac at the west side of the project site. The project has since been revised and is now comprised of 45 lots. The access gate has been eliminated and the cul-de-sac at the extension of La Vine Street has been modified to include a specialized driveway to allow for emergency vehicle access. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Single-Family Residences; Low Medium (LM) Residential District South - Apartment Complex (part) and Mobile Home Park (part); Medium High (MH) Residential District (part) and Low Medium (LM) Residential District (part) East - Single-Family Residences; Low (L) Residential District West - Retail Store; Medium High (MH) Residential District D—I pg. 2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18912, DRC2013-01083, DRC2013-00887, DRC2013-00889, DRC2014-00161, AND DRC2014-00626 — MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 3 B. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Medium Residential North - Medium Residential South- Medium High Residential (part) and Low Medium Residential (part) East - Low Residential West - Medium High Residential C. Site Characteristics: The project site is a rectangular parcel located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road (Exhibit B). The project site has an overall area of about 312,000 square feet (7.16 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are about 1,200 feet deep (east to west) and 250 feet (north to south). The project site is generally vacant with the exception of a single-family residence that was built circa 1915 that is located at the east side of the project site near Ramona Avenue. To the west of the project site, is an equestrian/pet supplies retail store (CW Feed & Pet). To the north and east are single-family residences (Tracts 12532 and 9450, respectively). To the south are an apartment complex (Sycamore Springs) and a mobile home park (Ramona Villa Mobile Home Estates). The site has street frontage on Archibald Avenue and Ramona Street to the west and east, respectively. Adjacent, and parallel, to the south property line of the site is the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail which, between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Street, is only partially completed. The zoning of the west half of the site is Medium (M) Residential District, while the zoning of the east half of the site is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the property to the west is Medium High (MH) Residential District. The zoning of the • properties to the north is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the east is Low (L) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the south (beyond the aforementioned trail) are partly Medium High (MH) Residential District and partly Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The subject property is generally level with a slope that trends from west to east; the elevations at the west and east sides of the property are about 1,398 feet and 1,373 feet, respectively. ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into 45 lots for a single-family residential development. The lots will be developed in accordance with new development standards that will apply to single-family residential development within the Medium (M) Residential Districts and are the subject of related Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. Individual lot areas will range between 4,013 square feet to 10,529 square feet; the average lot area is 4,907 square feet. The depth of each lot will be at least 90 feet with the exception of Lots 26, 27, 44, and 45. Those lots will have a depth of between about 60 feet and 80 feet. The width of each lot except the above-noted lots at the required front setback will be between 45 feet and 50 feet. Lots 26, 27, 44, and 45 will have a width of between 65 feet (Lot 27)to 137 feet (Lot 26). As noted previously, access to the subdivision will be via a new street (hereafter referred to as"La Vine Street")that will connect directly to Ramona Street. This street will terminate in a cul-de-sac at the west side of the project site. For emergency purposes a second point of access will be constructed at the end of the cul-de-sac and connect to Archibald Avenue via a specialized driveway (referred to as an emergency vehicle access (EVA)). Although the technical/design details of this EVA are still being • determined, in addition to being wide enough for an emergency vehicle, it will include landscaping and a walkway for direct pedestrian access to Archibald Avenue and the adjoining trail. The project also includes the construction of missing improvements in the aforementioned Pacific Electric trail. D—I pg. 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18912, DRC2013-01083, DRC2013-00887, DRC2013-00889, DRC2014-00161, AND DRC2014-00626 — MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 4 In conjunction with the tentative tract map, the applicant proposes to construct a single-family residence on each lot for a total of 45 single-family residences. Although all of the houses will be two-story, the proposal does not conflict with Section 17.122.010(A)(1)(a) of the Development Code which requires a minimum of 25 percent of the houses in a residential development to be single-story. That Code section only applies to residential development with lots in excess of 7,200 square feet. The applicant proposes four (4) types of architectural themes (elevations) —Traditional, Bungalow, Spanish, and Cottage. Each house will incorporate a variety of materials to varying degrees depending on the theme. Each house will have an articulated footprint/floor plan and profile. The applicant proposes four(4) distinct footprints— Plans 1, 2, and 3, and reverse footprints of each for a total of six (6) footprints. The floor area of the houses will be between 2,566 square feet (Plan 1) and 3,163 square feet (Plan 3). The number of available footprints will comply with Table 17.122.010-1 of the Development Code. Because the footprints and profiles of each house differ, there will be a variety of movement in the wall planes and roof lines. B. Neighborhood Meetings: Three (3) neighborhood meetings were conducted to gather input and comments from the owners/residents of the surrounding properties within 660 feet of the project site. All of the meetings were held at Deer Canyon Elementary School at 10225 Hamilton Street. The first meeting was held on April 8, 2014. The applicant incorrectly addressed the notification letters for this meeting and, as a result, the correct recipients were not notified. However, despite this error there were several individuals present. Thus, the meeting continued as scheduled with the understanding that there would be a second meeting scheduled for a later date. The second and third meetings were conducted on April 29, 2014, and May 29, 2014, respectively. The following is a summary of those meetings. The applicant has also provided a summary of each of the meetings (Exhibits 1-2, J-2, and K-2). 1. Neighborhood Meeting #1 (April 8, 2014): At this meeting, the applicant presented the proposal to the owners/residents in attendance. Staff from both Fire Construction Services and the Planning Department were present to address questions. The majority, if not all, of the owners/residents expressed opposition to this version because of the proposed connection of La Vine Street to Newton Place (Exhibit 1-3). The principal reason for their opposition was increased traffic and diminished traffic safety on Newton Place and other streets within Tract 12532. Staff from the Fire Department explained that the connection was necessary to ensure public safety. Two points of access were necessary so that emergency vehicles could enter the subdivision without interfering with normal traffic flow and/or blocking residents from exiting the subdivision. Furthermore, the Newton Place connection was identified as the most direct path of travel for emergency vehicles originating from the nearest fire station at 6627 Amethyst Avenue located about 0.60-mile to the northwest of the project site. Staff from the Planning Department explained that the connection of the streets was logical as Newton Place was designed to connect to a future street based on its design, i.e., it ended as a stub and not as a cul-de-sac constructed per City standard. However, those in attendance stated that the neighborhood had become accustomed to Newton Place being a cul-de-sac despite its appearance and that it had been that way for over 30 years since their subdivision was constructed in the 1980s. Therefore, they continued to be strongly opposed to it. Following this meeting, staff received phone calls and correspondence opposing the project (Exhibit M). This was in addition to comments that were received by staff during the early D—I pg.4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18912, DRC2013-01083, DRC2013-00887, DRC2013-00889, DRC2014-00161, AND DRC2014-00626 — MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 • Page 5 stages of the City's review of the project. Staff subsequently began the process of exploring other design solutions in coordination with other City departments (particularly Fire Construction Services) and the applicant. The design solution that was eventually agreed upon eliminated the connection between La Vine Street and Newton Place, and La Vine Street was re-designed to end in a cul-de-sac with an emergency vehicle access (EVA) driveway connecting to Archibald Avenue. 2. Neighborhood Meeting #2 (April 29, 2014): This meeting served as the first official neighborhood meeting. There were more owners/residents in attendance at this meeting than at the meeting held on April 8, 2014. The applicant presented the revised version of the project at this meeting (Exhibit J-3). As the revision to the street design caused changes to other aspects of the project, e.g. house plotting, lot layout, number of lots, lot dimensions, etc., and they did not have sufficient time to complete the details of those changes; the applicant's presentation was limited to the basic, conceptual design of the subdivision. Joining the City staff from Fire Construction Services and the Planning Department, who were present at the first meeting, were additional staff members from the Engineering and Traffic Engineering Services Departments. Most of the attendees (in particular, the owners/residents from Tract 12532) were in favor of this version because of the elimination of the proposed connection of La Vine Street to Newton Place. However, some of the owners/residents of the properties located to the east of the proposed project had reservations. They were concerned that the traffic volume generated • by the proposed subdivision was now being concentrated towards the east side of the project site and that this would negatively impact the intersection of La Vine Street and Ramona Avenue. They also cited increased traffic volume and diminished traffic safety on Ramona Avenue in general. Some questioned why La Vine Street did not connect to Archibald Avenue instead of, or in addition to, Ramona Avenue. Lastly, there were questions about improvements on Ramona Avenue. Staff from the Traffic Engineering Services Department explained that the traffic volume generated by the project was within the design capacity of the subject intersection and Ramona Avenue in general. A connection of La Vine Street to Archibald Avenue would compromise traffic safety and traffic circulation due to its proximity to the existing intersections of Camden Drive and Archibald Avenue, and the Pacific Electric trail and Archibald Avenue, to the north and south, respectively. Regarding street improvements, the applicant will be required to construct street improvements along Ramona Avenue that will improve traffic safety and efficiency. These improvements include widening the street; installing a sidewalk, curb, and gutter; constructing drainage improvements; and relocating overhead utility lines underground. 3. Neighborhood Meeting #3 (May 29, 2014): This meeting served as an opportunity to present the final version of the project (K-3). There was a similar number of owners/residents in attendance at this meeting as the meeting that was held on April 29, 2014. City staff that attended the previous meeting were also in attendance at this meeting. The project was conceptually the same as presented on April 29, 2014 - the only significant difference was that finalized details such as house plotting, lot layout, number of lots, lot dimensions, etc. were • available. The focus of the comments and overall discussion continued to be on the traffic volume and circulation at the intersection of La Vine Street and Ramona Avenue and on Ramona Avenue itself. D—I pg. 5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18912, DRC2013-01083, DRC2013-00887, DRC2013-00889, DRC2014-00161, AND DRC2014-00626 — MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 6 During all three neighborhood meetings the owners/residents cited concerns about other issues including construction noise; dust control; the removal of a windrow of Eucalyptus trees along the north side of the project site; the loss of privacy; and animals leaving the project site during construction and entering the adjacent properties. Staff responded that the requirements of the Development Code, special conditions of approval, and/or environmental mitigations will address these issues and minimize, if not eliminate, these impacts. With the exception of questions about the floor area, timing of construction, and anticipated prices of the proposed homes, none of the owners/residents present during the three meetings had any significant concerns with the architecture of the houses. Following the neighborhood meetings on April 29, 2014, and May 29, 2014, staff believes the level of opposition to the project has significantly lessened. However, Staff continued to receive some correspondence afterwards and has included it for review by the Commission (Exhibit M). C. Grading and Technical Review Committees: The .Grading Review Committee (Addington and Miller) and the Technical Review Committee reviewed the proposal on June 3, 2014. The Committees accepted the proposal and recommended approval. The Committees' conditions have been incorporated into the Resolutions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083. D. Design Review Committee: The Design Review Committee (Oaxaca and Granger) reviewed the proposal on June 3, 2014 (Exhibit N). The Committee generally accepted the proposal as submitted subject to revisions that were to be verified by staff. These revisions were, for example, adding decorative ironwork details and arched/recessed windows to the Spanish theme; altering the roof pitch of the Cottage theme to 6:12; adding decorative stone veneers on specific elevations of the Cottage and Traditional theme; adding windows on the garage doors of at least 50 percent of the homes; and adding vertical elements to the garage doors of the Bungalow and Traditional themes. The applicant subsequently revised the architecture. Staff, on behalf of the Committee, reviewed the revisions and determined that they were completed as requested. Their conditions have been incorporated into the Resolution of Approval for Development Review DRC2013-01083. E. Zonina. Mar) Amendment DRC2013-00887: According to the Zoning Map adopted by the City Council on July 18, 2012, the project site is currently within two zoning districts (Exhibit O). The western half of the project site,an area of about 147,000 square feet (about 3.37 acres), is zoned as Medium (M) Residential District. The eastern half of the project, an area of about 165,000 square feet (about 3.77 acres), is zoned as Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The underlying land use designation of the entire project site is Medium according to Figure LU-2 of the General Plan (Exhibit P). It is uncertain why the Zoning Map and General Plan are inconsistent with each other. Nevertheless, in order to address the discrepancy between the Zoning Map and the General Plan, the applicant has submitted a request to amend the Zoning Map. This amendment only affects the zoning designation of the project site. Staff notes for the Commission's reference that the zoning designation of the subdivision to the north (Tract 12532) is Low Medium (LM) Residential, but the underlying General Plan land use designation is also Medium Residential. Therefore, the applicant's request is to amend the underlying Low Medium zoning to Medium, consistent with the General Plan. F. Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626: The project is for single-family residential development within the Medium (M) Residential District. Currently, "basic" and "optional" development standards are not provided in Tables 17.36.010-1 and 17.36.010-2, respectively, of the Development Code (Exhibit Q and R). These standards describe the requirements for . minimum lot area, minimum lot dimensions (width, depth, street frontage, etc.), building setbacks, lot coverage, etc. and are necessary in order to guide the City and applicants in developing residential projects that are consistent with the General Plan, in accordance with the objective of the applicable development district (zoning), and comply with other standards and guidelines D—I pg.6 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18912, DRC2013-01083, DRC2013-00887, DRC2013-00889, DRC2014-00161, AND DRC2014-00626 - MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 • Page 7 described in the Development Code. As the standards do not exist, the applicant in coordination with the City, has created a set of draft development standards (Exhibit S) for incorporation into the Development Code. The applicant's proposed project is designed according to these standards. These development standards will apply to all single-family residential projects that are proposed in the Medium (M) Residential Districts in the City except within areas of the City governed by separate specific/community plans such as Terra Vista, Victoria, and Etiwanda. In those specific/community plans, such development standards already exist or, if they don't exist, will require separate review and action by City and, therefore, are not subject to this amendment. G. Minor Exception DRC2014-00161: The applicant submitted a Minor Exception to allow the construction of combination walls (garden/screen walls on top of retaining walls)with a height of up to 8 feet along the interior property lines of several lots within the proposed subdivision and the project perimeter walls at Lots 25, 26, and 45. Per Table 17.48.050-1 of the Development Code, the maximum wall height of fences and walls is 6 feet. The proposed walls will be located generally where there are grade differences (Exhibit H) that warrant retaining walls. Generally the natural terrain of the project site slopes from west to east. Therefore, the usual alternative, an earthen slope, is not practical because of the lack of available space in the side yards between the house (which with a few exceptions, are on the east and west sides of the house) and the property line wall. As most of the walls will be along common interior side property lines; the increased height of the walls will not be observable from public view; where the walls are located adjacent to a street, the increased height of the wall will be most observable from the interior of the project site (at Lots 25 and 26) or the height of the wall occurs along only a short length of wall (at Lot 45). • H. Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889: The proposed project includes the removal of numerous trees that are at various locations within the project site. The applicant submitted a Tree Survey Report, prepared by BonTerra Psomas on February 12, 2014, that included the description and health of the individual trees and their overall health and condition. The survey identified 117 of these trees as "heritage" trees which are subject to the City's tree preservation requirements as described in Section 17.80.050 of the Development Code. As it is necessary to remove the trees in order to grade the site and construct future single-family residences and associated improvements which will allow economic enjoyment of the property; the applicant has submitted a Tree Removal Permit. The proposed project includes the planting of new trees on a one-to-one basis to replace the trees that are removed. The trees that are located within the Eucalyptus windrow along the north side of the project site will be replaced with new trees of a minimum 24-inch box size. These replacement trees will be in addition to the trees that are required by the Development Code for new residential development. There are also numerous fruit-bearing trees within the project site that will be removed -these trees are not subject to the City's tree preservation requirements. I. Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, staff determined that, with the imposition of mitigation measures related to, for example, air quality (including greenhouse gases), biological resources, hydrology/water quality, and noise there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. A Mitigation Monitoring Program has also been prepared to ensure implementation of, and compliance with, the mitigation measures for the project. • CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot D-I pg. 7 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT SUBTT18912, DRC2013-01083, DRC2013-00887, DRC2013-00889, DRC2014-00161, AND DRC2014-00626 — MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 8 radius of the project site. Although staff received correspondence regarding the project during the early stages of the City's review of the project and following the neighborhood meetings, no additional correspondence has been received in response to the public hearing notices that were posted in the newspaper, mailed, and/or posted on-site. Respectfully submitted, Candyce ett Planning Manager CB:MS/ge Attachments: Exhibit A - Location Map Exhibit B - Aerial Photo Exhibit C - Site Utilization Map Exhibit D - Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 Exhibit E - Site Plan Exhibit F - Conceptual Precise Grading Plan and Sections Exhibit G - Floor Plans and Elevations Exhibit H - LandscapeMall Plans Exhibit 1-1 : Neighborhood Meeting Sign-In Sheets (April 8, 2014) Exhibit 1-2 - Neighborhood Meeting Summary (prepared by the Applicant) Exhibit 1-3 - Subdivision Design as of April 8, 2014 Exhibit J-1 - Neighborhood Meeting Sign-In Sheet (April 29, 2014) Exhibit J-2- Neighborhood Meeting Summary (prepared by the Applicant) Exhibit J-3- Subdivision Design as of April 29, 2014 Exhibit K-1- Neighborhood Meeting Sign-In Sheet(May 29, 2014) Exhibit K-2- Neighborhood Meeting Summary (prepared by the Applicant) Exhibit K-3- "Finalized" Subdivision Design as of May 29, 2014 Exhibit L - Correspondence from Applicant Exhibit M - Correspondence from Property Owners/Residents Exhibit N - Design Review Committee Action Comments, June 3, 2014 Exhibit O - Zoning Map of Project Site Exhibit P - General Plan Map of Project Site Exhibit Q - Table 17.36.010-1 Development Standards for Residential Zoning Districts Exhibit R - Table 17.36.010-2 Optional Development Standards for Residential Zoning Districts Exhibit S - Proposed Development Standards for. Single-Family Residential Development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts Exhibit T - Minutes for Pre-Application Review DRC2013-00545 Exhibit U - Initial Study Part I, ll, and III Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 Draft Resolution of Approval for Development Review DRC2013-01083 Draft Resolution of Approval for Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887 Draft Resolution of Approval for Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889 Draft Resolution of Approval for Minor Exception DRC2014-00161 Draft Resolution of Approval for Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626 D—I pg.8 I M I :SSL. I W .I I cl i LWA CT gc_ 61 jff- WEEK 'INN ; r� 0 L_., AVE I AVE Im CT PL sic AVE U. Z;_U1 11 j- ;S-3 Mw- LLD 1 22 6MAL A.51- CT Mt 7 ML El 9 MnL NfA h AGATE T zmm A% 4uudm . I — ­ I-- qtr % --- VILA Cf,to ICE" 1h N jl� AVE I;' TULIAt El N Ak I I EL Mum ra la LEM. ii-IN M 'ST IYLST It Axl uI I ig 1 EAST A. Joao fj E*WU AVE M I —7 a ,A 6MST IL W I -- 'fRwustno " ] ._ Ir— my �01—9- Al IfiFux A 11- - �1 tjp'l 141 OOD AVE 7-Z VIE- Z F ir cy CT jokELMS AVE T 1K Pl. 7A AVE i ST a 'T I I I - I M.�TIL-IIIAYtdI St--- F4 51 11 UA1 Ah-4 I I$ st '_no MALACH AVE 'TE AVE KZUCEE�YE ILU� IlE ME ML"Am3L L I EUCITE AVEJLUS6IAN AVE I v4w P fill ON PL KaL SWIM AVE AVE t f E AVE VE r. ARCHIBALD AVE 0 3A1 Alk OR rig 3AV (3-1V81H8, :,Lj VWE Ir Rt a r-AM is w A EPL CRO A VILLA AV RAMON _0 �I_ A% IINI"UrARAY La lk�l W­ ­­-­­ % AVE L EUKUYMO H 7w— AVE, x T411MACT 11; r Ewan 7_1 a) A r F AE _.J 1-71 0 43 c MIT. �R A. it WAVE a L itIAQMF IlMlIku HAVEN __AVE_1r_ A I[ Hf,.VEN AVE ....... . - ­1 1 -!"!1 1511 HAVEN, AV -k 4 FUT ICA AVE i t 33 r % RED OAK AVE . rn w, i ii TE A �E IIm-9 A L it - " "'0, 0 J b�� � , x. Z . .u�R.' , �:m r _�9__� �—�,�i �I�� _ uA r ITE OAK M 611 —4, 0, 12 -Ija ------ T7_( io r) w! a - I'l tf on Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887 Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161 'k- •,. _-- ,3�yg� '.AF.t •Y' —'C®€?Inr ..� 4 .. t ' 8 i� r uj w ..... t .#•Camden-Drive► m fes_. �, ('4 C—�..� G ✓i __ 'e+y jaCA d i1-qtr � -+� � ► f` e} • o sa, .� • t L Vin`eiStreet .•P 1 Slt�roect • � ` . . o r : --- = Ykil PacificElectricTra�l -=' - _ 'y' „�,,...•�.•^�""�w'�t �� .': .. ..,� ;.-'!•� t:�. -. � ^ ��i� ,�.UA011nnn:r i,!F y 1 ! -• a„ .�.2 r,: - eu.J4. �: a�i ��"`.L".'�.i. ,yp 1 � ��? ��[-« ��-' ..e:: - tee•}mss +its ;� x • '� � �����•' �� � s p . \V a �y S �� we-,. as �4 .alb .;�;#'�1®.. .,� •yr � � a � § f, ,V " 1 �!p'}"""': �b1 —� .�•�M "i� - � .n!.! ��5r II • • I • r '� : ."wad;.. � x "� �, ,fi•gv `: '•� W.�+��i�� " '`�+j, }",:. -a,�c � � u �i ,M. -L -,•�> � � ...:}'±� 4- 4— ' 114 b . i• F: t�'Wal �'��iC7 V!N Q in'} iF w� rn TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18912 IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA• -- F COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO.STATE OF CALIFORNIA. 5 _ auo.i�io�moe}i�a+iri iwwa�moai�..�s'iuvs'® /`a__ _ _._._ J .°a w MAY.1010 9.36 ACRES GROSS AS NUMBERED LOTS { T y jig, b.07 ACRES NET 1 LETTERED LOT }- _ APN NO:IOMIOI-01i- DEATAILED SITE PLAN ESIIS711YG'SIrE FAMLY fMSID@:T4IiG fFMUNII � ���+; 1 �� _ -r■ i •�. r iBI a E1 � � � • M � - -} i+r aero MpMq Y Kan MM .M1C .MLR MY M10 .14r•>] Mfg nru - - _-_M1- _LAYNESI 1pM r V c TL J aw & . M a MIC M r nw>A M r nnl# rr r( M ul M Y rn 1. w: M r S nlr 4 M r. } t D N syn �,y'i 6Stiil r�( >D p u r n >b 1 r .• O -r• F - - 3.a.. rr ui NCI[ ELiG1OG YauAl ELWY(INiI Lor .A. vY7G OECTWC RSSAI ELPNE INA ' G ,.t. ... ._ ' a SNGL(TAY0.(LOT TABULATION SINGL[7AYY,Y LOT f�BUL1T10N Inl rArLA w lar. IEun mrLarF If r•Wy - .-- w�m�" LEGEND: _ 1 y -talpcl NI rnp[I Sta Rt.l iwi _ �j� OEYLLU12fLUWltR rlib llOiUIYVANIks' ,.rrl„�aL��E•�L•±--�' -_�_ -'-'-a�u�_ --�-�- _.ET. r r - _ r., rrr• ��yi� �Vrr o.r+ar �ia�avlw� --4a�r1 _ --,- __ __ G�ENf'.INLEN n - mi.ray ncwrn �w ti •..� -.T. ---:�- -��1..- r n �icnmrnr •.m 3y0 '1.('�J�71 If-._- i$-.��_- u�-_ r -..>ii____�'T 1- r w'�[.����syr�r IISG•6�� a V ala Y r r rarn�ww.� wr.n i r:aA�- - -- � "__r "- ii7 -7:r . - -- - nt ral..•�...r.,a.a• Lm�r _ sy Y��tNkE�S 'e-- �iCF � — '--- — n ,r ••, w psswlxvNlalNwla.a •19••• •"� -�__ al}._ -T.{(1- _ -_ --_ -- ..n.. .a.rn...n.ra•r.nw� SIIF IUl:A1alN _I.__ II EWR. ARc d•. :n V ANIINO SIfYYAAY �w ac m.wr iyMKrMsrrY I.rerrRr u4mq.e.e • /gyp MAY. Silk Nwfk5 Vf\ OG erowc.ramn nar Dern ru�uwar rorwrw• q>an �!7� - ORR I•Irl1} r!a _-�___�._� }nrE1tNl4 rG Q - usonu�suu arr PEtNATE OPt. A1�r.M •�nonx,.we......rur....r.�.. WDID/: .- orrcln rrm L. I Iv r a r(1 YG i f0SMU0.E0C RMIIIII'}LBnElO DS-070 • • • m X TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18912 N RPE CRY OF RANCHO CLICAMONOA 8�Q S CoUlm SAN BmoARONOsf Alm OF CALFORNvIL Pxfr11F.1 T.4xE : � moR•r••wwrDwleOgiMmwrOMwNRlwi l.Rem/tM.wrw RYlNm ■' •ire MA VIwLewpmw• ;�i 935 ACRESGROSS UYSE NURYOTOTe S97 ACRES NEI IIEfTERED IDI � :n.• Au"q � W ! IF 4 RLLI •! Agvr,mp ENSr.SNGIEFAYLYRXfSIDENTULLDEV.(TOREYNN! N 29 >q 11 32 33 N 35 35 37 ' 3e 39 AO AI At 43 1 N - -- .Sc �( � 1\\ r•�_ _ _ -_ R LA VINE 57 T �--•• �� c•r �i 111 3 I 1r_ b -+...� x5 x. 23 23 ti 10 r9 11 V le IS !. I3 1t 11 10 9 e 7 , 0 e . 3 t ! T — — — --------- . " t " ! • _ --—T-- -- 9 r— — -- — __ _ — __a! 1+-+�_Y.r r---�I.�i-_-moi:�i-._._�_�pMr►Nr---�-:.•.---r ---_• 1\-• _--'y-- "!i) -- _ YID]• cA TOC rMa3... Yw oI RY•S R.s[•,]aN w aN/a•..NY` . .•PACIFIC ELECTRIC MR/WD EMPIRE TRAIL - LOT •A" PACIFIC ELECTRIC INLAND EYPINE IRA& SiNGL' FAM IT LOT TAB ULAT-OR t } of Nw .E—[•!w ! i a 3iQy 4TLOR5 GOYPAHIEe NOTES •..,`..1. a.,. � ,aa ols SOBS PARCEI NUYSER -_. ..__. - 1.._.__ _ ./ai. � . tee. - • ' •� Imlrama.. ll ARRCFBALD AVENUE RANONA AVENUE 11PICAL`IREEi s[clpn TYPICAL SIPEET SECTION .aa•e•ro•e wna•.r.Kra... """' ., -. ... ..a -_T- ••e..•n,n..•• •.,e lENC SIARIa P4c U R ••...m..�.r•..u•...a oa•un..w [ u ,• AN r r'•� ...I'�1�.• • v awT CMLENONEER SL4SENGINEEES DEVELOPER.UNNER OYei FY WE ca MAX _.. .[_1._ ,•W a.rrt ' �oa.fVla»� .wo .Pw••wfwas LA VINE STREET v • $GREET SECTION t WDID/: N--li.� +cal r_m !•Wr`i ,�!w DRC NIIMSER AI•/19331 •.a•1 DRcliumERx91301083 —' --- SUSTTi3917 +•n'1 v 1 rn 0 TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18912 N THE Cm OF RANCHO CUCAMOI K 3^Q". COLOM OF SAN BEIMMOM STATE OF CALFOWM rY3YrrfbtE/. .-�•• '�� rR•®Olrvrew MlO.wl.em 1.1e0eror0 M01A0•rw �'� •y a.r.r�rr®.warrsrwmawoaua�wlwls® _ '■ mewa�.resrisrar M:3 y — M1Y.mN L]OAagESGROSS aS MRABEM LOTS . 547 ACRES rE1 IIETTER♦D BOT "n vlaarr�uAP I ii I? ni EXISTWO SINGLE FWILY RESIDENTIAL ITO REMAIN, I � I 'r :; .:�a g:►. l:.dl: � it;el L;`I -■ - — ha "dL' EOMY Np•W _A N w 1 ftj Itl.na I ND•IU N ftl Noon Ii.r1J E' a. I:. i �( 9n •ate �_ -_�,Y_.a �..� ."_'e." f. - Ii � < �- - ry �u�ii=i:._.+`!• .3�, L � � _may`� s �e'�� v !p I I 6 II '• --•-5+..•i�.�-1 a n �b. r • • @ e c - .. .. . it 6 1; Vol, . .. ;�: sr - I 1:59 gI NP.aE M••lY w.M• riPYO w•lIJ ME•OJ MM1. reE•E/1, Yld•0.3. rlE.eal_ rplEE MP•E3A rePAl No.n.E 'rle•M' roar,l No-nE NFSu.I NFRE NO•n.'1 NO.nr M.na l NPnJ !n0•nl I NwEu 1 q 9 ' i ++ ' , I a r a A n a p • ■ 0 e e • a ■ ■ o � • ■ � 7 1 � ■ ■ 1 i 4 Y ��._.. LOT'A• PAC61C EIECTWC Yi/WO EMPIRE 1MIL r e.a ' w I ■ OEVELOPER/OIM/IR un/11ES GOliI�IEO�• Q vxl w rw•ni;a f�i« �p I r�.a r.... @Nahum .. r':.�ea..:.'.�".:•s. A a RamYa•.:eia.�a••c.o• >w"eci.'t`-..rc.u� - ni r...c.n ^.^.r...ns..a ,• _a .,..,. r ..ic _ •Sa r NOTE: CIVIL ENGINEER. er, rAo.il.o r,... u•.,.,.uu. f0i 'ter'I"' �•nv 1 SEE CG-02 FOR GRADING SECTIONS. ~'"'�^ •� •'� - SITE LOCATION:BETWEEN ARCHIBALD .sr•,. ammo-L rr r II^r RIrrk p'r�.n:,m'm.�• AVE.AND RAMONA AVE.,NORTH OF sansENGa1(ERS "Sv _.._... __. BASELINE ROAD. E� """ aibi� Nam"" <>.•tia" nu3 NOTE:SEE CG03 FOR SECTIONS A $ SEE TYPICAL LOT GRADING DETAIL �"'"'""" mEr.•E ON SHEET CG-02. ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER rr •1•• - 0 0-' E�1/'S•�—N.T�,Q4.!.Q3. BEN HAWtK: .,.. .. ...^ AAACIOLE WDIDN: ..... ... ee......,...as ra.� .ran er..••.awAi^uo.^..o. .n ,4 :r.' a. PwN Br aR OWNAram ARN N0. 1076-IBI.-01 y1T, .� r r CR SITE ADDRESS: 7!011 '''• "" 7074 RAMONA AVENUE, .K.r m...'.nI RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CA. n r.,...rn. nra I erne. -- nrw.q ;•a �..� roc.nr, y W 1W' IB•-v I. MIIBEA mI . .•••. WiL M■BERmI3Blm sums Ill ORC Na91 WR 1 0 SrGR IP. TR. 18912 '41,WNPOvE.EN15 TR. 18912 111,MPROVI.ldiNM RZOM MML PAW"AVENM fir 1 . . :, n .. g, fit, 'T ?all oil SEC"A awnON .K6118-D AvENur 1R. 16912 111912 IR. lag-2 1,2532 A. T.- u QfFM D to AYf.IIN.ID.YIMN IN. 1891: Lu ul MNA AVENUE TYPICAL AVENUE RA TYPICAL SIRE I SECTION < SeCTION-cloo A!TT.SECTIQU Aw 4% ff 4$ LA VINE SME T -- GRADING ADJACENT I BUILDINGS CR JMVI-5M LAMM ke"a. pmvr 2w Tyllcm LOT QVM COAL —'s CCI-09 2. r x. ,�, i rid r ,. ,.0 1 - r •---+ �yT. � 1 g. 3� PLAN 7-COTTAGE PLAN 2A-TRADfTIONAL PLAN 3D-SPANISH PLAN 2B-BUNGALOW CUNCEPTUAL AZALEAETSCENE Rancho Cucamonga,CA W;kt.IAM HLCMALVlAL.C_Ii SUBTT 18912 Uf1GKIS(A�B87 A It(;H 1 7 E C: t 5 INC; Manning Homes DW-2013003 SS �.�:.��`MT 45' ------------------- I I 1 I I 1 I I I I i I I i • I I - i Uini�ig� i I �Ea-gra I H Bdml M Bab e> — 1.r; 1 r[ IUI. rcal4tu I ILL -''I I --------- 0 --- ---O O I;lain Itlr 77, .p rcire , Hu �_ [ j iPEreh I --- IWrm2 I i Z{'aEa�age I s. BaJ --- — I - r ----------- PLAN 1 i 2526 SF 4 BDRM 1 3.5 BATH I TECH 2-BAY GARAGE L.---------------- - - -- -._. .-.-..- SECOND .FLOOR FIRST FLOOR -�_--'-- fl0_01111REA IAEIE ----PIAN IA IRSI IICMPW --- PLAN 1 — FLOOR PLAN wnw W m 11 AZALEA E a E H Rancho Cucamonga,CAWI C HM HE M S~UNC. —�— Mannir� Homes suBrra89�2 ��o W' A 1.1 w "- "`` 201316E 1 Wn:16" =M1 EEEDESM 11 F r - O aQ Plan 1A-Traditional Plan 1B- Bungalow 1p 00 ad- MJUM EZ73=E1_Z_ UM MTRT.7013 N'dnWana'Rf,Yeewc0.A. . Plan 1D-Spanish Plan IC -Cottage PLAN I FRONT ELEVATIONS AZALEA Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILLIAM HUMALMALCH DRC2013-00887 ARCHITECTS INC. '013160 Awe 16 20IJ SUBTT189121 MODUMIUMMIL Manning Homes DR=3-0=3 A 1.2 =�CA WM*M ° I 4; 4 FIE a EjEj 'LF I RRF•h -- - - --------- O ------. RIGHT Ba:I ROOF PLAN -- - - -_- - -------- SCAVW-T-10* - -- FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA r_. 01 IRADIIIONAL - �IfI1Ff���1F.-.7EIf�I�I R004 FIAT CONCAlk RJB,•lik FASCIA 2%6 TYPICAL FASCIA.7x6 BARGE BOARD L� GABLF HORIZONTAL FAP SIDING W'ITI1 LOUVERED VENT - MII STUCC01 KMONTAI 50MG VAIN CORN@BOARDS 0 WWOLM IRIAT: SIDCCO OVER RIGIDFOAM IRM M ACCR41 f*COPAFSHURTERS PER ENTR 'Q MrOMIFITIERCFM[NPOSTS AT ENTRY DECF OAM B 1 COACH ILGHIS IRONI DOOR ACCNFI COLOR aQ .J GARAGE DOOR: MEIN SECTIONALGARAGf DOOI+GLASS DT ES A"D DECORAIIVF COACH UGIT PER FtEVABON SMF ___— —__ —_ __ _ __-- %MFER OW,WAMSL:OT BASF WBMBRB:B CAP LEFT AWN H - - - - �0 o©cam© .A'11 Ylbnlbm,l•i..A.t ISYK REAR FRONT PLAN 1A - TRADITIONAL AZALEAr B B 11 Rancho Cucamonga;CA WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH SUBTT18912 MM� A R C H I I F C 1 5 IHC. Manninry Homes DK2MKI'��,3-oI0M A1.3 1 1 � . ON]L -- -- __ i ` 1 oil a RIGHT ROOF PLAN FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA SUINGAI IOW _— 0 ROOF FLAT CONCRkIk ROOT[ILL FASCUI 1X6 TYPICAL FASCIA WITH OUROOKER AND KNEE BRACE 1X6 TYPICAI FASCIA.1X6 BARGE 80 ARD _ VANVGABLVERTICAL BOARD AND FOAM SIDING WALL STUCCO!SHRFGLE 9DNG Al SILECI LOCATIONS (� ACCE W TRIM: DE STUCCO OVER COACH FOAM FRIM PEii ELEVATION STILE ACCFM DEIAR DECORATIVE COACH TIGHTS PER EEPARON STYLE (V PROFIT DOtX7: ACC[NICOIOR MRfIEVAlIONSMELNM GLACSUf[S Q GARAGkOQIR METAL>h'IgNAI OECORAIryEGARAGk DIYYt AND COACH LIGHT PER ELLVAIION STYLE LEFT ILI U11 III. �r7rX- _ •AH AYan WAmMAn 4xa[nn REAR FRONT PLAN 1B - BUNGALOW AZALEA Vir I ° Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILLIAM HkLMALHAI CH �—L SUBTT18912 DRC2I113.O87 A R C EI I T E C T S I N C. 1013166 1 y,Q I6.jDld Manning Homes MC2013-01M3 A 1.4 Atte a tlfA`ak I 4. El 4 I I, RIGHT 0. ---- Raj. --- - � e04M Ve•-r-w ROOF PLAN i' FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA COTTAGE . PO(V IIAI CONCRETE Lr?a ILL FASCIA 2)6 nPIC AL FASCA 2X6 IYWAL FASCIA._L6 BARGE BOARD WTH OLTILOOAER AND KNEE BRACE GABLE: HOAUONTAI SIDING WIN TRIM BASE 0 LVAIL SRICCO .I WPIDOW HLA. STUCCO OV kii 16GID ARAM TRIM PER NKAIION SIM ACCWI pEIAI WOOD P1NESNJ SJJFCT tOAh Nfi -O WOOD P0191AE AlN$EIFCT IOCAi1pF6 M COACH LIGHTS PER 81INATION SKI 1"10, A'CLNT COLOR VARI GUESS OILS N GAVAGE DOOR AIHAL SLCIK*M GARAGt DOOR VAIN OECORAINE __----- _ COACH IIGHI PER ELEVATION 5111.E VENFEF MANUTACIMED STONE VENEER ACCFNT LEFT n V E- --E =E=Varvill E=KjMau . --—---- - --. ��ra►' a SI,Abnl,TdddNTb.:! REAR FRONT PLAN 1C - COTTAGE AZALEA B 1 e a Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILLIAM HELMALF IALCII SUBU18912I �201"W7 ARCHIII LC T5 INC. $1115166 I JIAY)u•••••, Manninq Homes X13.01083 A 1,rJ 4- al, RIGHT ROOF PLAN SPANI ROOF CONCUR S Fit F R(\)F '' �_®_—� T-�@ FASCIA 7 WOODFASCLA B0ARD.2X.tNF4CAI FASCIA 2XO ZD WIT RAFTEDIALS .6 BARGE BO BAfr-"D DYAWC-DD BARGE BD. VW41. SIUCC WINDOW TOM: STUCCO OvERAIGOFOAM EVAJK)N SrU FRONT DOM ACCENT COLOR KR REVA110N SRIF GARAGF DOM UrIAL SECTK)NAI DECOPAMF GARAGE DOOR MOM. VIN"CC) Sig ACCENIDUAILS, M�OPAII VLE WIVUGHT"ACCMIS EXCIMAIN SH1.1111,11E)VAILKI? CL M ACHLIC.MlPLRELEVAIK)h Al LEFT -IT A I 7- rnnmTyi 1. LU -L-4 REAR FRONT PLAN 1D - SPANISH AZALEA 4 1 U Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILLIAM HEZMALIIALCI I DX2013-OM7 A F?C H I I I. S !III C SUBTT189121 a ==— c T 2013166 1 Jue 10.2D.4 Manning Homes DRC2013-010M A1.6 H:rwAzall-w--am"W—5- � IM wt i 50' i I i I ! i 1 i I I i ^ I t Bdnu 3 �Bdrm 2 ua.n.r ❑ 10chee�i 1111 Ir I 4d1/BrdS I "••: t I Swap j Bat 1 I m, Uli � 3 N.I.f - I SI Balh O i :'° sa ! gg C_ 1 _ I - i i I a i V.11 i � 1 i NO i . � I I PLAN 2 _-.--_ 2877 SF ! $ i 4 BDRM 13.5 BATH I LOFT ! 1 � I OPT.BEDROOM 5 I I 2-BAY GARAGE+STORAGE -_._._.-_._-_._ _- _, ._._._..__ ._ . .._._.. _.__._._._. .._..._...-. .; SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR -- R0011 PUIN 3A PLAN 2 - FLOOR PLAN IW11i LLT M-_-- -11 WII AZALEA _ - _ r awtgnlm.mrc. o. 4 1 u Rancho Cucamonga,CA —------ ----' Wul rnnn HeznnAr HnLcra SUBTl8912IDfC201 7 ""C""t C'S INC. 20131661 Mann' -� Homes MC2013.OIOM A2.1 M v EEEMUBEEME3333E=1=E=L x 00 ==== rx v/11 Plan 2A-Traditional Plan 2B-Bungalow ..J In E--7 TrP.1 Plan 2D-Spanish Plan 2C -Cottage PLAN 2 FRONT ELEVATIONS AZALEA Rancho CAwaffwxfie.CA WILLIAM HEZMALMAL-CH SUBTT189121 MC2013-00R7 MW .913166 1 Am 16=4 Manning Homes X13-01W3 A2.2 LUMCA ILnh 44- 4 4RIGHT L-------------- --------- ROOF PLAN �>, FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA TRADITIONAL FA CY 'LAT CONCRETE ROA.TEL -- ® MT FASCIA: HORIZONTAL FASCIA.SIDMIG WARGEBOARE GAdlk� HORIZONTAL EAP S10WG Willi LOUVERED VENT WWII STUCCOa IIOR"IALSDRIGVWMCORNERBOAMS WROM TRWI STUCCO OVER RIGO FOAM TRIM , Q PER ELEVATION STYLE ACCENT DkWI: DECCVTNIVE SHUTTERS PEd ELEVATION STYLE.WOOD 1101 91ELF AT SELECT LOCAIK#b _ BURT.UPWOODTFIBERCEEIMTNSA WMiRAAHGATMRv IEy� IIYI��T'7I� 11 CCE T COLOR 1Vf COACN W'Nb �IILjEE�JJII IFyyl FRONT DCR,R ACCENT COLOR 114QkW.al1 N GARAGE DOOR MEW SECRONAI GARAGE DOOR WITH DECORAINE COACH 1610 PER NEVAMN SMF VFNFEIE BRICK WAINSCOT BASE WITH BRICK CAP LEFT io O CJ L -- .AU - REAR FRONT PLAN 2A - TRADITIONAL AZALEA B E u Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILLIAM HEZMALIiALCH :DOTpp I A.ro 1p.y011 Manninry Homes suerr18912 X13- � www-�F'..MSWAWrA1r�:I DRCT013-01083 A2.3 ,R� .�.,,.� t.HF N`Wb r-- ----�_.._..---'--- .__.------ I — - a ----— o --- ---❑: o Ld 8 RIGHT ROOF PLAN - _.._.-____ FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA llf BUNGALOW ROCY TEAT CONCR"f ROOT RIF Q IAS CIA 2X6 IYPA'AL IA51:IA.2Ce nPICAL FASCIA:xa aARGL BOARD WAIT ODTLOOAER AND ANEE BRACE G.ABEL VERTICAL BOARDAND BAH SING WAH SWCOISKNGIF SIDING AT SHFCIIOCA:IONS p WWDNA ETAL: STUCCO OVERDECORAT,IC ACCIGID HIS IRM PERELEVATIONTYLE SMF ACCENT pLiAll. DCCORAIAL COACH LIGHTS PER ELEVATION STYLE N WONT DOOR: ACCENICOLOR PER NLVAIION$IYLE INIH GLASS LIIFS GARAGE DOOR MTTAISFCVONAI FNIIANCFD GARACE DOOR VAIN GLASS ERFS AND DECORAINE COACH WIII PER ELFLALIDN SME LEFT ' ��_ E-U-- El El M' --- .IV/ —'----- -- -� -ER 4 =_ --- Xl - �� REAR FRONT PLAN 2B - BUNGALOW AZALEAr$ B ( a u Rancho Cucamonga,CA W-LLIAM HA PC F MASH INC. �'DI.IID ' suea9i2� X '3-0OS MAy9� Manning Homes 0M A2.4 W� w i El I Pureh 4: 1i I ❑ ❑ RIGHT ROOF PLAN FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA SCALE:119' 1-0' COTTAGE Iit10F FLAT CONCRELLROOFID ____ FASCIA 2x6TYP,CAL FASCIA.'Y6TM1PCAI FASCIA 2x6BARGE &:ARD WITH OUIIOOAER AND KNEE BRACE D GABI. HORIZONTAL SIDING WAIN TRIM BASE WALL STUCCO - � D IIMk STUCCO FOAM IRTI PER E \AIION STYLE ACCENT DRA4 DECORINF SIMURSPCR ELEVATION STYLE (0 WOODPOTSHEU WRH MEE BRACE. COACH LIGHTS PER ELEL'AIIEIN SIYLE N FROM L\-X-?: ACCENT COLOR WPM GLASS UIES V GARAGE DOOR METAL SECTIONAL DECORAM-f GARAGE DOOR AND COACH LIGHT PER ELEVATION SME vENEER MANISACTLITED STONE BASE WA0iSC01 ACCENT ' LEFT - I ' ti - - - Hl 1[d NNE aKl ,au rn�m,amv.+c,+rta+cn n REAR FRONT PLAN2C AGE AZALEA 0 E 0 .0 Rancho Cucamonga,CTA WILLIAM HELMALHALCH '�- Manning Homes SUBTT18912 DX2013- M7 ARC H1TFC TS INC. A2.5 145CIE]IAIAYLKC FJiEk�l TNfAYAU �uloe I.Wn:A6.7tIq ORC2013-01083 ee r^—� .��raP,m. r-- RIGHT ROOF PLANSPAN _ Is MIOI Clllu:RklkSIAk Fg5C1A. 21W LVOODfASCIA WARD MIN RAFIFq IAgS f9 v FIArGC RD 21WOODBARGE°D WALL STUCCO - I WNDOWIRIM SIIICCOOVFRRIC4DWAM \ W94DOW: VINYL _ ACCENT DEUNS DECORATIVE WROUt.HtRON POISHFIF AND1-mm- N GRAL ACCENTS At SFLFCI IOCAllg6 N DkCORA1Nl SHUT ILR Dl IM PLR LLkVA1AN1 SIYIF II��I(E_WTj}_j7slll� WOOD RAUC-AI kNIRY PORCH 00 FRONT DCOR ACCENT COLOR PER R EVAJON SME GARAGE DOOR. META:SECTIONAL DECORATIVE GARAGE WOR AND COACHLIGHT PER EIRATION SDIt LEFT -Irm I " _ =13 1�rrp mn Li _ , ._ Tilriillrl TITEF _ _ RRMI ME REAR FRONT PLAN 2D - SPANISH AZALEA" ° 1} Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH SUBTT18912 ARCIIITEC IS INC. 2066 .A TC 16.2014 Manning Homes DRC2013-OW7 /� / r75.1RU�1,:F11[!1/IC.R.FAATA,:1:l EA flifM5li MCM13.OIOU A2.6 WNW, 3 50' - --------- E 4... tuft EE WHIMS 01 j�77 r---j I 01 0 Hal Bdnu3 x ------- - i - ----- - -- - ----- ---- t i I WHIIIII i _.____ --_- - --- ___ - L Hall Milath ITWIF Porn. It lit 1.6, Hall 0 Rd 2 nn NMI 2 p ----------- PLAN 3 3093 SF 4 BDRM 14.5 BATH I LOFT I TECH OPT.BEDROOM'5 2-BAY GARAGE SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR PLAN 3A FLOOR PLAN AZALEA a 4 1 a Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILUAm HELMALHALCH SUBTT189121 DRC2013-00887 A a CHIIECIS INC. Homes A3. W,, . Manny"` DK200-010M .................... Ir L---3 00 00 I[l� D'/�aD�a�;�� Plan 3A-Traditional Plan 3B- Bungalow F11 39 pmq ® . .) [Ill I-1 Fr-\7 I F�i 3] Plan 3D-Spanish Plan 3C -Cottage PLAN 3 FRONT ELEVATIONS AZALEA 0 4 1 U Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILLIAM HEZMAL LCH 6-n.&---0tNNN,- A R C H I I E C T S"Al P4 C. 7M3166 I J~6.1014 SUBTT189121 DRC2013-OON' miamawlamman"MCA Manning Homes DRC2013-01063 A3.2 NOW b."tOm"' -------- RIGHT I ROOF PLAN -- FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA IRADIFIL)NAL L110/ HAT CONCRF1RI IA . 2K6 TYPICAL FASCIA. BARGE GAJJLE. MCALONIAI ILP SIDING W114 OUVtRED B viNI . WALL SIUCCOI HORIZONTAL SOFA'W TH CORNER BOARDS 0 WINDOW TRIAL STUCCO OVFR RIGID FOAM TRIM I PFR FLFVATON Sr lI ACCENIDNAIL DLCORAINE SHUTIERS PER ELEVAIRTN STYLE. WOOD FIB RCRIE 415HECI T ENTRY. lQ COACH UG R CFAIEYT POSTS AT FNRN.DECORATIVE COACH lGHiS w IRLINIDOOR. ACCENT COLCYR PER LLE'.WK)N SEAL GARAGE 0.70fE ME IAL SLCIIDNAL GARAGE DOOR MAIN DLCORAINE COACH EIGHT PER FLEVAT"SIYIE VENTER WICE VENEER BASF MIARMOT A,BRICK CAP LEFT ® �® -1 ® ® 0 N H TIMo� REAR FRONT PLAN 3A - TRADITIONAL AZALEA �1y� 0 E 1 n Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILT IAMF HE:zmAI FLALCI I I HDIJIOs Manni►'L'"1 Homes SUBTT18912 MC2013�' A R C H I i k C I S I N.C. .lUi' "V4 NIESU Sx11AM'A ClRS.¢L' DRC2013-01003 A3.3 .� an.o.Ism. m p.170 15N --- 1wfll14 ------- i -- - - --------------=_ ► El RIGHT ROOF PLAN ____ _ FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA BUNGALOW RLXL LUIL'LINCRLAS IAF IRk El Q FASCIA. AN TYPICAL FASCA 216 BAL2Gk Bi/Al2U WIIN OIIil001,kR AND BN[E BRACE S GAW VFRIICAL BOARD AND BATT SIDING ' WAIL STUCCO C VER RRIGID FOA SFUCI LOCAfgT1< — ((� WNLA�R IRAk I'tR EILL1f712FR RIGID FOAM IRRd I'k17 FIkVAIION SIYIf (� ACCFN7 DFTAII. DfCORA1NF COACH LIGHTS CFR FI NATIDN SMF _ (V FRONTfACYk ACCFNICOLOR PFR tINAIANi SIYTf WIN GLASS UICS GARAGE DOUR: METAL SEC.Rg27AL LY2 ENHAWED GARAGE DOWITH GLASS UILS AND DECORAIIVE CCACH LIGHT PER ELINATIDN STYLE LEFT H ixxx i T _.. --- REAR FRONT PLAN 3B - BUNGALOW AZALEAr 0 J 1 q Rancho Cucamonga.CTA WILLIAM HUMALHALCH SUBTT18912 DKp'-'BBQ' ""` "'' E` ' S '"`. ylllEp L AM bac2ms-0ioe� A3.4 M no C4W1.�lAAA1'wOft—WM Milt. --- ----- ---- I--...a..=- - —�----- - •� I; L— 6agL keret a 4. - RIGHT ROOF PLAN — — — FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA conAGE R(%VI ILAI CONCRLIE(K01 TLE MSCIA. 2Xb IVPICAL 1ASCUL.:%O BANCL BOARD WITH OUILOOLER AND FNFF BRACF v GABLE HORRONTAL SIDING WITH TRIM BASF WALL. SNCCO VANDO.Y RAE STUCCO CV ER RIND FOAM TRIM PER ELELAIN)TI SIM ACCENT DETAIL DECO PO'9'f11111ERSHERklBRA=ION ME. ri00fIP0191F1f N,R1kNfF BRAC[. COACH LIGHTS PER FELLATION STYLE w IR•VNID(CM AC.CLIII COLOR WITH GLASS LIES w GARAGE DOM METAL SECIPONAL ENHANCED GARAGE MIOR WITI, DECORATIVE COACH MIR PFR FIFVAIUH STAF bFWR MANIMACTURED STONE V[NFFR BASE WAMSCOT ACCFM LEFT a4! H I Cl1L�al 7C�CJ REAR FRONT PLAN 3C - COTTAGE AZALEA At B 1 1 17 Rancho CUCHrnonga,CA 77 WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH SUB1118912 Df7C20,300897 A R C H,I E r C E B E N C. $DISICA 1 AM10.ZnIA Mannir- Homes � oeczou-0,883' A3.5 b,"' ��--I&—."�I . - ----------------- 4- --------- --- ------4------ RIGHT ROOF PLAN SPANISH ' CONC ROOF RAFTER ROOF (ASCU. Ao WOOD FASCIA BOARD WITH RAFIkR TANS BARGE SID Ab WOOD WGE BD 19 v WML STUCCO WADO`N TRAI STUCCO OVER RIGID FOAM YNIDOW: Vlwl -0 ACCENT EklAy DECORATIVE S AT SELF T LO PC-ISHEEF AND 1p DFC ACCENTS AT SELECT IL PER CM DFCORAMf 9 WRFR OFlAA PER DEVMi0T1 STYLE w WOOD RAANG AT ENTRY PORCH l P`.NIOtXM .ACCENT COUNT PER EILYMKri STYLE GMFAGE DOOR METALSECIIONAL DECORATIVE GARAGE WOE?YAIH DECORATIVE COACH ILGHT PER RF%MION STYLE LEFT I ZI, ,. - REAR FRONT PLANISH AZALEA o WILLIAM HELMALHALCM u Rancho Cucamonga,CA SUBTf189121 D1C201.OD88' ANF-1 H I T E r T.5 m,I�NC: . ?0016 qIQ201A Manning HomesA3.6 '.BAIAMI+Hl4F SII[M SYitA Yy,it pTJAV, a ► 49,,, H cT► $ hub 0 —_-— RIGHT ROOF PLAN SCALE: VS*-T-w ,:- -----� FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA SPAN]� CONCRLIESPLELCCA —' FASCIA: Ho WOOD FASCK WARD.2Ao f1 PICAL FASCIA M BARGE BOARD MH RAFTER IMS ��4�44E�66E��1 BARIiE BD: 70D WOOD BARGE BD WaLeruffo WINDOW IIAA SII1CCo OVER RI04)FOMI ACCENT D[w5 DECORAE W IR EM. DfORATWF SHUTTER DETMII.PER I®1 b b (Q HAVAMNSIriE. FIX"DOOR ACCEHI COLOR PER ELEVAIIVI SII LE W GARAGE 00011 METAL SEC DORM MORAINE GARAGE DOORun . Ln .MID COACH UGM PER RENAIM SM.F LEFT .al.aeon a,unsy,�A,aw,ek REAR PLAN 1 D - LOTS 26 & 44 FRONT ENHANCED ELEVATIONS AZALEA ° E2 Rancho Cucamonga,CA Wil-LIAM HE-ZMALHALCH Manna Homes susTTl8912 DRc�� � 1 A R" •1 I E C 1 S INC. :013100 1 AAq 16 I DRC2013-0�oa� E 1. 1 b• '�`".o:"®':f)u 1 41� I z' MHHr 0 purfh RIGHT Baa ROOF PLAN -- -- -- = --- - -- SCALE: 118*- r-o• ---- FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA IRADRIONAL fFLµ}kI��{1 ; ; �f{-11 • _ - IA70F KAI CONCRklk lk)M 1111, FASCIA: Ike IYMCAI FASCIA.)le BARGE BOARD - -- -- --- GAEIF 11CM70UTAI I AD SIDING-WITH IOUVFRfD VENT --- ---- 0 WAIT STUCCOI HORCONIAL SDNG YNTHCORNLRBOARDS _ I 1NINDOTN IPIM. $I 1'CC0 OVER RIGID FOAM TRIM -a PHSIM ACCENT DEAR DFCORAIIVF%UER5 r. { PFR FLFVMLY15i17F WOODiFIBERCEMRIIP&TS N EMM.DECORATIVE COACH LIGHTS w HIONI DOOR AM.NICOWR - GARAGEDOOR: MEIALSECIC4,1AL GAXAGE DOOR WTlIC:k%UlESAND DECORATIVECOACIl11G1IT KR ELEVATION Siklf �ENkFR. BRICK WAINSCOT SAM W1111MCK CAP LEFT VN:...nWnM•MVN_U•f REAR PLAN lA - LOT 45 FRONT ENHANCED ELEVATIONS AZALEA B f I V Rancho Cucaffx a,CA WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH 6w—nmnARCHITECTS INC. '_OIJIM 1 A—l� Manning Homes SUBTTl89121 DDRC201J-00' E 1.2 0 M `0 i � ���' �' '��j l� �'1lP��p.�R��P'`�R�tAP`���'`f�l�'`�!!`��QR+ ��`�!P!�RR''�P��"�R1�P-��1lP'IIn���!AP'�P��►'"AP�j►�*'P'1 �:Yh � � �-.��irr_�� .�i�Y-r_�r..-�i�fr_�k:®i���4.,�i�ir�r..-�i�rr_�r�-ril®�r..�ii�ll���-�_►._�!r'�.- .- I���r `v _ =av�� -i�co�s• =•o��inr:w mac_ , ��- , � . 11 ` w w_ w.a w Gs' �w�R ,..r-. �, .� �e- ��� .� t.. �.., sem. ����.-®�� �`, • ���•�► ���._►•ar��r.= _f��e�►n r��. _r���•w .r.. -_ ��o� .r�� re=r��r�r:�...-�' c vim Si Si ya. _�_� Si �'_i Of A N le Si 04 Si_�!� _�Si Si Si Si�Si Si� _�_�_� •� tAna v o- � f1 �■ - N - ` C• $vovvoo t�f � Vr q��.��0i.vt5,!apl,+� °�A .�: ti t� i' ��� ti � A,.O �. -- � A°OCS:Qb�irf►� �a0 ;- . V 0000 �, �i:�,0 V• 100,::-.O ooboaoo �°.,� . . A OHO 0000 4i ril �t+ ;++ �� oo�r000rO p,�00o000000c� ! 0�0, o V ,�a000a 0000 oo:nu oo"�Ooo �,a o 0000 c�ri�oo,b ODn.noo°o°o uo- V o�•ur O _ o^.":.::. —.���et�o'o�-�•sTl- y� n�r.�, aoo�rr�a occ •viGi! _ P • 1 14/8/20-14 11. Address . • WIMP MM Uiv ®� AA + I VI A?191 WZ • � I r 10 NO 1 { Neighborhood Meeting Tuesday, April 08, 2014 418/2014 6.00P.m. Tentative Tract No. 18912 4_ 7074 Ramona Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga Page-1 Address Phone No. Print Name Sign 1 7 ;Z3 4f— It 4 2 — 3 K a SUS `PD`1• vQ 5 1 V6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 D-I pg.39 • MAN.N1;Ntl""1 140M ts.:: .: . July 16,2014 Mr. Mike Smith Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive. Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91730 Subject: Tract 18912 Summary of Neighborhood Meeting held on 4/8/14 Dear Mr.Smith. On April 8, 2014 Manning Homes held a neighborhood meeting at Deer Canyon Elementary School at 6pm to present the proposed'development of 46 single family homes at 7074 Ramona Ave_ Other than the homeowners and other attendees shown on the sign-in sheet,.Craig Kozma,,Jim Manning, and.Jackie Manning.were present representing Manning Homes,Mike Smith representing the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, and Julie Frasure representing the City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Department. Just prior to the meeting, it was discovered that there was an error in the printing of the mailing labels which were used to mail out notice.4 of the meeting (to the 660' radius from the project site). Once this error was recognized,Manning Homes announced to the attendees that an error was made in the noticing and the neighborhood meeting would need to be rescheduled. However, since there were approximately 15-20 people in attendance (see sign-in sheet), Manning Homes decided to proceed with an "informal" presentation even though it was understood that another meeting would be rescheduled. The majority of people in attendance of this meeting were from "The Neighborhood", which is a homeowners association representing 111 single. family homes directly North of the proposed development. Upon completion of the presentation, Manning Homes conducted a question and answer session from the audience.. Below is a list of issues discussed: • The proposed street layout for new development and its connection to the Newton Place stub street was by far the issue of most concern and discussion during the question and answer session. • The impacts of increased traffic from thenew development on the 8 existing houses on the South side of Newton .Pl. due to the street connection. The South side of Newton Pl. currently has 8 homes on a reduced radius cul-de-sac (stub street). The homeowners currently living on this street had concerns about the increased car traffic, and safety for themselves and their children in the street: • • There was discussion about the impacts of increased vehicle traffic at the intersection of Camden Pl. and Archibald Ave: due to the street connection. Attendees said there is already "ort Peach CA 91.660 1 TEL 949.250.A200 I FAX 9:9.2`;0.9008 I Cs = EXHIBIT -1-2unvwr�.:nn,.nits?rn,5 ce 1 D-1 pg.40 Mr Mike Smith July 16,2014 Page 2 of 2 "stacking" and backup issues at the interseetionduring morning peak hours. Asked if traffic studies have been completed or would be required. • There were concerns about increased traffic (in general).to ""The Neighborhood"due to the street connection. Discussions about increased traffic throughout "The Neighborhood" and discussions about likely traffic patterns and there affect on the existing streets. • Discussions and concerns. about "cut-through" traffic on the newly proposed street and its impacts on the existing neighborhood due to the street connection: • There was discussion about inadequate, or improper fire access in the past with the street design when turning.from Camden.Pl. south onto Newton Pl. Residents told of a time when there was a fire and the fire truck did not pull down Newton Pl. • Concerns about future homeowners in the proposed development using the private facilities (ie. pool and park)within the Neighborhood.. With the proposed street connection there were concerns about pedestrian access to the private facilities without permission. • There were lengthy discussions about alternate street designs. Alternate street designs discussed were 1) A direct through street to Archibald, therefore not connecting.to Newton PL 2)A single cul-de-sac design off Ramona,with EVA out to Archibald or Newton Pl. 3) a double cul-de-sac off Ramona and La Vine. The feasibility and.fire access of the alternate designs were discussed in detail. • Discussion of the Pacific Electric Bike Trail. Questions whether there would-be a pedestrian connection.from the proposed development. • Discussion of the,improvements and widening on Ramona. Concerns of pedestrian safety and speed limits of cats traveling North and South on Ramona. • Discussion of the trees on site. Removal and replacement of the Eucalyptus windrow and other trees on the site. • Discussion of timing of construction. Work hours. Phasin& Impacts of construction noise. Noise and rodent impacts during.demo,clearing,and grading. • Discussion of some existing problems on the site. Break-in's at home, overgrown trees, and homeless camps on site. • Discussion of expected price range for new homes. All the above items were addressed and answered as best as possible by Manning Homes, Mike- Smith, and Julie Frasure. At the conclusion of the question and answer session, Manning Homes announced that another meeting,would be scheduled at the same location in the near future and the surrounding homeowners within 660' of the project'site would receive a notice in the mail at least 2 weeks in advance Manning Homes also indicated it would have additional discussions with the City prior to the next meeting regarding the street design. Manning:Homes also agreed to bring other site studies which were done with alternate street layouts to show at the next meeting:. Sincerely, 1167 Craig Project Manager-Manning Homes D—I pg.41 NMI '9■■� @'9■e w-as'wu ,� ■ ;; �` (I IIS ■, 1 � ���LM 1`1 =���k��+��a�����I3+������9��� �� �— �_' 11� r%`wi.���.%i,�.Gi,��r.ii.�.i%��_ ,• =i��ii�.ie57u�Gi�iG.��u�.ii��G��Gw.r_- �_OM IM �xp�� •-_ - 'r ��R ,■ ,� �� ;� 111111 is-ilia i)•ii�iiF�ai:a� aisIIai7F:I1•® !1•idFi�il%'7E=� i:�i.4�i�ik?�is.'Ll• O�L�i7F�0 oi[_��ikFliE� 1 .• i�trl�iAF)•i5k� lli�i'!•ik?7i� i>•�c>_ixa;>_ita� i��ic�i�,ii�a>_ rl i!•i.9F1•ilF_Li�� oii.SF7iiiF�l�'-aE� O�G�i4Ii�3)• i:ii4?F�ikFli�l� 11 - + \ ilis4:i1•!R!:iiA' i-iiF}Ili1F:712! 0�®il®® i:ii4T��fAIi® ifl��it>IIIilfi� ilil4l_lik::il:E' ' �i�k?:'�i1FIi��A� 0' iF��i1EIIi�}31♦ � \ 0�f::lilQlii�=! i!i!S!IlilF_�lIS! 0i.G1•i]Q7•�L� i'��i]©i� �)•t::F�ik2"1•�I� tib®ikili�:EI♦ I WIN 69V 02 ilii®i. 0 51-3-Ti 11 MM" —"91Z. _..+bIK:�S9 '1ti44.T �'9ATA!' iliilF�iR1:1•ii41• �f1"�•i}[L7�� ®® — nowitC7ik�)•i�4� i Azalea, LLC Neighborhood Meeting4/28/2014 9 6:00P.m. C Tuesday,April 29, 2014 `' 0o _ �P► Tentative Tract No. 18912 46 SFRH1 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga Page 1 Address Phone No. E-mail Address Print NameA OF Si n 1 JO Ck 2 � G'/o v 3 g r . �d0 �, r5— 0� er s RAVI •W' Arm 4CA - '1qq aft—nawaila n n Am1h 9 !01 komof CouL40L 10Z-G'�G l -blue (�Iu�bP�C1 11 ID Z14 Ne�►o�n Pt A Dq -T8-1 21 .6 12 7038 N o4 624-7224 LA 8 13 7n w L 10107& A109- X01StFOP1 _XC', 14 IgSC. r 1-60 rlr ,r 15 701-CAP f .3 ie� c�rvir� .: No. E-mail Address Phone cr,7 ® ` i 14 ® ' R � - ii- 7 - _ _:a. " ,� _ `'`± � . '' _► fit. ,,�i 'f Azalea. LLC 4128/20146:00p.m. Neighborhood.Meeting Tuesday,April.29, 2.014 Tentative Tract No. 18912 46 SFR 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga Page 3 Address Phone No. &mail Address Print Name Sign 4 G4 32 2-4 z. 000 . Mo w t . t-Vr" 33 70. r ¢w w► co e I 34 co 35 P. 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 • MANNINO. HOMES. July 16,2014 Mr. Mike Smith Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91730 Subject: Tract 18912 Summary of Neighborhood Meeting held on 4/29/14 Dear Mr. Smith: On April 29,2014 Manning Homes held a neighborhood meeting at Deer Canyon Elementary School at 6pm to present the proposed development of 45 single family homes at.7(74 Ramona Ave. There were approximately 33 people in attendance for this meeting (see sign-in sheet). Other than the homeowners and other attendees present, Craig Kozma and Jim Manning:were present representing Manning Homes, Mike Smith representing the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, • Willie Valbuena, Betty Miller,Craig Cruz representing the City of Rancho.Cucamonga Engineering Department,and.Rob Ball representing the City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Department. This was the first "official" neighborhood meeting since the prior meeting on April 8th was not property noticed due to a error in the mailing labels. All residences within 660' of the site were. noticed by mail at least 2 weeks prior to this meeting. Between the first meeting held on April 8th and the second held on April 29th,various meetings were held between Manning Homes and the City of Rancho Cucamonga to discuss alternate street designs for the proposed development: It was determined just prior to the neighborhood.meeting on April 29th, that a street design.with a single cul-de-sac connectingonly off Ramona with and EVA out to Archibald would be acceptable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning, Engineering, and Fire Departments and to Manning Homes. This change in.street design also changed the number of lots on the site from 46 to 45. However, due to time constraints, at the time of the meeting Manning Homes only had a rough conceptual (hand drawn) site plan showing the revised cul-de-sac street design with the EVA out to Archibald. Manning Homes decided to proceed with the neighborhood meeting on the 29th and present the revised conceptual site plan showing the cul-de-sac off Ramona and EVA out to Archibald. Early during the presentation,Manning Homes indicated to the attendees that a third neighborhood meeting would be held in the near future to present a "final" site plan prepared by an engineer with correct dimensions and house plotting. • Generally speaking, the revised site plan with the. new street design was well received by the surrounding neighbors. Upon completion of the presentation, Manning Homes conducted a question and answer session from the audience. Below is a list of issues discussed. ^ni" cw n:.�, c,_,,,,,-i Z �«. � Newport Beach CA 92600 1 rEL 949.250.4200 1 FAX 949.250.90091 WEB www.mcnninghomes.com EXHI1 BITJ D-1 pg.46 Mr.Mike Smith July 16,2014 Page 2 of 2. • Some neighbors off Ramona and La Vine were concerned about the cul-desae design and the traffic impacts on Ramona. Now that all residences in proposed development would be using: Ramona Ave. • There werediscussions about alternate street designs and. fire access. Alternate. street designs discussed were 1) A direct through street to Archibald, no connecting to Newton Pl. 2)Connecting with a throughstreet to Newton Pl.(the previous design) • Discussion of the Pacific Electric Bike Trail. Questions whether there would be a pedestrian connection from the proposed development. • Discussion of the improvements and. widening on Ramona.. Concerns of pedestrian safety and speed 1 imits of cars traveling North and South on Ramona., • Discussions of the pedestrian safety crossing across Ramona.. Discussions of a possibility of a traffic signal or stop sign to be installed either at La Vine or the Pacific Electric Bike Trail crossing !R Discussions of storm.drain improvements and widening..of Ramona. Impacts and timing of construction. • Discussion of the trees on site. Removal and.replacement of the Eucalyptus windrow and other trees on the site • Discussion of impact on schools: Which schools will the future residences'children attend. • Discussion of timing of construction. Work hours. Phasing, Impacts of construction noise. Noise and rodent impacts during demo,clearing,and grading. •: Discussion of some existing problems on the site. Break-in's at home,overgrown trees, and homeless camps on site. • Discussion of sizes and expected price range for new homes. • Discussion of noticing procedure required by the City:. Wanted more widely noticed or by a method other than mailers. All the above items were addressed and answered as best as possible by Manning.Homes and the City of Rancho Cucamonga staff. At the conclusion of the question and answer session,Manning Homes announced that another meeting would be scheduled at the same location in the near future and the surrounding homeowners.within 660'of the project site would receive a notice in the mail at least 2 weeks in advance. Manning Homes indicated that at this next meeting they would present the"final" engineered site plan showing the cul-de-sac street design with EVA out to Archibald, dimensioned and showing more detail. Sincerely, C g zma Proj r-Manning Homes D-1 pg.47 -F T 1- 4 r } ; fill Nt ' CO Kj ...... LJ , I{ I j} 3 `r M _ m S W me 0 0 W Azalea, LLC ...� Neighborhood Meeting 5/2912014 Thursday, May 29, 2014 6.00P.M. Tentative Tract No. 18912 45 SFR 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga Page 1 Address Phone No. E-mail Address Print arpe -....-.--_._..--.- 3 _ P �. u 4 7L92 �C� c dais oLB oL. 5 7-D pl 2 -12Z do rna;1 o Tem s s a - GdirC_ . uOrj� 'Z .t .1i•coCk&n 7 T, _ % / '� e %y �Q�- ' 9 —r l /�k K 10 1--ttit'p5 Res -9651 T Nd�.� .y.,��l.ce �►d }�e;'� 1, d Dpi 3 3 b e a Laa.10 12 70.21; 'Lo' -eX09 5b9 0 3 0 J � f3o 13 N A-Ve' q0�- S -l�{S ll-fSG119Cs 4t'too• �v��4 O - 14 15 MA July 16, 2014 Mc. Mike Smith Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91730 Subject: Tract 19912 Summary of Neighborhood Meeting held on 5/29/14 Dear Mr. Smith: On May.29, 2014 Manning Homes held a neighborhood meeting at Deer Canyon Elementary School at 6pm to present the proposed development of 45 single family homes at 7074 Ramona Ave. There were approximately 13 people in attendance for this meeting (see sign-in sheet); Other than the homeowners and other attendees present,Craig:Kozma,Jim Manning,Anne Marie Kane, and Jackie. Manning were present representing Manning Homes, Mike Smith representing the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department;Willie Valbuena,Betty Miller,Craig Cruz representing the City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Department, and Rob Bali representing the City of Rancho Cucamonga Fire Department During the previous neighborhood meeting held on April 29th Manning Homes presented at 45.Iot site plan. showing a revised street design with a single cul-de-sac off Ramona with and EVA out to Archibald. Due to time constraints,the site pian presented at the April 29th meeting was conceptual, hand drawn, and lacked proper detail. It was therefore communicated at the April 29th meeting, that another meeting.would be held to present the "final" engineered plan,showing dimensions and proper. detail. The meeting held on May 29th Manning.Homes presented the final plan. Upon completion of the presentation, Manning Homes conducted a question and answer session from.the.audience. Below is a list of issues discussed: • Discussion of the Pacific Electric Bike Trail. Questions whether there would be a pedestrian connection from the proposed development. • Discussion about the proposed. improvements on Ramona. Questions: on storm drain improvements and removal of the open culverts which are currently located.at the crossing of the Pacific Electric Bike trail. What would the sidewalks look like on Ramona. • Discussion of the improvements and widening on Ramona. Concerns of pedestrian safety and speed limits of cars traveling North and South on Ramona. • Discussions of the pedestrian safety crossing across Ramona. Discussions of a possibility of a traffic signal or stop sign to be installed either at La Vine or the Pacific Electric Bike Trail crossing. n70 I Newu�rt Beach�a 915cC I49.756.4260 I FAX 949.259GQ3 I `� iwWW,m.r.,rnEXHIBIT K-Z c�nar;;s.c m D-1 pg. 50 Mr. Mike Smith July 16,.201.4 Page 2 of 2 • Discussions of storm drain improvements and widening of Ramona. Impacts and timing of. construction: Traffic delays on Ramona. Possible.shut off of utilities. • Discussion. of construction traffic and work hours. Discussed how the project would be phased and limit.construction workers to park vehicles on-site. • Discussion of the trees on site. Removal and replacement of the Eucalyptus windrow and other trees on the site. Replacement with different species of Eucalyptus in the rear yards of Lots 26�-45. New trees will be low maintenance and good screening trees • Discussion of timing of construction. Work hours. Phasing. Impacts of construction noise. Noise and rodent impacts during demo;clearing,and grading: • Discussion of some existing problems on the site. Break-in's at home, overgrown trees, and homeless camps on site. • Discussion of sizes and expected price range for new homes. All the above items were addressed and answered as best as possible by Manning Homes and the City of Rancho Cucamonga staff. Manning Homes provided business cards and contact information if.any attendees had questions or concerns in the future: Manning Homes received approximately 20 letters of support for the development from residents in the surrounding neighborhoods. Sincerely, Craig a Project Manager-Manning Homes D-1 pg. 51 m = TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18912 i111W'Ia111 _! - I�l� IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. COUNTY OF SAN BERNAROWO.STATE OF CALIFORNIA -- 111111111- .�. r=wa��alwrii=�IYIi�.tialia� x Lu ! xXdo ANY.7014 8.35 ACRES GROSS 45NUMBERED LOTS T IY Yy 5.01 ACRES NET !LETTERED l01 Iw1iNO:loTate!-0+ :ffr DEATAILED SITE PLAN 1 W •(..1 w aC: t rr a- 1Q�1TM� I.. DIISTw6 STFzFAMLV RESIDeNTIAL ITO 1:•: i 1. ! 1 �� - fl 1 ar\ tw.o.. YCrr•:ama 1 oaf �.e�. rtaaa ityriai-\_ —` {--�I.� ':'I�.'a r- _. - • 4 i ■ >t �a t t Y N 1 —1_Mraa t• IIIA Y Ra■ I 'ra Y.a '.Yr R.a ~~ .11aY t wY M►! tia Raa Ilwr - \ -. Mw - }I- a IA" ` �*Yt.-:-��r..._� � .. .—._""':—._..:..._;=e•a-:�-u:�.rt�f[.r't,.��,� :7-1,f"T't'_�.. °.,��1�s��'.���:t�:.,° a�-�^ _ _ I N {-[� '1'Y Ila R t41/ ,Iw tl Yr b 11Y Y tla N m y N Y t11Y y Y[ ty1 Y "to IIa w Yr Y. Ya y ti Y .IIa al Ya■ Rr V•r Y N • n ° a • •■ .• o .■ • . M . a • • . • . : f • r• • a -- _ 1MAO ma TWA r.L _ _; ___ __ ___ _�_.�.aw.r_'�-a"� _. �• -. r —_ _ ___ _.. ____� _ -Y.Y�r•__.._r. __ _ _ _ _y!- •�I 6 f gym _=x-- �._—_-�_—__.._ �adGY'�paa.l.a �YYf � • lla.�.:�:aa N. ■Y �' r �>j• TT ? .� 1.9c EeTw KVO EINE IW un.A• P.M.;GICI11C i ,r.. ... . _ . . _. 1 9Q - - ..- - — ' EGEND, slnc_u FAwu for iAEuiulal—" --siYii[-f_uuLr-ioi uSmAtroN 1 Iat Yru a[•Is..l TTilf-- r.iRO- MI�� a.s� '-IaTr o:� I.YtN.r 1 � �rYl � '11 nT-=vn VW1lN :IIM IIY�.%IY+NIttl ` T_ — _ _ li-- _ n ��o>... ■�MADOLE_trlrr:r.Yaa _ _ t::. - �._ _ _- I'YEYCYIEN TIEFF it S - am&EN61l"IS _'■_.. _Jr.-- -- ..Wv._.. , �_ ._ — niJY - ___..__ :tn• ava a,.:u.n..0 ee�wy��.•�.••n 51l!1_'a1fY LI" YYM Ir ym w YN[ — CR IMT. GWAM 511L _If NtYltt1 Sl11WMt n •e<.ra.a rrl. _ YW M.s..an4•wr,m, �E -II-'- - c4 no ,.n.0 w., N1WI. _"�_ -_ SIt1_ -� -a1 Ywf Oi ...,r ..... tarpu,sa•.,la•.'mw tiara.. ar mate WOID/:~ wrc ra PRIVAIEUPIN N•AOE ..... . aY.IL aWYsil•aI: 'IRC MIAa01]OIIOREi �� D11L 111ita[N a/UVtQI SVE1T•qt7 ERr t s t .� N-;. MANNING HOMES CITY OF RANCHO CLIC-11V;ONGA February 19, 2014 FEB 2 0 2L'.A Mr. Mike Smith RECEIVED - PLAwgING Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Subject: Tentative Tract Map 18912 Submittal, 7074 Ramona Avenue Dear Mr. Smith: Manning Homes is pleased to present justification in support of the proposal to develop a 46-unit single-family detached subdivision (Tentative Tract Map 18912) on a 6.82± acre parcel of land located between Ramona and Archibald Avenues immediately North of the Pacific Electric Bike Trail. • Existing Site Conditions The parcel has an agricultural history and has been highly disturbed from its natural state (Hamilton Biological, 2014). Along the Northerly boundary of the site there is a fragmented . Eucalyptus windrow which is in declining health, possibly due to the construction of a block wall in the root zone of the trees (Bonterra, 2014). Several trees that would have made up the windrow have also fallen or been removed at some point in the past(Bonterra, 2014). Across the remainder of the site are dead or declining fruit/citrus trees and coast live oak trees, which have been cut at the stump in the past and have since re-sprouted (Bonterra, 2014). There is a vacant single family home (7074 Ramona Ave.) on the site which appears on the "Local Inventory of Historic Resources" list complete by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. On the list, the property was assigned a California Historic Resources code of 6Z, which states: "Found ineligible for NR (National Register), CR (California Register), or local designation through survey evaluation" (Rancho Cucamonga, 2011 / Bonterra, 2014). A Cultural Resource Assessment was completed for the property and no significant archaeological, historical, or paleontological resources were discovered (Bonterra, 2014). The entire parcel will be cleared prior to the development of the subdivision. Mitigation measures will be implemented to preserve paleontological, historical, or archaeological resources which may be discovered during grading. All trees will removed per the requirements of the Biological Assessment (Hamilton Biological, 2014) and will be replaced per the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Tree Replacement Policy including new Eucalyptus trees along the Northerly boundary. EXHIBITL !ewport Beach CA 92560 1 TEL 949.2JO.a200 1 FAX 949.250.900$ I `';E3:vw•n m. �nninghomes.corn D-1 pg. 53 r Mr. Mike Smith February, 19 2014 Page 2 of 6 Zoning and General Plan The parcel currently possesses two different zoning designations with the Easterly half of the parcel being zoned low-medium residential (LM, 4-8 dwelling units/acre) and the Westerly half being zoned medium residential (M, 8-14 dwelling units/acre). The General Plan however, designates the entire site as medium residential (M, 8-14 dwelling units/acre) (see attachments). The surrounding land uses and zoning are as follows: • North — Single-Family Residential, Low-Medium (LM District, 4-8 dwelling units per acre. Small lot development with minimum lot size of 40'x82'=3,280sf) • South — Bicycle and Running Trail, Multi-Family Residential, Medium-High (MH District, 14-24 dwelling units per acre) and Single-Family Residential, Low-Medium (LM District,4-8 dwelling units per acre) • East — Single-Family, Low-Residential (L District, maximum of 4 dwelling units per acre) • West—Feed and Tack Store,Medium-High (MH District, 14-24 dwelling units per acre) Currently, with two zoning designations, the property could be designed with detached, single family units on the Easterly side, and attached multi-family units on the Westerly side. Developing the property in this manner would result in a fragmented development which may be undesirable on a relatively small 6.82-acre property. Another approach would be a "blended" zoning method (averaging LM & M densities), which would allow a maximum of 11 dwelling units per acre, or approximately 76 units across the entire site. The proposed development of 46 single family lots (6.74 dwelling units per gross acre) is consistent with the Low-Medium zoning designation (4-8 dwelling units per acre) and is a less intense land use than both current zoning standards and the General Plan allow. It is proposed that the Easterly half of the site will be re- zoned to the "M" Medium-Residential zoning to establish consistent zoning across the development and to conform to the General Plan. Zoning guidelines and development standards will be established for detached, single family lots/homes in the "M" zone. The development to the north is designated LM but was developed prior to current zoning standards being established and has several deviations, including lots as small as 40' x 82' (3,280 s.f.) and 5/5 side yard setbacks. The overall density of the existing project to the North is 7.70 dwelling units/gross acre. The density of the proposed project (Tract, 18912) is 6.74 dwelling units/gross acre. Compared to the existing neighborhood to the North, the proposed project (Tract 18912) is compatible with the existing Northerly neighborhood and will have larger lots and lower overall density. The parcel is constrained to the south by the Pacific Electric Bike Trail (SANBAG/railroad right- of-way). The location of the old railroad tracks and associated right-of-way have resulted in an irregular shaped parcel. Due to the narrow (and variable) north/south dimension of the parcel, lot depth and front yard setbacks per the "LM" Development Standards for Residential Districts are difficult to achieve. In addition, the property is also constrained by the curve in the proposed new public street which is required in order to properly align with La Vine St. to the east. The DA pg. 54 Mr. Mike Smith February, 19 2014 Page 3 of 6 ® applicant is proposing front yard setbacks of 27' sideyard setbacks of 5/5, and minimum rear yard setbacks of 15'. The street scene will include varied front yard setbacks, mixed architectural massing, and architectural features such as front porches, low roofs, and set-back garage doors. Significant architectural enhancements are included on all four sides of all. the homes including architectural popouts, varied roof lines, exterior window and door trim details, shutters, and decorative potshelfs. All homes will have a 2-car garage and a private driveway a minimum of 19'deep. An attached table summarizes the design guidelines used for the project. Open Space The proposed project will provide 137.330 square feet (3.15 acres) of private open space. This constitutes 61.5% of the net area of the project. Private open space includes front, rear, and side yards of each lot and does not include the street or parkways. The percentage of open space far exceeds the amount required for both the LM zone (40%), and the M zone (35%) as listed in the Development Code. . We respectfully request your approval of this project. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at (949) 250-4200. Sincerely, Craig Kozm Project Manager Manning Homes D—I pg. 55 Tract 18912 Proposed Tract Design Guideline Summary Standard 18912 Minimum Lot Area(minimum) 4,000sf 4,013sf Minimum Lot Area(minimum net ave) 4 000sf 4,907sf Lot Width(minimum) 45ft 45ft Lot Width(comer lot) 50ft 60ft Lot Depth(minimum) 80ft 83ft Minimum Frontage 3011 45ft Minimum Frontage(flag lot) 20ft n/a Allowed Density(dwelling units per acre) Minimum Density(Net/excluding streets and ROW) 8 du/ac 8.88 du/ac Maximum Density(Net/excludmg streets and ROW) 14 du/ac 8.88 du/ac Minimum Setback Front Yard' (from curb face) 27ft 27ft Comer Side Yard (from curb face) 15ft 20ft Interior Side Yard 5/5 5/5 Rear Yard 1511 15ft Building Height Primary Buildings 35ft 2911 max Lot Coverage Lot Coveragez 50% 45.5%max Open Space Requirement Private Open Space(excludes street&parkway) 35%min 62% Minimum Patio/Porch Depth 6ft 6ft ' Front yard setback can be reduced up to 5'to provide variation along the street. Does not include eves. Z Lot Coverage includes building footprint(incl.garages)and covered porches. Does not include eaves. D-1 pg. 56 Hill III � .�.�■. � ! As M, IMP �4 � - ' . Mr. Mike Smith February, 19 2014 Page 6of6 ZONING y ,... �_ C v n. A A A I n FF Fmi R SITE Easterly 1/2 - LM (4-8 du/ac) Westerly 1/2 - M (8-14 du/ac) D-1 Pg. 58 ® MANNING HOMES CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA February 20, 2014 FEB 10 1014 Mr. Mike Smith RECEIVED - PLANNING Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Subject: Minor Exception justification for wall height T?Mlq- 0161 Tentative Tract Map 18912 Submittal, 7074 Ramona Avenue Dear Mr. Smith: Manning Homes is pleased to present justification in support of a minor exception for wall heights for Tentative Tract Map 18912 on a 6.82±acre parcel of land located between Ramona and Archibald Avenues immediately North of the Pacific Electric Bike Trail. The parcel is constrained to the south by the Pacific Electric Bike Trail (SANBAG/railroad right-of- way). The location of the old railroad tracks and associated right-of-way have resulted in an irregular shaped parcel. Due to the narrow (and variable) north/south dimension of the parcel, lot depths, widths, and sizes are constrained. In addition, the property is also constrained by the curve in the proposed new public street which is required in order to properly align with La Vine St. to the east. These constraints, in combination with the natural topography of the site, require walls up to 7.5' in height (as calculated by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Development Code). The combination walls are also required in order to avoid slopes between houses and provide as much usable/flat area within the yards of the proposed houses. The applicant is proposing a combination screen/retaining wall up to 7.5'in height in the rear yards of Lots 24-27 along Archibald Ave. The maximum height of this wall as viewed from Archibald Ave. will be 6', with the retaining portion facing inward towards the proposed houses. Combination screen/retaining walls no higher than 7.5' are also proposed on the sideyards, between houses on Lots 11-22 and 29-39. We respectfully request your approval of this minor exception. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at(949) 250-4200. Sincerely, • Craig Project Manager- Manning Homes 20151 . W Birch Str=•er I Sc to 1.50 1 \ler port Beach CA 92660 I TEL �•:9.250.4;_00 I FAX 949.250.9008 I 'NEB .u. nnir,�liornes. ;irn D-1 pg. 59 • To: Mr. Mike Smith,Associate Planner March I,2014 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga,Ca. 91729-0807 Re: DCR#2013-00887 2013-010 3 SUBTT 18912�� 1�t File No.:Tract 18912; Proposed Development of 46 Single Family Homes by Manning Homes& Watermill Homes Location:between Ramona Ave and Archibald Ave,north of bike trail Gentlepeople: I am concerned that the above captioned proposed leve!:.pment N-culd substantially interfere with the,use and enjoyment of my property located at 9801 Yale Dr.,adjacent to the proposed site(P.S.). 1. The lower density zone that currently exists over the middle and eastern portion of the P.S.should be extended,westward,over the rest of the site. . This would reduce congestion,noise,pollution, and traffic. The lower zone would be consistent with the neighboring density zones that lead in and out of the P.S.. 2.Construction work should be limited to reasonable times;after 8 am and before 5 pm,and not on weekends or holidays. 3.Construction equipment and vehicles should be fitted with smog and noise reduction devices. ® 4. Parking for employee and construction vehicles should be restricted and away from neighboring homes. 5. A common area should be developed on the P.S..so that pre existing small common areas and parks outside the P.S.are not crowded with the residents of the P.S..(example: I pay homeowner's fees for the upkeep of the small park across the street from my property and it was not intended to be used by a multitude of non H.O.A.members. ) Thank you for your time and attention,and please inform me in writing of all meetings on this matter. Very truly yours, Ai-Lun"Ellene"Tseng 9801 Yale Dr. Rancho Cucamonga,Ca.91701 �p�CHO�CAI�'p' CM 2014 BAR n� ® R�cENED PIANNING EXHIBIT M D-1 pg. 60 March 10,2014 Mike Smith Associate Planner,Community Development-City of Rancho Cucamonga P. 0. Box 807 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho.Cucamonga,CA 91729-0807 RE: Proposed construction of single family homes south of The Neighborhood HOA,Alta Loma. Dear Mike Smith, We have been a resident of Rancho Cucamonga for over 26-years and the growth has been exponential. The volume of traffic to Archibald Avenue has increased with the access to the 210 freeway. Roadways into Archibald Avenue have become perilous for those that live in aligning areas.We have no doubt that the proposed plans to route the development traffic for the area just south of the Neighborhood Homeowner's. Association through Newton Place will pose a threat to safety. The Camden Drive access from the Neighborhood HOA to Archibald is a shared intersection with 4-way multiple traffic activity. Not only is the turn lanes small from Archibald Avenue into the east and west resident areas but there is not enough attention given to increased usage,speed, and adequate lighting. If not for the traffic interruptions caused by the Pacific Electric Trail walking path,vehicles turning into Archibald Avenue from the east and west would not be able to exit easily. Camden Drive descends into the residential area with a blind spot to vehicles and pedestrians entering and exiting the Neighborhood HOA. Newton Place is the first road upon entry.And as an immediate turn,it can be dangerous with increased traffic and vehicle speeds over 5 mph. Newton Place is a narrow residential road leaving little to no options for the current residents in having additional parking. If the traffic to the southern development routes through Newton Place, road parking would be impossible.Roadside parking throughout the Neighborhood HOA is limited for the capacity that exists. Disruption in US postal, utility,and disposal service is constant with notices of vehicle blockage. It is unfortunate that construction is considered for such a small wedge of land than in other outer areas of the city.The City of Rancho Cucamonga would be valued more in decisions to maintain and preserve historic sites and land for parks and vineyards which the city's logo seems to promote. With the concerns stated above, it is suggested that the city consider proposals for the southern development with heed to safety and preservation. If the city favors construction on the southern property, remapping for a cul-de-sac with entry from Ramona Avenue and a fire access only to Archibald Avenue may be an alternative than routing an increase of nearly 50%traffic through the Neighborhood HOA via Newton Place. If proposals include routing traffic through Newton Place,we stand opposed. Regards, E. Kyler&LaDonna Kohler Resident to the Neighborhood HOA 9835 Yale Drive,Alta Loma,CA 91701 D—I pg. 61 March 10,2014 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • Mike Smith Associate Planner,Community Development-City of Rancho Cucamonga MAR 1 1 2014 P.0. Box 807 10500 Civic Center Drive RECEIVED - PLANNING Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91729-0807 RE: Proposed construction of single family homes south of The Neighborhood HOA,Alta Loma. Dear Mike Smith, We have been a resident of Rancho Cucamonga for over 26-years and the growth has been exponential. The volume of traffic to Archibald Avenue has increased with the access to the 210 freeway. Roadways into Archibald Avenue have become perilous for those that live in aligning areas.We have no doubt that the proposed plans to route the development traffic for the area just south of the Neighborhood Homeowner's Association through Newton Place will pose a threat to safety. The Camden Drive access from the Neighborhood HOA to Archibald is a shared intersection with 4-way multiple traffic activity. Not only is the turn lanes small from Archibald Avenue into the east and west resident areas but there is not enough attention given to increased usage, speed,and adequate lighting. if not for the traffic interruptions caused by the Pacific Electric Trail walking path,vehicles turning into Archibald Avenue from the east and west would not be able to exit easily. Camden Drive descends into the residential area with a blind spot to vehicles and pedestrians entering and exiting the Neighborhood HOA. Newton Place is the first road upon entry.And as an immediate turn,it can be dangerous with increased traffic and vehicle speeds over 5 mph. Newton Place is a narrow residential road leaving little to no options for the current residents in having additional parking. If the traffic to the southern development routes through Newton Place,road parking would be impossible.Roadside parking throughout the Neighborhood HOA is limited for the capacity that exists. Disruption in US postal, utility,and disposal service is constant with notices of vehicle blockage. It is unfortunate that construction is considered for such a small wedge of land than in other outerareas of the city.The City of Rancho Cucamonga would be valued more in decisions to maintain and preserve historic sites and land for parks and vineyards which the city's logo seems to promote. With the concerns stated above, it is suggested that the city consider proposals for the southern development with heed to safety and preservation. if the city favors construction on the southern property,remapping for a cul-de-sac with entry from Ramona Avenue and a fire access only to Archibald Avenue may be an alternative than routing an increase of nearly 50%traffic through the Neighborhood HOA via Newton Place. If proposals include routing traffic through Newton Place,we stand opposed. Regards, E. Kyler&LaDonna Kohler Resident to the Neighborhood HOA • 9835 Yale Drive,Alta Loma,CA 91701 D—I pg. 62 �v2 L� v a 73 Le Neu* fteL�4 egg Tz� 9 au;e O,ta . � C: tc.C& � Zaia �� D-1 pg. 63 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA March 10, 2014 MAR 18 2014 Mike Smith ® Associate Planner, Community Development - City of Rancho CucamwW PLANNING P. O. Box 807 NG 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 RE: Proposed construction of single-family homes south of The Neighborhood HOA, Alta Loma. Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083) Dear Mike Smith, Although we have been a resident of Rancho Cucamonga for just under seven years, we have seen a significant change to our neighborhood. The volume of traffic on Archibald Avenue has increased due to new construction, and completion of the 210 freeway. Families not living in our neighborhood, but drive children to school each morning, use our neighborhood as a by- pass/cut-through from Archibald to Ramona due to the high volume of traffic on roadways. This in itself has been a safety concern, and very discouraging for those that live in aligning areas and specifically in our neighborhood. I have no doubt that the proposed plans to route the development traffic for the area just south of the Neighborhood Homeowner's Association through Newton Place will pose an even bigger threat to the safety and well being of those of us that live in our quaint community. • The Camden Drive access from the Neighborhood HOA to Archibald is a shared intersection with 4-way multiple traffic activity. Not only are the turn lanes small from Archibald Avenue into the east and west resident areas but also there is not enough attention given to usage and adequate lighting. If not for the traffic interruptions caused by the Pacific Electric Trail walking path, vehicles turning into Archibald Avenue from the east and west would not be able to exit easily. Camden Drive descends into the residential area causing a blind spot for vehicles and pedestrians coming from or going into the Neighborhood HOA. Newton Place is the first road upon entry. And as an immediate turn, it poses a threat to safety with any increase to entering the neighborhood with vehicle speeds over 5 mph and traffic to the roadway. Newton Place is a narrow residential road leaving little to no options for the current residents in having additional parking. If the traffic to the southern development routes through Newton Place, road parking would be impossible. Roadside parking throughout the Neighborhood HOA is limited for the capacity that exists. Disruption in US postal, utility, and disposal service is constant with notices of vehicle blockage. It is unfortunate that construction is considered for such a small wedge of land than in other outer areas of the city. The City of Rancho Cucamonga would be valued more in decisions to maintain and preserve historic sites and land for parks and vineyards, which the city's logo seems to promote. New construction in this area also posses a threat to wildlife; specifically • the Owls, and Red-tailed Hawks living in the Eucalyptus trees, that provide a wind break to our neighborhood at the So end of that property. In addition, the issue of rodents, possum, and D-1 pg. 64 squirrels will now seek refuge and inhabit our garages, and attics due to their displacement once new construction begins. With the concerns stated above, it is suggested that the city consider proposals for the southern development with heed to safety and preservation. If the city favors construction on the southern property, remapping for a.cul-de-sac with entry from Ramona Avenue and a fire access only to Archibald Avenue may be an alternative than routing traffic through the Neighborhood HOA via Newton Place. If proposals include routing traffic through Newton Place, we stand opposed. Regards, Robert J. and Donna M. Oshiro Resident to the Neighborhood HOA 9848 Yale Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 D-1 pg.65 WY OMM r` CMINGA MAR 2 4 2014 March 20, 2014 RECEIVED - PLANNING Mr. & Mrs. Ruben Estrada 7038 Princeton Place Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701-5900 Mr. Mike Smith Associate Planner, Community Development City of Rancho Cucamonga P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 Dear Mr. Smith: We live in The Neighborhood which is next to the Azalea community that is being proposed. After taking several looks at what is planned, my husband and I are writing this letter to express our concerns. We think these concerns are shared by other Neighborhood residents as well. For example: We are familiar with main streets such as Foothill Boulevard or Archibald Avenue being thoroughfares, providing access to many side streets, businesses, multiple communities, etc. We are also familiar with streets that only give access to the houses on them. However, we are not familiar with short, narrow streets such as Newton Place being used as thoroughfares in busy communities such as ours. Also, the expected household density the 46 Azalea homes would bring also concerns us. With 46 new homes that will potentially bring 2-3 vehicles each, and half of them likely entering and exiting their community through The Neighborhood twice each day, (four trips per household minus a projected 2 trips onto Ramona Ave.) we foresee the following problems: • Unsafe traffic congestion at the intersections of Archibald Ave., Camden Drive & Newton Place • Unsafe turns from Archibald Ave. onto Camden Drive • Unsafe turns from Camden Drive onto Newton Place • The need for traffic signals at the intersection of Archibald &Camden • Reduced safety for pedestrians and for children playing on Newton or Camden • Disruption of privacy and safe access to homes for Newton Place residents • Encroachment on The Neighborhood's park and parking • An increased need for pavement repairs within The Neighborhood • Reduction in privacy between Azalea and The Neighborhood, depending upon how the Azalea homes are placed D-1 pg. 66 • Azalea residents'and construction vehicles passing through The Neighborhood The release of rats, possums, owls, hawks and other life forms now located on land where fruit trees and eucalyptus trees provide shelter and food To remedy these potentially hazardous, encroaching and costly conditions, we suggest the following revisions to the Azalea Plan: 1. Build fewer homes. Ensure home placement within Azalea that will maximize privacy and aesthetics for both communities. 2. Do not create access through The Neighborhood for Azalea construction or motorists' use. 3. Create driveway access for Azalea residents directly from Ramona Ave. and Archibald Ave. 4. Provide visitor parking within the Azalea community. 5. Give written notice to The Neighborhood and other nearby residents when wildlife displacement will begin. 6. Consider building green space as a buffer between the Azalea Community and The Neighborhood. This green space could be a park, similar to the park in The Neighborhood. We understand that new construction can often be a welcomed uplift to an area; yet with these considerations, we believe care must be taken to ensure that the Azalea project does not diminish the quality of life the community now enjoys. Thank you for the time you have spent acquainting us with this project. We will rely on you to move our concerns and recommendations forward. Cordially, � �i ub"en Estra 0� Ivy Estrada D-I pg. 61 Smith. Michael From: Nancy DiVincenzo <nandivincenzo@yahoo.com> ® Sent: Tuesday,April 08,2014 7:53 PM To: Smith, Michael Cc: nandivincenzo@yahoo.com Subject: Concerned resident Re: manning home development newton place/Archibald To City of Rancho Cucamonga: I am a resident of The Neighborhood Community. My main concern regarding this development is the Newton Place traffic that will increase and the safety of the street. Please do a traffic study.When maps are presented regarding the development it does not give a true picture. When turning from Archibald onto Camden then right onto Newton Place there is a huge down slope and a blind spot.Cars increase speed when turning in then they come down the slope. It's hard to see people that are walking or riding their bikes etc. It is a very dangerous situation as is but if you add the increased traffic from 40 homes it becomes much worse.Also cars at times will park on Camden when you turn off Archibald. Please consider making that a no parking zone. I am aware that this development is happening, I hope we can come to a compromise and make it safe for all the residents.Thank you for considering this. Nancy Divincenzo nandivincenzo@yahoo.com 1(909)262-2803 Sent from my iPad • i D—I pg. 68 Smith, Michael Front. Sally Martinez <santafesally04@yahoo.com> Sent: Thursday,April 10,2014 7:29 AM To: Smith, Michael Subject: RE: Manning Development(Azalea) April 9,2014 Luis&Sally Martinez 7032 Princeton PI. Alta Loma, CA 91701 Mr. Mike Smith Associate Planner, Community Development City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729-0807 Dear Mr. Smith: I would like to thank you first for being at the meeting with the Neighborhood' residents on April 8 and answering our questions. We live on the SW corner of Camden and Princeton which already has traffic from outside our community creating dangerous driving hazards to all our residents. I am sure when the Manning homes are built;that danger will only greatly increase if they open the street through Newton PI. With the proposed 46 homes and 92-184 more residents the population explosion in our quiet community will be extremely compromised. Of course the safety issue which all residents of this community are concerned about will be a great challenge for all pedestrians as well as the neighborhood children. The Fire Department's claim that the response time will be hampered if they have to enter through Ramona instead of Newton PI seems to be an absurd point because the residents on Ramona or any other location east of Ramona will have the very same response time to any emergency calls. As of right now we have two exits in our small and somewhat private community. That will end due to traffic from the Manning residents if they open Newton PI. Due to added congestion,we will not be able to exit from Camden to Archibald with the additional traffic from the minimum of 92 or more vehicles added to the overcrowding. We will be needing a light installed at the Camden/Archibald location if this happens; I do hope the city will be prepared for that. I expect that the Traffic Dept.will come and review our situation without blindly approving the Newton street expansion. i D-1 pg.69 And the families on Newton PI., I'm sure regardless of what the street looks like on a map,were under the impression that street was a cul de sac,which it has been for at least 26 years and now they're being told it will be a thoroughfare. To any fair minded person that seems like an extremely rational point of view. That should have been an ® obvious disclosure when purchasing their house if Newton PI would be extended into another possible community. We had the presumption of privacy, now we do not. I know the Eucalyptus trees were brought up...and here is the cities tree removal link...I do hope Manning homes has seen this and will be complying with Rancho's criteria. http://www.citvofrc.us/citvhall/plannina/answers.asR?id=954 From what I understand, in the Manning Azalea community there will be no park or association. I would like to be assured they will not be using our pool or facilities in our association. We have had numerous problems with strangers coming into our recreation area creating a drug problem and causing vandalism. I do hope the crime in our community does not increase. I understand that Manning homes has already purchased the land and has every intention to go forward with their building project. That is not the issue. The issue is that they will be disrupting our quiet neighborhood and bull dozing their way through our community to do so. I hope the various depts.of the City and Fire Dept.will take our resident's wishes and concerns into account. Please let me know that you received this email. Thank you. Sincerely, Luis and Sally Martinez z D-1 pg. 70 Smith,_Michael From: LaDonna Kohler <Ladonnak@ccul.org> Sent Tuesday,April 15,201410:00 AM To: 'craig@manninghomes.com'; Smith, Michael Subject: Neighborhood Meeting -April 29th,2014 RE: SUBTT18912/Development Review DRC2013-01083,46-lot subdivision between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue. Good Morning, Thank you for rescheduling another meeting to address questions and comments to the proposed development south of the Neighborhood.Was the mailing made to all current residents?Some have received your mailing; but not all. I am a renter to the neighborhood and found out through neighbors and the actual homeowner of the rescheduled meeting. And I suspect your notice to homeowners would not reach all current residences leaving 30%out of the discussion. Regards, La Donna Kohler 9835 Yale Drive Alta Loma,CA 91701 1 D-1 pg.71 Smith, Michael From: Colin Lally <clally@outlook.com> Sent: Wednesday,April 16, 2014 1:20 PM To: Smith, Michael; lallyc@coyote.csusb.edu;jim@manninghomes.com Subject: The Neighborhood Homeowners Association v Manning Homes Dear Mr. Smith et al., please consider my primary objection to the opening of the cul-de- sac at the end of Newton Place; according to article XVI recorded on October 31 1985, document No. 85-271105, at the San Bernardino County Recorder, the planned urban development comprises of "private streets, [and] landscaped open areas". Therefore, the private access road should not open to a Manning Homes development site. Further, I ask you to initiate a traffic study for support of my secondary complaint. That is to say, with the opening of Newton Place, on the south-west side of the Neighborhood Home Owners Association, it will effectively reduce the livability and safety of the homeowners' way of life on the street. For example, with increased traffic through the neighborhood from a collector road to a local road that serves our private development--we have an accident waiting to happen, as vehicles speed through, and children play outside. Moreover, please consider that our Neighborhood Homeowners Association is a private community, with a pool and a park for our residents to enjoy in the common area, which we pay dues for, and along with having by-laws to adhere to, we can effectively maintain the integrity of the neighborhood, but with others in our neighborhood, we lose control, and the ability to enforce our by-laws. One solution for the development that Manning Homes proposes, is a right turn road at Archibald Avenue, which should suffice for emergency vehicles too. Bear in mind, that this area had a fire in a eucalyptus tree, a number of years ago, and emergency vehicles •could not transit Newton Place, because of parked vehicles, and they had to set up operations on Camden to fight the fire; thus, access from Archibald is a better alternative for an emergency vehicle access road to the new development. Yours sincerely, C. Lally • 1 D—I pg.72 Smith, Michael From: Tricia Vanderpool <tricia@euclidmanagementcom> Sent Thursday,April 17,2014 3:09 PM To: Smith, Michael Subject DCR#2013-00887/2013-01083 City of Rancho Cucamonga Attention: Michael Smith,Associate Planner 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga,Ca 91729 Re. DCR#2013-00887 2013-01083 SUBTT 18912 File:Tract 18912; Proposed Development of 46 Single Family Homes by Manning and Watermill Homes Location: Between Ramona Ave and Archibald Ave,north of bike trail To Whom It May Concern, At The Neighborhood HOA Board Meeting held on March 6,2014,a large number of homeowners were in attendance to- discuss their many concerns of the potential new home construction just south of the association. Although each homeowner will be sending in a formal letter of concern, the homeowners in attendance asked that a general letter be sent stating their trepidation with this project should it move forward. 1. Gate to be installed on Newton to allow access for homeowners of the new association to enter through The Neighborhood HOA.This street is extremely narrow and would not allow enough room for homeowners to park on the street, play in front yards, or allow construction equipment through and would increase the amount of traffic throughout the association at all times. They would not want the homeowners of the new association utilizing the Neighborhood HOA park and pool area. 2. Hours of Construction recommended being after 8am and before Spm Monday thru Friday. 3. Construction equipment and vehicle should be fitted with smog and noise reduction devices. 4. Parking for employee and construction vehicles should be restricted and away from neighboring homes. S. Privacy of homes along Yale.The proposed homes will be two story and would butt home closely to these homes on Yale—will a new taller wall be built in place of the current wall. 6. The Neighborhood HOA maintains city owned property on Archibald-however the new project would not have to maintain any area on Archibald? 7. Will this new project cause an overflow of traffic and parking in the Neighborhood HOA/ 8. Who would maintain the wall in between the Homeowners Associations? 9. The existing Eucalyptus Trees are going to be removed and wildlife(Red tail Hawks)are going to be removed from their habitat?Where will the wildlife be moved to?Will there be rodent control when they are forced out of their habitat? Homeowners which have asked to be a part of this letter: 1. 9818 Westport—Chris Wheeler 909-238-2298 2. 9848 Yale—Donna and Bob Oshiro 909-527-3494 1 D-1 pg.73 3. 7032 Princeton—Luis and Sally Martinez 909-980-1386 4. 9835 Yale—LaDonna Kohler 909-944-0342 S. 9801 Yale-Ai Lun Tseng 6. 7012 Wakefield—Donna Rushing 909-989-0068 • 7. 9854 Westport-Stephen Bernard 909-684-8155 8: 7012 Newton—Georgia Martinez 909-948-7287 9. 7038 Newton—Jeff Olson 909-518-7339 10. 9805 Yale—Ingrid Van De Meer 11. 7018 Wakefield—Lisa DeNardo 909-240-2707 12. 7045 Newton—Mary Kupisiewicz 909-980-5676 13. 7038 Princeton—Ivy Estrada 562-436-4808/909-484-7957 14. 9809 Yale—Ron and Debbie Ciminesi 909-239-8351 15. 7032 Newton—Cheryl Gipson and Andrew Gipson 909-980-9812 16. 7039 Newton—Colin Lally 909-987-2676 17. 9824 Yale=Maureen Iglesias 323-428-4297 18. 7039 Wakefield—Richard and Trish Mayo 909-908.8518 19. 7013 Arlington—Daniel and Jennifer McGuire 909-238-9227 Sincerely, Viida Q7"Ai* Association Manager The Neighborhood Homeowners Association • Tricia Lynn Vanderpool I Property Manager Tel 909-981-4131 Fax 909-579-6529 2h E U C L t D 0000 MA!rAG[M91I7 tOY7A![T 195 N.Euclid Ave I Upland,CA 91786 www.euclidmanasement.com CONFIDENTIAUTY NOTICE This communication is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. It may contain information that is privileged or confidential and/or exempt from disclosure. Any unauthorized disclosure,distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,please notify the sender immediately by telephone or return e-mail and delete the message from your system. Your assistance in maintaining the integrity of e-mail communications is appreciated. • 2 D-I pg. 74 Smith, Michael From: Debbie Ciminesi <dcimi711@msn.com> Sent: Monday,April 28, 2014 4:21 PM To: Smith, Michael Subject In regards to the proposed developement by Manning In regards to the proposed developement by Manning Homes in Alta Loma We have lived in The Neighborhood for 19 years and have enjoyed our quality of life including our privacy,our backyard backs up to the old orange grove( proposed property)and the eucalyptus trees add beauty and shade to our quality of life.We upgraded our backyard a few years ago and put a lot of money into knowing that we have the shade of the trees.We have a lot of concerns. 1. Sharing our wall 2. Cutting trees downs which will raise our electricity bill because lack of shade. 3. Quality of life will be damaged due to cutting trees down that provide shade and beauty to our backyard and home. 4. Water consumption( Calif is in a drought)adding 45 more homes means.more water being used. 5. Electricity and Gas.... More blackouts due to more homes using electricity. 6. More traffic through Neighborhood. When is the city going to take a stand and start conserving water,electricity etc.... Why does every little bit of land have to be built on. All we hear about is we need to conserve on water,electricity and they want to build more homes with more families that need water and electricity. We, Ron and Debbie Ciminesi our very much against the building of these homes! Ron and Debbie Ciminesi 9809 Yale dr Alta Loma,ca 91701 #909-239-8351 Sent from my Mad 1 D—I pg.75 Smith, Michael From: melsmom531@aol.com Sent Wednesday,April 30, 2014 5:18 PM To: Smith, Michael Subject: Manning Homes Mike, Thank you for the meeting last night at Deer Canyon. I think Manning Homes is a reputable builder who will build a nice development. I do agree that the project should not come through Newton. I knew when I moved in 24 years ago that street would some day come through. That being said, the distance from Archibald, Camden and Newton is just an accident waiting to happen by increasing traffic there.The speeds on Archibald are too fast and the turn in to Camden is also fast to then have Newton traffic driving across that short distance. A new improved Ramona will be much better for the traffic to come out of the new neighborhood. I was also wondering if I am inside the 600ft notice area. I live at 9837 Chesapeake Dr. Thank you again- I could feel your pain sometimes last night. People just don't know how the system works. Jeanne Cockrell 1 D-1 pg. 76 ISSUES & CONCERNS RE: DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY BETWEEN RAMONA & , ARCHIBALD BY MANNING HOMES Neighborhood Meeting Tues. April. 29, 2014. In attendance approximately 35 people. As requested, these issues and concerns are being submitted in writing and are collective input garnered from the meeting as well as comments from many local neighbors who were not able to attend, but who have requested their input added to this report. Major concerns are the increase of traffic on Ramona Ave that will result in congestion and safety of vehicle & pedestrian traffic. "Launch Site" at the PET crossing: Many speeders use that section of Ramona to "get air" as they speed on Ramona. Although it was promised that it will be graded "somewhat", the increase in traffic exiting the new portion of Lavine will create more of a safety hazard. The intersection of Lavine (which will continue across Ramona into the development) and Ramona will become increasingly dangerous. Currently exiting LaVine facing west onto Ramona turning either north or south; visibility for oncoming traffic is extremely compromised due to cars parked on Ramona's east side to the north and the elevation rise of the PET to the south. With increased traffic entering/exiting the new street, the danger of safely making way onto Ramona is heightened. When a four way stop was suggested, we were told the traffic. volume did not warrant it. OUR RESPONSE: Well, perhaps not YET, but with more traffic the situation will change. Again with the "launch pad" at the trail and speeders on Ramona and the increase of daily traffic, this is going to become a major safety traffic hazard. Will on-street parking for the PET be allowed on the improved section of Ramona? As it is now, many PET users park on LaVine blocking the fire hydrant and the stop sign. Although this has been reported to police who post "compliance" notices of sort on these vehicles, it still remains a problem, especially on the weekends. Will the homes have adequate parking for all their vehicles, either in their own driveways or their own on-street parking? As we have seen D-1 pg.77 in this area, the current trend in this economy seems to be that many • multi-generational families are living in one dwelling, which results in a tremendous Increase of on-street parking. Many single family homes now account for four or five vehicles. Our concern is their "overflow" parking will be on Ramona, or LaVine east of Ramona. NOTE: This on-street parking is becoming a definite safety hazard at the North end of Ramona at the stop sign at 19th. While this has nothing to do with the current Manning development, it is a trend that is pervasive. People from the Sunrize Ridge apartments on 19th are using Ramona on-street parking as their overflow parking. Cars are parked on both east and west side of the street and illegally too close to the stop sign at the intersection. (This has been reported numerous times to police dispatch, but the problem continues). How will the safety issue of the PET be addressed at the Ramona crossing? Those of us who drive across the PET daily are concerned for the safety of people using the trail. Currently only a caution light is in place and must be activated by those who traverse the trail. Most times, pedestrians and cyclists do not use the button and often cross • without looking for oncoming traffic. Again, with an additional 100-150 motorized vehicles in this development, the issue of safety for all is of great concern. Why are all the houses designated 2-story homes? Rancho is in need of single story homes. Diane Williams, city council person, has noted this need in the past. If zoning is an issue, then allow for more land per home and fewer homes. Initially the sign said 42 homes were to be built, however Manning has managed a way to fit in an additional 4 homes for a projected total of 46 houses. When it was brought to the floor about the number of homes with increased population density, we were told essentially, (paraphrased, but this is how it came across) "we should be grateful Manning was chosen to be the builders who want to make it Medium density because there were other builders in line who wanted to put big apartment buildings there'. D-1 pg. 78 Those of us who did not receive notice of the first meeting felt as if decisions were made final based on the opinions of that meeting: Specifically regarding nixing the plan of traffic flow onto Newton. While we all sympathize and agree with those.residents they do not want that heavy traffic flow through their neighborhood; but it was a done deal without any other input of those remaining "650 foot residents". Only those residents who live in that neighborhood were part of that meeting. We trust in the future EVERYONE within that notification perimeter will receive proper notice. Majority does not want increased traffic on Ramona or Newton, but when suggested that entrance and exit be on Archibald, we were flatly told "no". But is there ANY way that can happen? That would be a solution that would appease most residents. Were the residents of the mobile home park to the south notified of this meeting or were they too far past the 650 foot notice? They will be impacted during the construction period. As stated over and over "all that is required by law is to notify those residents within 650 feet of the property'. It was suggested that the notices of this and future meetings be posted on the website www.nextdoornei-hbor.com. That way all residents within the Hermosa neighborhood would get notice of these meetings. People who are outside the 650 foot diameter notice area and who will be greatly impacted by the construction, would have the opportunity to know of plans. Currently many notices are posted on this website of happenings in the City. Please check into this method of notification. At the very least, can we have these meetings posted on the official City website so anyone can have access to the meeting dates and time regardless of the "650 foot notification law"? Temporary issues, but concerns nonetheless are the increase in vermin infiltrating our neighboring properties as these critters are displaced when construction begins. When the 210 freeway was under construction we were inundated with rodents. Response from Manning was if it becomes a problem, each individual resident should call them and they will "help" with that. D-1 pg.79 Is it possible that the low-lying brush can be cleared immediately? ® The remaining house is particularly vulnerable. Vagrants have been "camping" on the property and in the house. Although a fence has been erected at the property perimeter and the house is boarded up, those of us who use the trail are still seeing signs that the property and nearby trail is being used for sleeping and campfires. If the brush is cleared, then nearby residents can keep a better eye on the surroundings and report to local police. There have been legal "NO TRESPASSING" signs posted which should result in immediate response from the police should we see anyone there who does not belong. Concern for the wild life inhabiting the property, particularly the nesting hawks was addressed. We were assured that those trees will not be disturbed until nesting season is over. The eucalyptus trees were deemed non-viable by Manning and will be cut down; however they promised that each lot will have two boxed eucalyptus that are a better choice for there. During construction, a lot of work will be done on Ramona. Residents • were told that access wouldnot be completely blocked, but at least one lane open at all times with a flag person. Concerns of building more housing during a time'when we are in a severe drought was mentioned. The response was low flow toilets/showers will be installed. D-1 pg. 80 Smith, Michael To: Grahn,Tom Subject RE:Proposed Azalea Project.Alta Loma From:vickyeoodwinl@hotmail.com (mailto:vickveoodwinl@hotmaii.coml On Behalf Of Vicky Jones Sent:Tuesday,May 06,2014 5:33 PM To: craie@manninghomes.com- 'im@manninghomes.com Gra n,Tom; Dennis Jones; Diane Williams;PatBob Curtis Subject: Proposed Azalea Project Alta Loma Importance:High Dear Sirs . . . I had the pleasure of meeting you at last months community meeting at Deer Creek Elementary School. The site plan that you have available on your web site is a better fit for the neighborhood than the alternate plan you presented at this 'meeting. An oversized cul-de-sac with only one entrance/exit is in my opinion, a poor design. I gathered that you had a previous meeting that was not advertised well and the community members that live just north of this proposed project and that the residents objected to having their street be considered for the tie in to Archibald. It is not reasonable to have all of the traffic enter and exit from Ramona,it would however, be reasonable to each neighborhood to bear the inconvenience equally,not one over the other. Since the addition of these large homes will raise the property value of the existing neighborhoods, this seems to be a reasonable consideration. With regards to accessing the Pacific Electric Trail, I can show you two recent examples of Builders who provided gates for their community members/residents to have access the PE Trail. The first example is Olen Jones, a retirement community that sits adjacent to the PE Trail at Amethyst. The Senior residents enjoy easy access to the Trail for exercise and use it on a regular basis. The second example is Pacific Trails by D.R. Horton. They are located at Foothill Blvd.,just west of Vineyard and also provided a gate for their residents in their community to the PE Trail. The city of Rancho Cucamonga has been recognized by the White House for their Healthy RC initiatives as one of the top cities in the nation. The city has re-committed to the needs of its community by providing its residents a multitude of options to choose from when considering exercise and healthy lifestyles. As the Vice-President of the Friends of the Pacific Electric Trail, I encourage you and your team to reconsider my suggestions about traffic in and out of this project and also adding access to the PE Trail and possibly a rest stop for this new community, donated by Nanning Homes. 1 D-1 pg.81 I welcome the opportunity to meet with you at a future date to share examples of Trail Amenities that have been donated on the PE Trail from our community members. I look forward to hearing back from you at your earliest convenience. BTW, SANBAG is one of our biggest partners and support the work we have done in the Inland Empire. Peace, Victoria Jones Vice President/Community Outreach Director Friends of the Pacific Electric Trail www PETrail.orP Victoria Lone-&&etrail.org 909.921.1059 • i D-1 pg..82 Smith, Michael From: Paula Stamey <raewil@msn.com> Sent Friday, May 30,2014 8:25 AM To: Smith, Michael Subject Tree planting Manning Development Ramona Hello Michael, Please add to list of neighbor concerns regarding this development. Mr. Manning said each house would have two sliver dollar box eucalyptus trees planted. Eucalyptus trees are not native to California. Didn't know the city approved these plantings anymore. Eucalyptus trees are highly volatile. They are an extreme fire hazard due to the oil in these trees. With nearly 100 being planted in this development, within a few years there will be a forest of highly flammable trees within a few feet of our property. Mr. Manning stated at the meeting they are willing to change the type of tree that is going in. Thanks Paula Stamey 1 D-1 pg. 83 DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS ' 7:00M'.m. p Mike Smith June 3, 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912- MANNING HOMES - A review of a proposed 46-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail - APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre Application Review DRC2013-00545, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, Minor Exception DRC2014-00161. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083 — MANNING HOMES - A review of a proposal for 46 single-family residences in conjunction with a 46-lot subdivision of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail - APN: 1076-181-01. Related files: Pre-Application Review DRC2013-00545, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161. Site Characteristics: The project site is a rectangular parcel with an overall area of approximately 312,000 square feet (7.16 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are approximately 1,200 feet deep (east to west) and 250 feet (north to south). The project site is generally vacant with the exception of a single-family residence that was built in ca. 1915 that is located at the east side of the project site near • Ramona Avenue. To the west of the project site, is an equestrian/pet supplies retail store (CW Feed & Pet). To the north and east are single-family residences. To the south is an apartment complex (Sycamore Springs) and a mobile home park (Ramona Villa Mobile Home Estates). The site has street frontage on Archibald Avenue and Ramona Street to the west and east, respectively. Adjacent and parallel to the south property line of the site is the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, which is partially completed at this location. The zoning of the west half of the site is Medium (M) Residential District, while the zoning of the east half of the site is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the property to the west is Medium High (MH) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the north is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the east is Low (L) Residential District. The subject property is generally level with a slope that trends from west to east; the elevations at the west and east sides of the property are approximately 1,398 feet and 1,373 feet, respectively. Associated Applications/Background: The .applicant, in conjunction with the subject applications, proposes to change the zoning of the eastern half of the project site to Medium (M) Residential District (Related file: Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887). The applicant has elected to develop the property according to the requirements outlined in Table 17.36.010-2— Optional Development Standards which will allow for more flexibility in developing the site. However, as the Development Code currently does not have optional development standards for single-family residential development in the Medium (M) Residential District, the applicant, in coordination with staff, is in the process of creating standards that apply to, for example, lot dimensions, setbacks, and lot coverage. General: The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into 45 lots for a single-family residential • development. The- lots will be developed in accordance with standards that are currently being developed as noted above. Individual lot areas will range between 4,013 square feet to 10,529 square EXHIBIT N D-1 pg. 84 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18912 AND DRC2013-01083-MANNING HOMES June 3, 2014 Page 2 feet; the average lot area is 4,907 square feet. The depth of each lot will be at least 90 feet with the exception of Lots 26,27, 44, and 45. Those lots will have a depth of between approximately 60 feet and 80 feet. The width of each lot, except the above-noted lots, at the required front setback will be between 45 feet and 50 feet. Lots 26, 27, 44, and 45 will have a width of between 65 feet(Lot 27)to 137 feet(Lot 26). Access to the subdivision will be via a new public street connected directly to Ramona Street. This street will terminate with a cul-de-sac at the west side of the project site. For emergency purposes, a second point of access referred to as an Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) will be provided at the end of the cul-de-sac and connect to Archibald Avenue via a specialized driveway. The technical and design details of this driveway are still in process. Parallel to the south property line, the applicant will "build-out" the missing segment of the Pacific Electric trail between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Street. This segment will have a decomposed granite surface and will match the existing segments of the trail that continue to the east and west of the site. It will complement the existing, concrete-surfaced component of the trail that follows the same general alignment. In conjunction with the tentative tract map, the applicant proposes to construct a single-family residence on each.lot for a total of 45 single-family residences. Although all of the houses will be two-story, this does not conflict with Section 17.122.010(A)(1)(a) of the Development Code. This Code section requires that a minimum of 25 percent of a residential development be comprised of single-story houses; however, the requirement only applies to residential development with lots in excess of 7,200 square feet. The applicant proposes four (4) types of architectural themes (elevations) - Traditional, Bungalow, Spanish, and Cottage. Each house will incorporate a variety of materials to varying degrees depending on the theme. Each house will have an articulated footprint/floor plan and profile. The applicant proposes three (3) distinct footprints- Plans 1, 2, and 3, and reverse footprints of each for a total of six (6) footprints. The number of available footprints will comply with Table 17.122.010-1 of the Development Code. Because the footprints and profiles of each house differ, there will be a variety of movement in the wall planes and roof lines. 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. 1. Spanish (all Plans) - Revise the Spanish-themed elevations so that they incorporate more features that are characteristic of the architectural theme including arched and/or recessed windows (with shutters having the corresponding curved top edge)and wrought iron accents on all elevations. 2. All themes (all Plans) - Provide more variety in the roof pitches - do not limit the pitch of the roof to only 4:12 or 5:12. 3. All themes (all Plans)-Add decorative pot shelves at the windows on the rear elevations. 4. Cottage and Bungalow (all Plans)-Add a decorative stone veneer wainscot and trimcap to the front D-I pg.85 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA ® SUBTT18912 AND DRC2013-01083—MANNING HOMES June 3, 2014 Page 3 and rear elevations and base of the columns/pillars that support the porch cover at the entrances. 5. Traditional (all Plans) — Add a decorative brick veneer wainscot and trimcap to the front and rear elevations and base of the columns/pillars that support the porch cover at the entrances. 6. All themes except Spanish (all Plans) — At the front elevation, the decorative veneer shall 'wrap' around the corners of each house and terminate at the return wall. At the rear elevation, the decorative veneer shall wrap around the comers of each house and terminate at a point at least 3 feet from the corner. Secondary Issues: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues. 1. Add decorative windows on all garage doors. 2. The molding along the top of the stone or brick veneer wainscots shall also be stone or brick and not foam. 3. All rock veneer shall be real river rock and not synthetic. • Staff Recommendation: With Major and-Secondary Issues addressed to the satisfaction of the Committee, staff recommends that the project be approved and forwarded to the Planning Commission for review and action. Desian Review Committee Action: Staff presented a brief overview of the project and summarized the major/secondary issues relating to the architecture and site development. The applicant followed with a response to the comments report. He noted that his design team had addressed some of the comments prior to the meeting. The applicant and the Committee discussed the other comments and various solutions to address them. The Committee accepted the applicant's proposed solutions (that were already completed) and recommend approval subject to the completion of the following revisions (to be verified by Staff prior to review and action by the Planning Commission): 1. Add decorative ironwork details and arched windows and/or recessed windows on the front and rear elevations of the Spanish theme; 2. The roof pitch of the Cottage theme shall be 6:12; 3. Add stone veneer to the Cottage theme and brick veneer to the Traditional theme (front and rear elevations) - the Bungalow theme does not need any veneer; 4. Add pot shelves at some of the windows of all themes; D-1 pg. 86 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE ACTION AGENDA SUBTT18912 AND DRC2013-01083—MANNING HOMES June 3, 2014 Page 4 5. Add windows on the garage doors of at least 50 percent of the homes within the subdivision; and 6. Add vertical elements to the garage doors of the Bungalow and Traditional themes. Staff Planner: Mike Smith Members Present: Oaxaca, Granger D—I pg.87 Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887 Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161 rn WE vz n V Camden Drive 3 NJU .4t t a f k La Vine Street Project SiteLH { Pacific,E ectric Trail D � o Cr AA = �ocVY►►�trtdv�e 2) a D � L = Wu K.-,V( lr( N Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887 Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161 M MR X Ixx.+• �y 3 Z Camden Drive MR LR -� R -v imp - La Vine Street Project Site MR MHR OS Pacific Electric Trail WI �,1 MWR £y'AMAK. Cryy < MHR ; TW'' h NCA a LR Article III, Chapter 17.36 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code • TABLE 17.36.010-1 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS Development Standardly: : . - . Zoning District. ;:::: L IIA... Lot Area(minimum) 20,000 sf 7.200 sf 5,000 sf 3 ac(�� 3 ac(1) Lot Area(minimum net avg) 22,500 sf 8,000 sf 5,000 sf 3 ac(1) 3 ac(1) 3 ac(1) Lot Width(minimum) 90 ft(2) 65 ft(2) 50 ft(2) n/a n/a Na Lot Width(comer!ot) 100 ft 70 ft 50 ft n/a n/a n/a Lot Depth(minimum) 200 ft 100 ft 90 ft n/a n/a n/a Minimum Frontage 50 ft 40 ft 30 ft 100 ft 100 ft 100 ft Minimum Frontage(flag lot) 30 ft 20 ft 20 ft 50 ft 50 ft 50 ft Allowed tfensity(dwelling.unitsper acre): ;, Minimum Density �_,:.-. : . '.- (3) n/a n/a 4 du/ac ^ 8 du/ac 14 du/ac 24 du/ac Maximum Density 2 du/ac 4 du/ac 8 du/ac(4) 14 du/ac(4) 24 du/ac 30 du/ac Minimum 8ettaclr Front Yard(5) (e'.. 42 ft 37 ft(8).. .....32 ft(8)... ...'37 ft(8) n/a n/a Comer Side Yard(5) 27 ft 27 ft 22 ft 27 ft n/a n/a Interior Side Yard(5) 10/15 ft 5/10 ft 5/10 ft 10 ft( ) n/a Na Rear Yard(5) 60 ft 20 ft• 15 ft 10 ft(7) Na n/a At Interior Site Boundary (Dwelling/Accessory NR(8> 15/5(7) 15/5(>> Building) 15/5(7) Builldiri$..Heightftmaximurn lit fe_et)- ' _ - - r1 Primary Buildings 35 ft 35 ft' : 35 It 35 ft(10) 40 `..55 ft(10).. Lot Coverage(maximum lotcovelaga with buiidings a a pence � e �,.. 9- . Parcel or projectr_ .:. Lot Coverage 25% 40% 50% 50% 50% 50% Cpen Space Requlrement(mfntmurri`percentagi of oen's-K..,.... .. P Pie Per Parcel or project) Private Open Space (Ground Floor/Upper Story) 300/150 sf 225/150 sf 150/100 sf 150/100 sf Open Space(Private and Common) 40% 35% 35% 35% Minimum Patio/Porch Depth 6 ft(11) p Eft(11) 6ft(11) 6ft(11) 6ft(11� 6ft(11� Minimum Dweiling Unit Size t12► Single-Family (attached and detached) 1,000 sf Multi-Family(13) Efficiency/Studio 550 sf Multi-Family(13) • One Bedroom 650 sf EXHIBIT Q D-1 pg. 90 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Article III,Chapter 17.36 Davei nit Standar. - :: come. =`; .. IIIA;, Mi{ ; H';.: .•. VL._ C .. Lllif,..,� - Zonn TV . Multi-Family(13) 800 sf Two Bedroom Multi-Family(13) 950 sf Three or More Bedrooms Fro t°►t'�►�ri�inimurn=Wf y. ::YA: .. DistancilbetYlre� Between buildings with no patio — — 30 ft 30 ft 30 ft 30 ft or recessed patio Between patio fence/wall less — — 15 ft 15 ft 15 ft 15 ft than 5 feet in height Between patio fence/wall more — — 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft than 5 feet in height Between balconies above patio fence/wall more than 5 feet in — — 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft height Between a patio fence/wall and — — 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft a building wall With common patio fence/wall — — 30 ft 30 ft 30 ft 30 ft Other M '� I ngtiac qu �, e Y 3 u llaneo�i.: : ;:.�• h; •� :.�: ;.�..�:,, Building to one-story detached garage/carport or other 6 ftj15 ft 15 ft 15 15 accessory structure Building to wall or curb at 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft 20 ft project entry Table Notes: (1) On existing lots of record,parcels less than 3 acres or less than the required minimum frontage may only be developed at the lowest end of the permitted density range. (2) Average width,which shall vary accordingly: VL-+/-10 feet L&LM-+/-5 feet (3) Excluding land necessary for secondary streets and arterials and in hillside areas shall be dependent on the slopelcapaclty factor contained In Chapter 17.52(Hillside Development Standards). (4) Developing multi-family in the LM district and single-family in the M district at the maximum density requires compliance with Standards for Higher Residential Densities as outlined in Subsection 17.36.010.0. (5) Setbacks are measured between the structure and curb face in front yards and comer side yards.Setbacks are measured between the structure and property line in rear yards and interior side yards. (6) Front yard setbacks in new residential developments may be reduced by up to 5 feet to allow for variation in structural setbacks along the street. (7) Add 10 feet if adjacent to VL,L,or LM district. (8) Applies to buildings two stories and taller in height Add 10 more feet for each story over two stories. (g) In hillside areas,heights shall be limited to 30 feet (10) Limit one story within 100 feet of VL or L district for multiple-family dwellings. (11) Free and clear of obstructions. (12) Senior citizen projects are exempted from this requirement. (13) To assure that smaller units are not concentrated in any one area or project,the following percentage limitations of the total number of units shall apply., 10%for effidency/studio and 35%for one bedroom or up to 35% combined. Subject to a Conditional Use Permit,the Planning Commission may authorize a greater ratio of efficiency or one-bedroom units when a development exhibits innovative design qualities and a balanced mix of unit sizes and types. (14) "Front"is defined as the face of the building or unit with the major glass area and/or major recreation area and may include access to that private recreation area. This access may or may not relate to the primary entrance to the building that faces the street or drive,therefore,some buildings may have more than one front- 17.36.3 D-1 pg.91 Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Article III, Chapter 17.36 • g. Jogging/walking trails with exercise stations. 4. For each one hundred (100) units above the first two hundred (200) units, another set of recreational amenities as described in Subsection 17.122.040M.3 above shall be provided. 5. Other recreational amenities not listed above may be considered subject to Planning Commission review and approval. 6. Related recreational activities may be grouped together and located at any one area of the common open space. 7. Dispersal of recreational facilities throughout the site shall be required for development with multiple recreational facilities. 8. All recreation areas or facilities required by this Section shall be maintained by private homeowners associations, property owners, or private assessment districts. Single-family residential development within VL, L, LM, HR, and OS zoning districts shall have public or private streets designed to the approved standards of the City. TABLE 17.36.010-2 OPTIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS 2�y'�l P�;: r.r'.v .,;.y ::n'r.. ,.;..i�y;;��':r,`:c:_ - _ ..•r- - :ti:rwi" - ntn pisM y �-1 Minimum Site Area(Gross) 5 ac~' 5 ac ` 5 ac 5 ac„ • Dwelling Units per Acre Up to 8 UP to 14 Up to 24 Up to 30 Minimum Dwelling Unit Size Single-Family and Multi-Family See Table 17.36.010-1 Public Street Setback 42 ft avg 42 ft avg 42 ft avg 47 ft av Vary t5 ft Vary t5 ft Vary t5 ft Vary t5 ft Private Street or Driveway Setback 15 ft avg Vary±5ft 5ft 5 f 5 f Comer Side Yard loft 5 ft Interior Side Yard - 10 ft(1)(2) Interior Site Boundary (Dwelling Unit/Accessory Building) 15/5 ft 20/5 ft(1) Residential Building Separations See Table 17.36.010-1 Height Limitations 35 ft(3) 35 ft(3) 40 ft(3) 50 ft(3) Private Open Space (Ground Floor/Upper Story) 300/150 sf 225/150 sf 150/100 sf 150/100 sf Open Space(Private and Common) 45% 40% 40% 40% Minimum Patio/Porch Depth 6 ft(') 6 ft(4) 6 ft(4) 6 ft(4) Recreation Facility Required per Section 17.32.040 Table Notes: (1) Add 10 feet if adjacent to VL,L,or LM district. • (2) Zero lot line dwellings permitted pursuant to Subsection 17.36.010.D. EXHIBIT R 17.36-5 D-1 pg. 92 Tract 18912 Proposed Tract ® Design Guideline Summary Standard 18912 Minimum Lot Area(minimum) 4,000sf 4,013sf Minimum Lot Area(minimum net ave) 4,000sf 4,907sf Lot Width(minimum) 4511 45ft Lot Width(comer lot) 50ft 60ft Lot Depth(minimum) 80ft 83ft Minimum Frontage 30ft 45ft Minimum Frontage(flag lot) 208 n/a Allowed Density(dwelling units per acre) Minimum Density(Net/excluding streets and ROW) 8 du/ac 8.88 du/ac Maximum Density(Net/excluding streets and ROW) 14 du/ac 8.88 du/ac Minimum Setback Front Yard' (from curb face) 278 27ft ® Corner Side Yard (from curb face) 15ft 2011 Interior Side Yard 5/5 5/5 Rear Yard 15ft 15ft Building Height Primary Buildings 35ft 29ft max Lot Coverage Lot Coverage' 50% 45.5%max Open Space Requirement Private Open Space(excludes street&parkway) 35%min 62% Minimum Patio/Porch Depth 6ft 6ft ' Front yard setback can be reduced up to 5'to provide variation along the street. Does not include eves. 'Lot Coverage includes building footprint(incl.garages)and covered porches. Does not include eaves. • EXHIBIT S D-1 pg. 93 • THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SPECIAL MEETING ;CHO CUCAMONGA THE PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES AUGUST 14, 2013 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center Rains Room 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California I. CALL TO ORDER Pledge of Allegiance 7:02 PM r Roll Call Chairman Howdyshell X Vice Chairman Fletcher X Munoz X Wimberly X Oaxaca X Additional Staff Present. Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager, Jeff Bloom, Deputy City Manager/Economic and Community Development; Betty Miller, Senior Engineer FIF II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS- This is the time and place for the general public to address the Planning Commission on any item listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. 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 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 EXHIBIT T D-1 pg. 94 PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES C�HO NC► AUGUST 14, 2013 Page 2 III. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION A. PRE-APPLICATION REVIEW DRC2013-00545-MANNING HOMES-A review of a proposal to construct a new residential development consisting of 42 homes on 6.9 acres located north of the Pacific Electric Trail between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue.APN: 1076-181-01. Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager, made opening remarks and introduced the project. The applicant's team, gave a PowerPoint presentation and presented the conceptual plans. The following items were brought up in the discussion: trail improvements, wall heights, Ramona storm drain improvements, street length, fire access,. linkage to the park, density and compatibility with the neighboring properties, tree removal and relevant conditions and the slope on the trail and who is responsible for the maintenance of that slope. The Commission gave broad comments and they were generally pleased with the improvements made in the conceptual plans. IV. ADJOURNMENT 7:42 PM D-1 pg.95 AcS� s y38. Lu R �@ Jill l _!.RAG7.. .. NO..., 12532: !. r O .s -.. r .. �. SD M >0 3•' a - 39 3• w 41 - - 1C0•A' 'f ' PAD-A.4 . PAD-111.1- PAD=99� :PAD.97.9 IPAD=9L7 ,PI�.90.7 ►AWN./ IA0417 .PAD47.7 /ADaY7 I@t1.7 MD•K7 PkDsf3./ PAD=9L7 PAD41D PAD41.9 %A691.9 FAD=91.1 vAD.811 r�`�1 I1aI 4' at :cT— —'-- a 4 Lor s- PAD=90.11 1 i '►AWN.3 PAWN.1 �PAD=17.3 JAD=9S3 IPAO=77.9 ,HW91.9 PAO=•IA /AD=110 PAWN.O PAD=310 /IW9TA /10411 PAD-4B.1 I�PAD=SJ.9 PAD=91.9 PJD47.0 PAD-01d PAD41. /A0=91.1 PAD=91. AFII.O IA0=90A PA0=31.! _ 1 / _ I ... , ,1• 1... .p. .2 ■ .b , 1 j ■ O ■ ■ 13 O ■ 3 ■ • • 7 • 6 1 7119.- , g � Lor fAeuu7lox • ion wuq� uu ism- — --- n � u 41a1_— a11 —I, _ --- --ham.— Srr-- - ___ �Ia— -- , TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 18912 Jay, ��— ---- SAN N IM CITY OF RANCMD d1CAMONDA —'Ti. 4ys-- w a -STIP- 200 COIMY OF SAN SEFftaloW.SiA7E OF CALFORWk a n as-aa ii sam.rnx r aas..av ,o a.nrror..aas,uo assecnor,sauce aa.,oa.o-m, .-.__.—._- — a cava.�nrw a nx mai rconm r eoo. w«.a or.ws.e:cnas or ow.rc In s.o mwn. JULY.2013 S./6 ACRcS GROSS 17 NUMBERED LOTS WE OI x.xx ACRaS NEI 1 LEIfEREO LOIS awr 1 ar 1 wn A CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA FEB 2 0 2014 ENVIRONMENTAL RECEIVED - PLANNING INFORMATION FORM " 1NCHO (Part clearty using Ink. Use the tab key to movePartl - I nidal Study) (Please type or prifrom one line to the next line.) �,;UCAMONGA 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 studies/reports 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. • GENERAL INFORMATION: INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED. Please note that it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the application is complete at the time of submittal,• City staff will not be available to perform work required to provide missing information. Application Number for the project to which this form pertains: SUBTT18912, DRC2013-00887, DRC2013-01083 Project Title: Ramona Name&Address of project owner(s): Jonathon Wilson 8933 Ironwood Street Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Name 8 Address of developer or project sponsor. Manning HomesMater Mill Homes 20151 SW Birch St. Ste. 150 Newport Beach, CA 92660 • EXHIBIT U Page Iof10 D—I pg. 97 Contact Person&Address: Craig Kozma-Project Manager 20151 SW Birch St.Ste. 150 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Name$Address of person preparing this form(If different from above): Same as above Telephone Number. (949)250-4200 PROJECT • ' • I • Information indicated by an asterisk(')is not required of non-construction CUP's unless otherwise requested by staff. •1) Provide a full scale(8-12 x 11)copy of the USGS Quadrant Sheet(s)which includes the project site,and indicate the site boundaries. 2) Provide a set of color photographs that show representative views into the site from the north,south, east,and west; views into and from the site from the primary access points that serve the site;and representative views of significant features from the site. Include a map showing location of each photograph. 3) Project Location(describe): . 7074 Ramona Ave. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 6.82 Acres-Archibald Ave.to the West, Ramona Ave.to the East, Pacific Electric Bike Tra!VSANBAG ROW to the south, existing residential to the North 4) Assessor's Parcel Numbers(attach additional sheet if necessary): 1076-181-01 'S) Gross Site Area(ac/sq.ft.): 6.82 '6) Net Site Area(total site size minus area of public streets 8 proposed 5.13 dedications): 7) Describe any proposed general plan amendment or zone change which would affect the project site (attach additional sheet if necessary): The easterly 1/2 of the site will be re-zoned from"LM"to"M"and will require a Zoning Map Amendment. The entire site is currently designated"M"under the General Plan and therefore will not require a General Plan Amendment. See attached justification letter. Updated 4/11/2013 Page 2 of 10 D-1 pg.98 8) Include a description of all permits which will be necessary fivm the City of Rancho Cucamonga and other governmental agencies in order to fully implement the project. ® Zoning Map Amendment for easterly 1/2 of the site from"LM"to"M". Design Review ofAfrnew single family homes. Tree Removal Permit. Minor Exception for wall height. License agreement from SANBAG to perform work in the ROW 9) Describe the physical setting of the site as it exists before the project including information on topography,soil stability, plants and animals, mature trees, trails and roads, drainage courses, and scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on site(including age and condition)and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of significant features described. In addition,cite all sources of information(i.e.,geological andlorhydrologic studies,biotic and archeological surveys,traffic studies): The site gently slopes from North to South and West to East. The site has an agricultural history and has been highly disturbed from it's natural state(Hamilton Biological,2014). Along the Northerly boundry of the site there is a fragmented Eucalyptus windrow which is in declining health, possibly due to the construction of a block wall in the root zone of the trees(Bonterra,2014). Several trees that would have made up the windrow have fallen over or been removed at some point in the past(Bonterra,2014). Across • the remainder of the site are dead or declining fruit/citrus trees and coast live oak trees,which appear to been cut at the stump in the past and have since re-sprouted(Bonterra,2014). There is a vacant single family home(7074 Ramona)on the site which appears on the"Local Inventory of Historic Resourses"list (Rancho Cucamonga, 2011). The property was assigned a California Historic Resources Code of 6Z: Found ineligible for NR(National Register),CR(California Register)or local desgnation through survey evaluation (Rancho Cucamonga,2011 -Bonterra,2014). See justification letter for more details. • Updated 4/11/2013 Page 3 of 10 D-1 pg. 99 10) Describe the known cultural and/or historical aspects of the site. Cite all sources of information(books,published reports and oral history): A Cultural Resource Assessment was completed and no significant archaeological,historical,or paleontological resourses were discovered on the project site(Bonterra,2014). Mitigation measures are recommended to preserve paleontological, historical,or archaeological resources which may be discoved during grading. 11) Describe any noise sources and theirlevels that now affect the site(aircraft,roadwaynolse,etc.)and how they will affed proposed uses. Archibald Ave.to the West. Pacific Electric Bike Trail to the South. Ramona Ave.to the East. An Noise Analysis study was completed and required elements will be incorporated into the project design. 12) Describe the proposed project in detail. This should provide an adequate description of the site in terms of ultimate use that will result from the proposed project. Indicate if there are proposed phases for development; the extent of development to occur with each phase,and the anticipated completion of each increment Attach additional sheet(s)if necessary. 16 f{etot subdivision with lot sizes ranging from 4,012sf to 9,501sf. Average lot size is 4,854sfi 46 0New, detached,single family homes. 3 Floorplan types, reverse floorplans,and 4 elevation styles per plan. House Square footages range from 2,526sf to 3,143sf. All homes have 2-car garages and full driveways (minimum 19'deep). Project Phasing is still preliminary, but it is anticipated that the project would be phased as follows: -Grade,street improvements,perimeter wall,other site work. -3 Model Homes and temporary parking lottsales office - Phase 1 (9 homes), Phase II(9 homes), Phase III (10 homes), Phase IV(10 homes) See justification letter for more project details. 13) Describe the surrounding properties,including information on plants and animals and any cultural,historical, or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use(residential,commercial,etc.),intensity of land use(one-family,apartment houses, shops,department stores,eta)and scale of development(height,frontage,setback rear yard,etc.): West-Archibald Ave. and existing multi-family residential and commercial South-Pacific Electric Bike Trail and existing multi-family residential and mobile home park East-Ramona Ave.and existing LM Residential North-Existing LM Residential(3,280sf minimum lots) See detailed site plan for setbacks and sizes of proposed houses Updated 4/11/2013 Page 4 of 10 D—I pg. 100 14) Will the proposed projed change the pattem,scale,or character of the surrounding general area of the project? The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding land uses. • See justification letter further description. 15) Indicate the type of short-term and long-term noise to be generated,including source and amount. How will these noise levels affect adjacent properties and on-site uses? What methods of soundproofing are proposed? Short term noise will be generated by construction activities. Al construction activity will take place during City of Rancho Cucamonga approved work hours. A permanent perimeter block wall is proposed and will be constructed early in the development stage. At build out,long term noise will be consistent with a single family residential neighborhood. '16) indicate proposed removals and/or replacements of mature or scenic trees: The existing trees will be removed as part of the development. Trees will be replaced per the requirements of the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Municiple Code. See proposed landscape plan for tree replacement. See justification lettter. 17) Indicate any bodies of water(including domestic water supplies)into which the site drains: Stormwater ® gererated from the site will tie into the City stormdrain system. Water quality and storm drain runoff is addressed in a Water Quality Managment Plan(WQMP). 18) Indicate expected amount of water usage. (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification,please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at(909)987-2591. a. Residential(9 Y)aYda 32430gal/day Peak use(gal/Day) b. CommerciaUlnd. (gallday/ac) Peak use(gaUmihlac) 19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal. ®Septic Tank ❑Sewer. If septic tanks are proposed, attach percolation tests. If discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate expected daily sewage generation: (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further clarification,please contact the Cucamonga Valley Water District at(909) 987-2591. a. Residential(gaYday) 12420 b. Commerciab1ndustrial(gallday/ac) Updated 4/11/2013 Page 5 of 10 D-1 pg. 101 RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: 20) Number of residential units Detached(indicate range of parcel sizes,minimum lot size and maximum lot size: Minimum Lot Size=4,012 Maximum Lot Size=9,501 Average Lot Size=4,854 For Sale Single Family Homes Attached(indicate whether units are rental or for sale units): 21) Anticipated range of sale prices and/or rents: Sale Prices) $500,000 to $650,000 Rent(per month) $ to $ 22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type: Plan 1 =2,526sf,4 Bedroom, 3-1/2 Bath,2-car garage Plan 2=2,877sf,4 Bedroom, Loft/Opt Bed 5, 3-1/2 Bath,2-car garage w/storage Plan 3=3,143sf,4 Bedroom, Loft/Opt Bed 5,4-1/2 Bath,2-car garage 23) Indicate anticipated household size by unit type: 4-5 persons per household 24) Indicate the expected number of school children who will be residing within the project: Contact the appropriate School Districts as shown in Attachment B: a. Elementary: 1-2 b. Junior High: 1-2 C. Senior High 1-2 COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL PROJECTS 25) Describe type of use(s)and major function(s)of commercial,industrial or institutional uses. N/A Updated 4/11/2013 Page 6 of 10 D-1 pg. 102 26) Total floor area of commercial,industrial,or institutional uses by type. N/A 27) Indicate hours of operation: N/A 28) Number of employees: N/A Total: Maximum Shift.• N/A Time of Maximum Shift: N/A 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): N/A 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(818)572-6283): N/A ALL PROJECTS 32) Have the water,sewer,fire,and flood control agencies serving the project been contacted to determine their ability to provide adequate service to the proposed project? ff so,please indicate their response. CCWD will provide a will serve letter City of Rancho Cucamonga reviewed the project for fire and storm drain as part of the Pre-Application submittal Updated 4/11/2013 Page 7 of 10 D-1 pg. 103 33) In the known history of this proParty,has there been any use,storage, or discharge of hazardous and/or toxic materials? Examples of hazardous and/or toxic materials include,but are not limited to PCB's;radioactive substances;pesticides and herbicides;fuels,oils,solvents,and other flammable liquids and gases. Also note underground storage of any of the above. Please list the materials and describe their use,storage, and/or discharge on the property, as well as the dates of use,B known. . No-None to our knowledge 34) Will the proposed project involve the temporary orlong-term use,storage,ordischarge of hazardous and/or toxic materials, including but not limited to those examples listed above? If yes,provide an inventory of all such materials to be used and proposed method of disposal. The location of such uses,along with the storage and shipment areas,shall be shown and labeled on the application plans. No 35) The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game the. The projectplanner will confirin which fees apply to this project All checks are to be made payable to the Cleric of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning CommissiomPlanning Director hearing: I hereby certify that the statements fumished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for adequate evaluation of this project to the best of my ability,that the facts,statements,and information presented are true and correct tot he best of my knowledge and belief. I further understand that additional information sy be required to be submitted before an adequate evaluation can be made by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Date: Signature: Title: O JQG� 0.Ngq�f' • �'^QNr1i^4 � � C ra:S �A a Ke.d Updated 4/11/2013 Page 8 of 10 D-1 pg. 104 ATTACHMENT"A" CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ® ESTIMATED WATER USE AND SEWER FLOWS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT (Data Provided by Cucamonga Valley Water District February 2003) Water Usage Single;Family 705 gallons per EDU per day Multi-Family 256 gallons per EDU per day Neighborhood Commercial 1000 gal/day/unit (tenant) General Commercial 4082 gal/day/unit(tenant) Office Professional 973 gal/day/unit (tenant) Institutional/Govemment 6412 gal/day/unit (tenant) Industrial Park 1750 gal/day/unit (tenant) Large General Industrial 2020 gal/day/unit (tenant) Heavy Industrial (distribution) 1863 gal/day/unit (tenant) Sewer Flows Single-Family 270 gallons per EDU per day Multi-Family 190 gallons per EDU per day General Commercial 1900 gal/day/acre Office Professional 1900 gal/day/acre Institutional/Govemment Industrial Park 3000 gal/day/acre Large General Industrial 2020 gal/day/acre Heavy Industrial (distribution) 1863 gal/day/acre Source: Cucamonga Valley Water District Engineering & Water Resources Departments, Urban Water Management Plan 2000 Updated 4/11/2013 Page 9 of 10 D-1 pg. 105 ATTACHMENT B Contact the school district for your area for amount and payment of school fees: Elementary School Districts Alta Loma 9350 Base Line Road,Suite F Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91730 (909)987-0766 Central 10601 Church Street,Suite 112 Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91730 (909)989-8541 Cucamonga 8776 Archibald Avenue Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91730 (909)987-8942 Etiwanda 6061 East Avenue P.O. Box 248 Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91739 (909)899-2451 High School Chaffey High School 211 West 5th Street Ontario, CA 91762 (909)988-8511 Updated 4/11/2013 Page 10 of 10 D-1 pg. 106 �r /k'��'`'�i I. ,.y6� � I_ �- .fir •a r I I`: �'!`��.. �/ `°� -\\ f`J�'.•. -S� N B E R'�1 O ,: -sem — J - - - 1• - •_---•----•--- -?�•��- I`_.' - - _ - \•.// .___ _ - --•_� 7,;, ._ ?OO '•moi ����1 UQ- II_:. _ - - 720 __ - fr 1: ��� � ,.•a k water , a ca afar• .+.•i-J - 1 /) - \. t II-_ - .` /r`r 4 00 chaffey • .�! I Tank 0• it = '!' rank — 17-1 /800 -- -- - Chuffey Ir P! Flood db d _ C a •_• i eta i, � _-__. .. - •- ... �� .. +j 4 B.. _4 •:=�� . 'is' — F� _ ,p T — - - --_ -- -" PROJECTSITE I i• ' - --a- _ , - -• � --- .;- - • /5/0 Gl/LAND 30 GRANTit j - 107 •.. •1 it •••• a •I•. �- '- � j r.-_=:-,-_= I /. � G 'moi • / �,\ .. . '• •j•• _ 1 n ^r IL zij... i• rr�ww... '� �� --_''__ '�_ F 'I r n it C /36 .r ••• w. ��= --_.-1 :' � . :. : :• �_"__ .._':_IJJ__�.,J'_ • rwO' .••••.r' '.�: �rw.• •� ��,5 •V• .r. rr �140..1JU Q• 1 � r4' r 7 n II �� � 1 r;� I 1 rc Seel s .i• -- ._._= � �_ 444 12 120000 FEET 445 446 35' •r• ___`t j - )ublished by the Geological Survey 147 R W. r n with California Department of SCAI * 1 MN sic GN 1000 0 1000 2000 methods from aerial photographs I so s ble surveys 1933. Field checked 1953o•f9• 1314• —�-- ographs taken 1966. Field checked 1966 6 Mil�S 240MILS I CONTOUR II )27 North American Datum NATIONAL GEODETIC m California coordinate system,zone 5 M . .. . _ D— pg. 107 U'/4 KAIVIVINA A V.Lly UL MANNINGHOMES LOT 9 & 10 TRACT 12532 10/8/2013 SITE P OTOS D-1 pg. 108 R �-�� _. t.. v'• %'9a w;s. _ .rw.w.. z2' xh`I*', "F(' -3"�':+ras+ � � 1 r tee SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES TO THE NORTHOF PROPERTY" r •' 4 fit ''• tl 1 .� � .}. h� r{����cccccc ;�,�,1, :,. `,,•,,�+i"i�•,�,`.�SPS. ,�f�a�s • r ; {� M r •� t ,fie. t .tYr 4v Yf� re " f SIX , ?Y .r„r � •?�""`t'� �` .. 1 � ��r��� i f r'je ._`ted 'ir'' �fA"�A� "� ,,xJ ,, `• �� r Ly s��.,ia� �gni.f x6a��,�� � ,4._. 4; n .y,5�'9 4 f""�i j � y ne-�• ' �.Idr' �' s. � r � tr 4 e.� o'&"9iW a � r Y�kM .n}j�- �� � i . .. ... , �.'-•�i'��a'�,��`f!-TM3� r, � ,yF; , ,� ��k y .. f, s�a� ��� .- :5"�7 7'# ♦, , .. F �Q����f�,t ay,M1r,,,. •t t s F,�r., fr,,+" ,� - 4. `.3'e' �`" f$T' -'esu •,.? `� ! :yam 'ri'� �, }.. ��, �n,F"!�"�.,�,,•�Y a r � R.fid ;. ��, �"�* e1.4T�,(4 i e4,.�ht � , ;F'°�•K'a,�1 �"' �•_� C F .k b r � r v �vnr- .e�� ,� a .•'ice. JI v)II { a i 11 we mf It CL t S i a Sl3i ,� IK Ro } 11, sgs Y; tt cw^���'7� vel�r•v -. � f�f yf'3'`• l /n "R 4 M � ;� r 5 a♦ L, m s• � �,,4s � ����� fig; a s '4 is h r AIM S � ;1 ��r� �^ 'R� .� 4K' '� ��,,..,,,,SS*..`° f�"i3 p�tf�i�fiR'�k'.,4� •'� y 5t Af J � � ,. •'.'� t.--. h ?�y*'R 6R1i..��1$j µ1 1 s� I t t •?`*�:G,,r ,}' dl'Z��3'3.�"1Y�Yv-ext fin1�� e ���.. � }�I � t't�` 4�?� �. 4 ,.. a5 } � `y i�' Pr }� ...9 tt 5 �'J'. •R S 55y'11+�5 ` 4SY � At �q�y,�.� •'lr l�k:: ��.a� fY�.• f' � #'y 9y. ,y, 4 . {• / � ` %.� �{� r .. R `fit ^) 1 y' ,. .>, Y s 'd;Ji►��r._ 4��a�_ r �no I .4 r.i \� ••d. y '.,��.'.. �/�{^I� t"' # G �tt Yds r '.,p �'d �s ��r r �i.S I t,Yw f ` ��•! 1 it 5`... '1r �, x r' i "i"�a�'$ 1 f';rR :t k Y,�41J :.Y ({`r �.�i���,`l�, ,:t '; _ t r5'�.yr .r•'1�� �t yqr•v,.a.y.9yT'k•. .i'N \yam... 1 �t• fi.. r ,d iS ;M< Yky77a kHfV5NI S(�{ t ? tQ A s ••t J � y f r �.T. �;� �j•:, �� ��' •l"y'� '•"+�<Jg�- �.k � 1 r � s� >� � r i m' �av�p. ',f,: ",r �H . yi.• AM I tr. rld; < '•. 3 ijkf l K+i t, ir�'� Y �p.s, f 4 ny S"5y'`•�. F. T 3a �1fi�� �t�rrlt�,`, 7 � r '�'��,. �1 ,� t\L a •ai�'M ~,X ay Yf!•'4:}'r`" ° 1. T 8 J w IS y .•^•:4 x r - ••1.. r.tYrC ,� t!� GaS � AR�• a C �`r't I�� r �' ti. ;t, . 6���.• � r L£x� t-, +1�wre t��'7,x��}',��� ' •+' �$'�yH"�' ,, • ' t 1 {.• - .wt�r`�a.�+,s 7 sN a #1 F� p�7 n � ` - {j? 10 Xa ��>t• � iw+if7 A i a "v as R3 ol y F a � '�`�« �• .i�f�' •?,y ��k Y yw,s"r .. ..;fir e j J.• }r°� G�' yy��, �� .{ ,. [��}t.' t })e,�eA'� c i ` < .„w t .,7.' �' V.J4 L - i+l i p g� }'.;. ,�L. '� +,A.� A.a.A0.a�.*.1'tP k�t.0..tl P y t �`•""' 'f' ram. t •,�"� a 1 `Yds �.�.� t, y •�• Y ;��: r . .t�ie� -� � � .1��. �•:"''-y: • � 4"' „ •.d' }�, 15��, 1, ,s� `;�t =*'� r% Y , '�'��5. t � "��lsir��S�ir �� ��.�••--a .iia ,,,r ( _'Y l �iX'�f ""�•,,,.,4 S y2. •�., .v.�L ,\ ,{� "�'�"C C,'4 �♦ ',�,_ � '`� gy_yp'� t ��;� ..3:• ,. sl `x�l'r 1?E•. �.'`�.^qaC yy t L x`. � .....•.••••••.•r.••••.•.... �� ,��• s •v• '.� .-. ,,� l+a w } Ott•.�. Qs _ � ��t �,' � ..`w9 a.fi'iA_ ._. � gA� S.,A ° � •,J �,, • ��- y, 'yam �i '"l r�i y/.')•'f E• �•.' •*.wr i�� '4 Y*.�.� ��3•,��'j��'�, "�`s'/ r •.�*� 'b �'r�J�•.Fr�� ql , ,�� � a y t�• r ,y �,.tLf� �1�� v e�`'' � °�. .•►�+^ y f.,h�.. ;j� �J�J �„I� rt1'��: v � i 'y `= �•J A�''?�'' { 1 j z' t!�{r� •�4 K +41� t- `�� :fid. � `A� '�']^ _'V',.,c.' `- • ^� � �� y � ..I .t" 1r "YC rte' .. `•. J ` � .. � ? ���*�;. fr.ya .a 331" `.r.•�, t -00 �. City of Rancho Cucamonga • _ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART 11 BACKGROUND 1. Project File: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. 2. Related Files: Pre-Application Review DRC2013-00545 3. Description of Project: The proposed project is a subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres (5.06 net acres) into 45 lots (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912) and construction of 45 single- family residences (Development Review DRC2013-01083) in the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail; APN: 1076-181-01. The underlying General Plan land use designation is Medium Residential. Therefore, the project includes Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-00887 to change the zoning of the east part of the project site from Low Medium (LM) Residential to Medium (M) Residential in order for the zoning of that part of the project to be consistent with the General Plan designation of Medium Residential. As development standards such as lot dimensions, setbacks, lot coverage, etc. for single-family residential development within the Medium Residential District are not addressed in the Development Code (only multi-family residential development is discussed), the project includes Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626 to insert these standards.. Also included is Tree ® Removal Permit DRC2013-00889 for the removal of the trees on the property to allow the construction of the aforementioned houses and Minor Exception'DRC2014-00161 to allow the construction of walls that will exceed, by 2 feet, the height limit that applies to walls in residential districts. 4. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Manning Homes Jim Manning/Craig Kozma 20151 SW Birch Street Ste. 150 Newport Beach, CA 92660 5. General Plan Designation: Medium Residential 6. Zoning: Medium (M) Residential District and Low Medium (LM) Residential District 7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The project site is located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road, and immediately north of the Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail (PE Trail). The site is characterized by single-family residential development to the north and east, apartments and a mobile home park to the south, and commercial development to the west. The zoning of the properties to the north is Low Medium (LM) Residential while the zoning of the properties to the east is Low(L) Residential. The zoning designations of the properties to the south, on the other side of the PE Trail, are Medium High (MH) Residential District and Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the property to the west is Medium High (MH) Residential District. 8. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive D-1 pg. 117 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 2 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 9. Contact Person and Phone Number: Mike Smith Associate Planner (909)477-2750 x4317 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement): None GLOSSARY—The following abbreviations are used in this report: CALEEMOD—California Emissions Estimator Model CVWD-Cucamonga Valley Water District EIR—Environmental Impact Report FEIR—Final Environmental Impact Report FPEIR- Final Program Environmental Impact Report NPDES—National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NOx—Nitrogen Oxides ROG—Reactive Organic Gases 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 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. ( )Aesthetics ( )Agricultural Resources (x)Air Quality (x)Biological Resources (x)Cultural Resources ()Geology&Soils (x)Greenhouse Gas Emissions ( )Hazards&Waste Materials (x)Hydrology&Water Quality ( )Land Use&Planning ( )Mineral Resources (x)Noise ( )Population&Housing ( )Public Services ()Recreation ( )Transportation/Traff'ic ( )Utilities&Service Systems ()Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: ( ) 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 Rev 2-26-13 D-1 pg. 118 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 3 • ( ) 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 pur)fVantto applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earl EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are im upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Prepared By: Date: o �� Reviewed By: Date: 7I 01 t Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 119 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 4 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated impact Im act 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 no significant vistas within or adjacent to the project site. The project site is within the Archibald Avenue view corridor according to General Plan Figure LU-6. However, the proposed project is a subdivision comprised of 45 single-family residences that will have characteristics that will be similar to those of the surrounding residential development including architecture, plotting, and massing, and will comply with the City's technical standards that apply to setbacks and building height. Therefore, there will be no 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,there will be no impact. C) The project site is located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road (and immediately north of the Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail). The site is characterized by single-family residential development to the north and east, apartments and a mobile home park to the south, and commercial development to the west. The visual quality of the area will not degrade as a result of this project. The house product associated with the proposed subdivision was reviewed by staff and the City's Design Review Committee. The architecture of the houses is consistent with the City's design and technical standards as described in the Development Code, and will be compatible with the architecture of the surrounding residential development. Also, City standards require the developer to both relocate the existing utility lines (such as those along Ramona Avenue) and install new utility lines and facilities underground in order to minimize the unsightly appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-96, unless exempted by said Resolution. Therefore, there will be no impact. d) The project would increase the number of streetlights and residential 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 impact will be less-than-significant. Rev 2-26-13 D-I pg. 120 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 5 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Williamson Act contract? C) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause 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 project site is not designated as Prime Farmlands, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The project site is located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road (and immediately north of the Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail). The site is characterized by single-family residential development to the north and east, apartments and a mobile home park to the south, and commercial development to the 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. Furthermore, a large number of the designated farmland parcels are small, ranging from 3 acres to 30 acres, and their economic viability is doubtful; therefore, they are not intended to be retained as farmland in the General Plan Land Use Plan. The General Plan FPEIR identified the conversion of farmlands to urban uses as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. Therefore, there will be no impact. b) There is no agriculturally zoned land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no Williamson Act contracts within the City. Therefore, there will be no impact. C) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that is zoned as forest land or • timberland. Therefore no impacts would occur related to the conversion of forest land to non-forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Therefore, there will be no impact. Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 121 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 6 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentiallywin, Than Significant Mitigation Significant No impact Incorporated Impact Impact d) There are no lands within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that qualify as forest land or timberland. Therefore no impacts would occur related of the loss or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. Further, there are no areas within the City of Rancho Cucamonga that are zoned as forest land, timberland, or Timberland Production. Therefore, there will be no impact. e) The project site is located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road (and immediately north of the Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail). The site is characterized by single-family residential development to the north and east, apartments and a mobile home park to the south, and commercial development to the west. The nearest agricultural use is a Christmas tree farm located about 1,200 feet to the northeast of 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, there will be no impact. 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 noted in the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.3), the proposed project 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). The project involves the subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres (5.06 net acres) into forty-five (45) lots and the construction of forty-five (45) single-family residences. The Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site so that the project site is uniformly zoned Medium (M) Residential District. This amendment will correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specified in the General Plan. The Development Code Amendment will provide development standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. Therefore the project is consistent with the 2003 AQMP and is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. Rev 2-26-13 D-1 pg. 122 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 7 Less Than Significant Less. Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially wall Than Sign cant Mdigation Than No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Both the State of California and the federal government have established health-based ambient air quality standards (AAQS) for seven air pollutants. These pollutants include ozone (03), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), coarse particulate matter with a diameter or 10 microns or less (PM,o), fine particulate matter less than 2.5 (PM2.5) microns in diameter and lead. Among these pollutants, ozone and particulate matter (PMlo 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 (1-12S), vinyl chloride and visibility reducing particles. These standards are designed to protect the health and welfare of the populace with a reasonable margin of safety. The City of Rancho Cucamonga area is within the South Coast Air Basin, which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) provides the SCAQMD with the authority to manage transportation activities at indirect sources. Indirect sources of pollution are generated when minor sources collectively emit a substantial amount of pollution. Examples of this include motor vehicles at an intersection, a mall and on highways. SCAQMD also regulates stationary sources of pollution within in jurisdictional area. Direct emissions from motor vehicles are regulated by the Air Resources Board (ARB). The combination of topography, low mixing height, abundant sunshine, and emissions • from the second largest urban area in the United States gives the Basin the worst air pollution problem in the nation. The Basin experiences a persistent temperature inversion (increasing temperature with increasing altitude); this inversion (coupled with low wind 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 (PM,o), 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, PM10 and PM2.5. Specific criteria for determining whether the potential air quality impacts of a project are significant are set forth in the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook. The criteria include daily emissions thresholds, compliance with State and national air quality standards, and consistency with the current AQMP. As prescribed by SCAQMD, an Air Quality Assessment was prepared by KPC EHS Consultants on December 2013 that • utilizes the CalEEMod methodology and CEQA Air Quality Handbook, April 1993 to evaluate short-term construction emissions and short-term construction emissions for Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 123 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 8 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact localized significant thresholds, long-term operational emissions, operational emissions for localized significant thresholds, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Short Term (Construction) Impacts VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5 Demolition 2.56 23.84 16.83 0.018 1.62 1.24 Site Preparation 5.71 57.62 44.49 0.04 21.40 12.87 Site Grading 4.22 41.20 28.03 0.03 9.09 5.59 Building Construction 3.72 23.98 18.23 0.02 2.09 1.83 Architectural Coatings 2.59 32.86 2.13 0.007 0.254 0.229 Paving Emissions 47.74 31.51 22.31 0.04 3.15 2.53 Threshold 75 100 550 1 150 150 1 55 Significant Impact No No No I No No No ROG=reactive organic gases;NOx=oxides of nitrogen;CO=carbon monoxide;SOX=oxides of sulfur,PM10 and PM2.5=particulate matter Source: Air Quality Assessment-(Tables 5-2 through 5-7)(CaIEEMod Output) KPC EHS Consultants,December 2013 Equipment Exhausts and Related Construction Activities Construction activities produce combustion emissions from various sources such as site grading, utility engines, on-site heavy-duty construction vehicles, asphalt paving, and motor vehicles transporting the construction crew. Exhaust emissions from construction activities envisioned on site would vary daily as construction activity levels change. The use of construction equipment on site would result in localized exhaust emissions. Fugitive Dust Fugitive dust emissions are generally associated with land clearing and exposure of soils to the air and wind, and cut-and-fill grading operations. Dust generated during construction varies substantially on a project-by project basis, depending on the level of activity, the specific operation and weather conditions at the time of construction. Construction emissions can vary greatly depending on the level of activity, the specific operations taking place, the equipment being operated, local soils, weather conditions and other factors. The proposed project will be required to comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403 to control fugitive dust. Architectural Coatings Architectural coatings contain VOCs that are similar to ROCS and are part of the 03 precursors. There will be 45 single-family residences constructed as part of this project. Based on the proposed project, it is estimated that the proposed buildings will result in about 2.59 lbs of VOC per day during the coating phase. The emissions would occur after grading activities, near the end of the construction period. Therefore, this VOC emission is the principal air emission and is less than the SCAQMD VOC threshold of 75 lbs/day. Rev 2-26-13 D-I pg. 124 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 9 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentiallyignifwrm Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Emissions associated with architectural coatings could be reduced by using pre- coated/natural-colored building materials, using water-based or low-VOC coating, and using coating transfer or spray equipment with high transfer efficiency. For example, a high-volume, low-pressure (HVLP) spray method is a coating application system operated at air pressure between 0.1 and 10 pounds per square inch gauge (psig), with 65 percent transfer efficiency. Manual applications such as paintbrush, and roller trowel, spatula, dauber, rag, or sponge have 100 percent transfer efficiency. Per the Air Quality Assessment prepared by KPC EHS Consultants on December 2013, the architectural coatings estimates were based on coatings taking place over 20 active working days during construction...with the emission results displayed with no mitigation measures applied. Additional decreases in ROG (VOC) can be obtained using HVLP, and Low or No VOC coatings. The majority of the architectural coatings will be applied as interior paints which would offer the best reduction using Low VOC and No VOC paints. Using Low and No VOC coatings along with HVLP equipment it is estimated would likely reduce the VOC emissions below the calculated unmitigated values. 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 single-family residences 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 Occurrinq Asbestos The proposed project is located in San Bernardino County, and it is not among the counties that are found to have serpentine and ultramafic rock in their soils. In addition, there has been no serpentine or ultramafic rock found in the project area. Therefore, the potential risk for naturally occurring asbestors (NOA) during project construction is small and less-than-significant. 2010 General Plan FPEIR Air Quality Analysis and Mitigation Measures (short term) Short Term (Construction) Emissions - Continued development will contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. During the construction phases of development, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty construction vehicles, construction worker vehicles, and energy use will generate emissions. In addition, fugitive dust would also be generated during grading and construction activities. While most of the dust would settle on or near the project site, smaller particles would remain in the atmosphere, increasing particle levels within the surrounding area. Construction is an on-going industry in the Rancho Cucamonga area. Construction workers and equipment work and operate at one development site until their tasks are complete. Nevertheless, fugitive dust and equipment emissions are required to be assessed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD)on a project- specific basis and in conformance with the General Plan FPEIR. Therefore, the following mitigation measures as identified in the FPEIR shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels: Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 125 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 10 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Signficant MUgaUon Signficant ]No Impact Inw orated I act I 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the developer shall submit construction plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD)as well as City Planning Staff. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. • Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph)in accordance with Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce PMjo emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 126 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 11 • less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Air Quality based on the future build out of the City. Based upon on the Urban Emissions Model (URBEMIS7G) estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan (FPEIR), Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Ozone (03), and Particulate Matter (PM2.5 and PM,o) 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. Long Term (Operational) Impacts Long Term Project Operational Emissions ® Long-term air pollutant emission impacts are those associated with stationary sources and mobile sources involving any project-related changes. The proposed project would result in a net increase in the number of residential buildings/uses in the project area; therefore, the proposed project would result in net increases in both stationary and mobile source emissions. The stationary source emissions would come from additional natural gas consumption for on-site buildings and electricity for the lighting in the buildings and at the parking area. Based on trip generation factors applicable to the project, long-term operation emissions associated with the proposed project, calculated with CalEEMod, shows that the increase of all criteria pollutants as a result of the proposed project would be less than the corresponding SCAQMD daily emission thresholds. Therefore, project- related long-term air quality impacts would not be significant. Mitigation measures would not be required. VOC NOX CO SOX PM10 PM2.5 Area 1.9406 0.0456 3.8662 0.0002 0.0207 0.0207 Energy 0.0459 0.3922 6.1669 0.0025 0.0317 0.0317 Mobile 6.1697 6.5489 25.278 0.0539 3.4520 0.9821 Total 8.1561 6.9866 29.309 0.0566 3.5084 1.0345 Threshold 55 55 550 150 150 55 Significant Impact No No No No No No Source: Air Quality Assessment-(Table 5-8)(CaIEEMod Output) KPC EHS Consultants, December 2013 2010 General Plan FPEIR Air Quality Analysis and Mitigation Measures(long term) Long Term (Operational) Emissions- The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report(FPEIR)analyzed the impacts of Air Quality based on the future build out of Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 127 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 12 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Inco rated Impact Impact the City. In the long-term, development consistent with the General Plan would result in significant operational vehicle emissions based upon on the URBEMIS7G model estimates in Table 4.3-3 of the General Plan FPEIR; therefore, would all be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less-than-significant. The following mitigation measures as identified in the FPEIR shall be implemented: 1) Landscape with native and/or drought-resistant species to- reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. 2) Provide lighter color roofing and road materials and tree planting programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous Sources MSC-01 measure. 3) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water heaters. 4) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. After implementation of the preceding mitigation measures, the General Plan FPEIR identified the .citywide increase in operational emissions as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council as noted in the General Plan FPEIR(Section 4.3). C) The project involves the subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres (5.06 net acres) into forty- five (45) lots and the construction of forty-five (45) single-family residences. The Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site so that the project site is uniformly zoned Medium (M) Residential District. This amendment will correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specified in the General Plan. The Development Code Amendment will provide development standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. As noted in the General Plan FEIR(Section 4.3), continued development would contribute to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and State standards. The General Plan FPEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as a significant and adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. . The project proposed is consistent with the General Plan for which the FPEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. d) Sensitive receptors are defined as populations that are more susceptible to the effects of pollution than the population at large. The SCAQMD identifies the following as sensitive receptors: long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic facilities. According to the SCAQMD, projects have the potential to create significant impacts if they are located within 1/4 mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air contaminants identified in SCAQMD Rule 1401. The project site is located immediately adjacent to sensitive receptors—single-family residences. Potential impacts to air quality are consistent with the Public Health and Safety Super-Element within the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. During construction, there is the possibility of fugitive dust to be generated from grading the site. The mitigation measures listed under b) above and the following mitigation measure will reduce impact to less-than-significant levels. Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 128 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 13 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 5) 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 Pli 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 residential uses would be like cooking and gardening. The proposed single-family residences are not anticipated to emit any objectionable odors. Therefore, there will be no impact. 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? • b) Have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? C) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native ( ) (✓ ) ( ) () 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? Jill Comments: a) The project site is located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue about 1,400 • feet north of Base Line Road (and immediately north of the Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail). The site is characterized by single-family residential development to the north and east, apartments and a mobile home park to the south, and commercial development to Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 129 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 14 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: Potentially With ThanPP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated I Impact I Impact. the west. The project site is in an area that has been disturbed by the construction of residential development to the north and east, commercial development to the west, and infrastructure including streets and a rail line (which has been converted to a multi- purpose trail). According to the General Plan Figure RC-4, and Section 4.4 of the General Plan FPEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources. Per the Biological Resources Evaluation and Analysis prepared by Hamilton Biological on February 14, 2014, based on the survey of the plant communities, the site consists of a fallow orchard, a windrow of Blue Gum Eucalyptus trees, old fruit trees, and about eighty- one (81) native oaks, four(4) native Southern California Black Walnut trees, and one (1) native Blue Elderberry trees. Based on the survey of the wildlife, twenty-four (24) native and non-native wildlife species were detected. Birds observed include local breeders, such as Cooper's and Red-tailed Hawks, Anna's and Allen's Hummingbirds, Nuttall's Woodpecker, etc., and species that breed elsewhere such as Ruby-crowned Kinglet and Yellow-rumped Warbler. Two (2) mammals were detected, the California Ground Squirrel and Botta Pocket Gopher - no amphibians or reptiles were observed. The biologist noted that additional common, widespread animal species may also occur/could be.expected. Per the Biological Resources Evaluation and Analysis prepared by Hamilton Biological on February 14, 2014, none of the detected flora or fauna qualify as sensitive species and, therefore, the project will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals. However, all native bird species may be considered sensitive during the breeding season, as the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Department of Fish and Game Code both prohibit interference with the nesting activities of native bird species. The following mitigation measure shall be implemented to address this impact: 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 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. 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. b) The project site is located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road (and immediately north of the Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail). The site is characterized by single-family residential development to the north and east, apartments and a mobile home park to the south, and commercial development to the west. The project site is located in an urban area with no natural communities; no riparian habitat exists on-site. Therefore, there will be no impact. c) No wetland habitat is present on-site. As a result, project implementation would have no impact on these resources.Therefore, there will be no impact. Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 130 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 15 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No EImpact Incorporated Im act Impact d) The City is primarily located in an urban area that does not contain large, contiguous natural open space areas. Wildlife potentially may move through the north/south trending tributaries in the northern portion of the City and within the Sphere of Influence. The project site is located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road (and immediately north of the Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail). The site is characterized by single-family residential development to the north and east, apartments and a mobile home park to the south, and commercial development to the west. Therefore, there will be no impact. e) There are numerous "heritage" trees within the project site according to the Tree Survey Report prepared by BonTerra Psomas on February 12, 2014. These trees are subject to the City's tree preservation requirements as described in Section 17.80.050 of the Development Code. Heritage trees are defined in the Development Code as trees that meet several criteria including the following: all eucalyptus windrows [and] any tree in excess of thirty feet (30) in height and having a single trunk diameter at breast height (DBH) of twenty inches (20' or more as measured four and a half feet(4.59 from ground level and warrant consideration for preservation or relocation. There are also numerous fruit-bearing trees within the project site that not subject to the City's tree preservation requirements. The applicant proposes to remove all of these trees (related file: Tree Removal Permit DRC2014-00889) and, therefore, project implementation will result in the removal of these trees. The following mitigation measure shall reduce the impact to less- than-significant. 1) The trees that are located within the interior of the project, but not including the trees within the Eucalyptus windrow along the north side of the project site, shall be replaced with new trees, on a one-to-one basis, of a minimum 15-gallon size. These trees are in addition to the trees that are required by the Development Code for new residential development. 2) The trees that are located within the Eucalyptus windrow along the north side of the project site, shall be replaced with new trees, on a one-to-one basis, of a minimum 24-inch box size. These trees shall be planted within the rear yards of Lots 26 — 43 and side yards of Lots 44 and 45. These trees are in addition to the trees that are required by the Development Code for new residential development. 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 and, therefore, 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? Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 131 . Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 16 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially wat, Than Significant Mtigation Significant No Impact lincorporated Impact Impact C) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: a) There is an abandoned house on the project site. According to a cultural resources assessment prepared by BonTerra Psomas on January 31, 2014, the house, constructed ca. 1915, appears on the City of Rancho Cucamonga's "Local Inventory of Historic Resources". The property was assigned a California Historic Resources Code 6Z which is used to describe historic properties with low integrity, properties that once contained historic buildings were found to be vacant lots, properties containing non-historic buildings. Therefore, there will be no impact. b) There are no known archaeological sites or resources recorded on the project site. However, the Rancho Cucamonga area is known to have been inhabited by Native Americans according to the General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6). The project involves the subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres (5.06 net acres) into forty-five (45) lots and the construction of forty-five (45) single-family residences. The Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site so that the project site is uniformly zoned Medium (M) Residential District. This amendment will correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specified in the General Plan. The Development Code Amendment will provide development standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. Construction activity, particularly grading, soil excavation, and compaction, could adversely affect or eliminate existing and potential archaeological resources. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of Cultural Resources based on the future build out of the City. The following mitigation measures as.identified in the FPEIR shall be implemented: 3) 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 2-26-13 D-1 pg. 132 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 17 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Polefi ally will, Than SignificWith Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact planning the site as a park or green space or paying a in-kind mitigation fee. • Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving. C) The General Plan FPEIR (Section 4.6) indicates that the Rancho Cucamonga area is on an alluvial fan. According to the research performed at the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County and the San Bernardino County database, no paleontological sites or resources have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the Sphere-of- Influence, including the project site; however, the area has. a high sensitivity rating for paleontological resources. The older alluvium, which would have been deposited during the wetter climate that prevailed 10,000-100,000 years ago during the Late Pleistocene epoch of the Quaternary period, when the last "Ice Age" and the appearance of modern man occurred, may contain significant vertebrate fossils. The project site is underlain by Quaternary alluvium per the Public Safety Element of the General Plan; therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 4) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered ® before or during grading,the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to,the following measures: • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. • Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. • Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. d) The project site is in an area that has been disturbed by the construction of residential development to the north and east, commercial development to the west, and infrastructure including streets and a rail line (which has been converted to a multi- purpose trail). The project site is an abandoned citrus orchard according a cultural resources assessment prepared by BonTerra Psomas on January 31, 2014. No known religious or sacred sites exist within the project area. No evidence is in place to suggest Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 133 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 18 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mltigatlon Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Impact 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 pursuantlo 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. Therefore, there will be no impact. 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project. a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) liquefaction? iv) Landslides? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) C) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, ( ) ( ) ( } (✓) or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: a) No known faults pass through the site and it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault, according to the General Plan Figure PS-2, and Section 4.7 of the General Plan FPEIR. The Red Hill Fault, passes within about 1,900 southeast of the site, and the Cucamonga Fault Zone lies about 2.75 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 about 16 miles northeast of the site and the San Andreas, capable of up to MW 8.2 earthquakes, is about 18 miles northeast 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. Rev 2-26-13 D=l pg. 134 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 19 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) The City of Rancho Cucamonga is within a designated Soil Erosion Control Area Exhibit 4.7-4 of the General Plan FPEIR. The proposed project will require the excavation, stockpiling, and/or movement of on-site soils. The Rancho Cucamonga area is subject to strong Santa Ana wind conditions during September to April, which generates blowing sand and dust, and creates erosion problems. Construction activities may temporarily exacerbate the impacts of windblown sand, resulting in temporary problems of dust control; however, development of this project under the General Plan would help to reduce windblown sand impacts in the area as pavement, roads, buildings, and landscaping are established. Therefore, the following fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels: 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB)daily to reduce PM,o 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. 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. 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 maybe induced by seismic activity, rain, or construction. The project site is not within an area with slopes of 30 percent or greater. Furthermore, the site is not within an Earthquake hazard zone or other unstable geologic unit or soil type according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-2. Soil types on-site consist of Hanford Coarse Sandy Loam (HaC, 2 to 9 percent slopes) Soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. Therefore, there will be no impact. d) The majority of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located on alluvial soil deposits. These types of soils are not considered to be expansive. Soil types on-site consist of Hanford Coarse Sandy Loam (HaC, 2 to 9 percent slopes) Soil association according to General Plan FPEIR Exhibit 4.7-3. These soils are typically not expansive. Therefore, there will be no impact. 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. Therefore, there will be no impact. Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 135 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 20 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than pp 9 Significant Utlgation Significant No Irmact Incorporated Impact Impact 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 Sianificance The Federal government began studying the phenomenon of global warming as early as 1979 with the National Climate Protection Act(92 Stat. 601). In June of 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger established California's Green House Gas ("GHG") emissions reduction target in Executive Order (EO) S-3-05. The EO created goals to reduce GHG emissions for the State of California to 2000 levels by 2010; GHG emissions reduced to 1990 levels by 2020;.and GHG emissions reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Additionally, on December 7, 2009 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued findings regarding GHGs under rule 202(a) of the Clean Air Act: (1) that GHGs endanger human health; and (2)that this will be the first steps to regulating GHGs through the Federal Clean Air Act. The USEPA defines six key GHGs (carbon dioxide [CO2], methane [CH4], nitrous oxide [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. The western States, including Arizona, California, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, and. Washington, already experience hotter, drier climates. California is a substantial contributor of GHGs and is expected to see an increase of three to four degrees Fahrenheit(°F)over the next century. Assembly Bill (AB) 32 requires that the California Air Resources Board (ARB), the lead agency for implementing AB 32, determine what the statewide GHG emission level was in 1990 and approve a statewide GHG emissions limit (427 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent) to be achieved by 2020 and prepare a Scoping Plan to outline the main strategies for meeting the 2020 deadline. Significant progress can be made toward the 2020 goal through existing technologies and improving the efficiency of energy use. Other solutions would include improving the State's infrastructure, and transitioning to cleaner and more efficient sources of energy. The ARB estimates that 38 percent of the State's GHG emissions in 2004 was from transportation sources followed by electricity generation (both in-State and out-of-State)at 28 percent and industrial at 20 percent. Residential and commercial activities account for 9 percent, agricultural uses at 6 percent, high global warming potential gases at 3 percent, and recycling and waste at 1 percent. It is not anticipated that any single development project would have a substantial effect on global climate change but that GHG emissions from the project would combine with emissions across California, the United States, and the world to cumulatively contribute to global climate change. Therefore, consistent with the ARB's Climate Change Scoping Plan, the proposed project was evaluated for consistency with the Early Action Measures Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 136 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 21 ® Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: SignificPgnifi ant with Than ant With Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact (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 pollutants except PM,o, PM2.s, and SO2 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, PM,o, and PM2.s levels all exceed State and Federal standards regularly. Project Related Sources of GHG's- Based on the Guidelines for the Implementation of California Environmental Quality Act, Appendix G, a project would normally be considered to have a significant effect on air quality if the project would violate any ambient air quality standards, contribute substantially to an existing air quality violation, expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations, or conflict with adopted environmental plans and goals of the community. However, neither the CEQA statutes, Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Guidelines, nor the draft proposed changes to the CEQA Guidelines • prescribe thresholds of significance or a particular methodology for performing an impact analysis. Significance criteria are left to the judgment and discretion of the Lead Agency. Project related GHG's would include emissions from direct and indirect sources. Based on the Air Quality Assessment prepared by KPC EHS Consultants in December 2013, the project would result in the emissions of carbon dioxide [CO2], methane [CH4], and nitrous oxide [N20], and would not result in the other GHG's. As seen in the table, the proposed project would result in a total of 11.3933 MTCO2eq/yr from construction activities and 0.7918 MTCO2eq/yr for area sources and 681.5140 MTCO2eq/yr for mobile sources. Total project related direct operation emission would result in 682.3058 MTCO2eq/yr. 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, Cha, and N20. CH4 is emitted during the fueling of heavy equipment. Construction greenhouse gas emissions will be 341.799 metric tons (11.3933 MTCO2eq/yr when amortized over 30 years) according the Air Quality Assessment prepared by KPC EHS Consultants in December 2013. Although the emissions are less than the de facto SCAQMD threshold of 3,500 MT/year, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented to further reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels: • 1) The project must comply with all rules that assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAQMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 137 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 22 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act 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. Long Term (Operational) GHG's Emissions - The primary source of GHG emissions generated by the proposed project would be from motor vehicles, combustion of natural gas for space and water heating, as well as off-site GHG emissions from generation of electricity consumed by the proposed land use development over a long term. CEQA requires the Lead Agency to review the project for"adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure," to determine potential impacts of GHG's. Therefore the project has been analyzed based on methodologies and information available to the City at the time this document was prepared. Estimates are based on 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. CO2 Total CO2 N20 Total' Mobile Sources 0.00 680.91. 0.0286 681.5140 Area 0.00 0.0775 0.0008 0.7918 Energy 0.0025 183.98 0.0062 184.8812 Solid Waste 0.00 10.985 0.6439 24.6200 Water/Wastewater 0.025 18.126 0.0985 20.9587 30-year Amortized 11.3933 Construction Total 924.159 Threshold 3,500 Significant Impact No 'MTCO2E Source: Air Quality Assessment-(Table )(CaIEEMod Output) KPC EHS Consultants, December 2013 The project involves the subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres into forty-five (45) lots and the construction of forty-five (45) single-family residences which will result in an increase Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 138 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 23 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact--Incorporated Impact Impact 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 numerous design features that are consistent with the California Office of the Attorney General's recommended measures to reduce GHG emission including energy efficient materials in the construction of the houses, energy efficient appliances, water efficient landscaping; shade trees; access to a multi-purpose trail (Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail), and 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 numerous design features including energy efficient materials in the construction of the houses, energy efficient appliances, water efficient landscaping; shade trees; access to a multi-purpose trail (Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail), and 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. The project's long term operation emissions will contribute to area pollutants but will not exceed any of the SCAQMD's thresholds. The proposed project would have less than a significant long term impact with the following mitigation measures: • 1) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Project Applicant shall submit to the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City) a plan for implementation of one or more of the mitigation measures/strategies to reduce GHG emissions from the CAPCOA "CEQA and Climate Change" White Paper. The total reduction of the implemented mitigation selected must result in a minimum of 5%. The selected mitigation measures/strategies and any measures for their long-term maintenance must be described and submitted as part of this report to the City for their approval. 2) 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. 3) 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 the site utilizing shade, prevailing winds and landscaping, • 0 Install efficient lighting and lighting control systems, Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 139 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 24 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP g significant Mitigation significant No Impact Inca orated Impact Impact • Install light colored "cool" roofs and cool pavements, • Install solar or light emitting diodes(LED's)for outdoor lighting. 4) 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 the houses 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. 5) Reuse and recycle construction and demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educate employees about reducing waste and about recycling. The proposed project will result in 924.159 MTCO2eq/yr (total project emissions) of operational related emissions without reduction from project design features. Based on the reduction measures proposed for the project and the Mitigation Measures the project would reduce its GHG emissions below the "business as usual" scenario by 5%. AB 32 requires the reduction of GHG emissions to 1990 levels, which would require a minimum 28.5 percent reduction in "business as usual" GHG emissions for the entire State. b) The project involves the subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres into forty-five(45) lots and the construction of forty-five (45) single-family residences. No other applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emission apply to the project. The 2010 General Plan Update included adopted policies and Standard Conditions that respond to the Attorney General and the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). The General Plan policies and Standard Conditions guide infill and sustainable development reliant on pedestrian connections, re-use and rehabilitation of existing structures, link transportation opportunities, promote development that is sensitive to natural resources and incentivizes denser mixed use projects that maximizes diverse opportunities. The proposed project includes energy efficient materials in the construction of the houses, energy efficient appliances, water efficient landscaping; shade trees; access to a multi-purpose trail (Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail), and sidewalks and therefore is consistent with the policies of the General Plan. The General Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report(FPEIR) analyzed the impacts of GHG's and determined that GHG emissions would be cumulatively considerable, which would be a significant unavoidable adverse cumulative impact. A Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project would not hinder the State's GHG reduction goals established by Assembly (AB) 32 and therefore would be less than a significant impact. Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg..140 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 25 • Less Than Significant less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentiallyignifnt with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 8. HAZARDS AND WASTE MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? C) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) 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. However, this is usually associated with industrial operations/uses and some commercial operations/uses, and not associated with individual households; home maintenance activities where paints, cleaning solvents, fertilizers, and motor oil are used; or construction activities that would use relatively small quantities of paints, solvents, acids, curing compounds, grease, and oils. The proposed project is a single-family residential subdivision. Due to the nature of the project, any utilization of hazardous materials and generation of hazardous waste is expected to be insignificant in volume and scale. Such materials would be stored and used at individual homes and would not be stockpiled. No routine transport of hazardous waste is anticipated. Therefore, there will be no impact. • b) Refer to 8.a above. Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 141 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC20IM1083 Page 26 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated -impact Impact C) There is a school, Alta Loma Elementary School, at 7085 Amethyst Street located about 500 feet to the west of the project site. However, due to the nature of the project, hazardous emissions, and/or handling of hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste are not anticipated. Therefore, there will be no impact. 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. Therefore, there will be no impact. 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 about 4.75 miles north of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. Therefore, there will be no impact. f) There are no private airstrips within the City. The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2.5 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. Therefore, there will be no impact. g) The City has a developed roadway network that provides emergency access and evacuation routes to existing development. New development will be located on a site that will have access to existing roadways. The City's Emergency Operation Plan, which is updated every three years, includes policies and procedures to be administered by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in the event of a disaster. The project will have primary access to a public street (Ramona Avenue), secondary, emergency access (only) via another public street(Archibald Avenue), and is required to comply with all applicable City codes, including local fire ordinances. Therefore, there will be no impact. 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. However, the proposed project site is not located within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone according to General Plan Figure PS-1. Therefore, there will be no impact. 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? Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 142 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 27 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ( ) ( ) (✓) ( ) site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on-or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) that would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? • j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Comments: a) Water and sewer service is provided by the Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD). The project involves the subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres (5.06 net acres) into forty- five (45) lots and the construction of forty-five (45) single-family residences. The Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site so that the project site is uniformly zoned Medium (M) Residential District. This amendment will correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specified in the General Plan. The Development Code Amendment will provide development standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. 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 (NOI) to obtain coverage under the General Permit. The. General Permit requires all dischargers to comply with the following during construction activities, including site clearance and grading: • Develop and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would specify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent construction pollutants Rev 2-26-13 D-1 pg. 143 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 28 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: dairy With Than PP g Significant MltigaGon Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 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 Madole and Associates in December 2013, 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. The following mitigation measures are required to control additional storm water effluent: Construction Activities., 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of 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. Rev 2-26-13 D-1 pg. 144 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 29 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. 5) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Madole and Associates in December 2013 to reduce pollutants during construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. Post- Construction Operational. 1) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Madole and Associates in December 2013 to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical.. 2) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped areas shall be monitored and maintained for at least two years to ensure adequate coverage and stable growth. Plans for these areas, including monitoring provisions for a minimum of two years, shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. ® b) According to CVWD, approximately 35 percent of the City's water is currently provided from water supplies coming from the underlying Chino and Cucamonga Groundwater Basins. CVWD complies with its prescriptive water rights as managed by the Chino Basin Watermaster and will not deplete the local groundwater resource. The proposed project will not deplete groundwater supplies. The project involves the subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres (5.06 net acres) into forty-five (45) lots and the construction of forty-five (45) single-family residences. The Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site so that the project site is uniformly zoned Medium (M) Residential District. This amendment will correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specified in the General Plan. The Development Code Amendment will provide development standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. The amendment will not allow more dwelling units than currently allowed in the density range applicable to that development district. The project will not 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. Therefore, the impact will be less-than-significant. 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 Rev 2-26-13 D-1 pg. 145 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 30 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Therefore, the impact will be less- than-significant. d) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff because of the amount of new building and hardscape proposed on a site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river. All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. Therefore, the impact will be less-than- significant. 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 or proposed storm drain facilities that the developer will be required to construct (in particular, along the Ramona Avenue street frontage) as a condition of approval. 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. Therefore, there will be no impact. f) Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary increase in the amount of suspended solids in surface flows during a concurrent storm event, thus resulting in surface water quality impacts. The site is for new development; therefore, is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) to minimize water pollution. The following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1) 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. 2) Prior to issuance of grading or paving permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent (NOI) to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number) shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. g) The project site is not located within a 100;-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. Therefore,there will be no impact. Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 146 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 31 ® Less Than Significant Less Potentially with Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact h) Refer to 9.g above. i) The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood protected by an extensive storm drain system designed to adequately convey floodwaters from a 100-year storm event. The system is substantially improved and provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage flows. This existing system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, spreading grounds, concrete-lined channels, and underground storm drains as shown in General Plan Figure PS-6. The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General Plan Figure PS-5. 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 dividean 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 project site is located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road (and immediately north of the Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail). The site is characterized by residential development to the north, south, and east, and commercial development to the west. This project will be of similar design and size to surrounding residential development to the north and compatible with the residential development to the east. The project will become a part of the larger community. Therefore, there will be no impact. b) The project site land use designation is Medium Residential. The proposed project does not interfere with any policies for environmental protection, SCAG's Compass Blueprint, or SCAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan. The project is consistent with the General Plan designation of the project site (Medium Residential) but is only partly consistent with the Zoning designation of the project site - Medium (M) Residential District on the west half and Low Medium (LM) Residential District on the east half. The Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site. This amendment will • correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specified in the General Plan. The density of the proposed project, was analyzed as part of the build out in the General Plan FPEIR. The Development Code Amendment will provide development Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 147 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 32 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: Potentially With Than pp g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated I Impact Impact standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. The amendment will not affect the density range (4 — 8 dwelling units/acre) applicable to that development district. Both the Zoning Map Amendment and the Development Code Amendment will be consistent with the 2013 Housing Element Update to the 2010 General Plan. The project will comply with the applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Therefore,there will be no impact. C) The project site is not located within any 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 not within an area of sensitive biological resources; development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals because of the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan. The Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site so that the project site is uniformly zoned Medium (M) Residential District. This amendment will correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specified in the General Plan. The Development Code Amendment will provide development standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. Therefore, there will be no impact. 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 will be 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 will be no impact. 12. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? C) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) levels in the project vicinity above. levels existing without the project? Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 148 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 33 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Su ortin Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP g Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact incorporated Impact Impact d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ( ) (✓) ( ) ( ) ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: a) The project site is located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road (and immediately north of the Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail). The site is characterized by single-family residential development to the north and east, apartments and a mobile home park to the south, and commercial development to the west. Noise levels can exceed established standards for exterior and interior noise. The primary source of elevated noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. The project site is within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards according to General Plan • Figure PS-9 at build-out—specifically, Lots 24 - 27 at the west side of the subdivision are within the noise contour of Archibald Avenue. Per the Noise Analysis prepared by Mestre Greve Associates on June 4, 2014, in order to reduce the exterior noise levels at Lots 24 —27 to less-than-significant, the recommended mitigation measure is a block wall of three (3)feet in height along the perimeter of the project adjacent to Archibald Avenue and the trail. However, a block wall of six (6) feet in height is already proposed along the above- noted perimeter (principally for screening purposes) and., therefore, the recommended 3- foot high wall would be redundant. Per the same noise analysis, a noise reduction of less than 20dI3 is necessary between the exterior and the interior of the structures to reduce the interior noise levels of the houses on Lots 24 — 27 to less-than-significant. No mitigation measures such as building upgrades to windows and/or walls are necessary as the construction practices common in California achieve noise reductions of at least 20dB. 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. The project will not significantly increase traffic as analyzed in Section 16 Transportation/Traffic and, as a result, an increase ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project is unlikely. 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: ® 1) 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 Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 149 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 34 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Withgate Than Significant MtigaUon Significant No Impact IncoMorated Impact Impact Plan shall depict the location of the construction equipment and how the noise from this equipment would be mitigated during construction. 2) 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. 3) 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. 4) 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: 5) 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. e) The site is not located within an airport land use plan and is not within 2 miles of a public airport. The project site is located about 4.75 miles north of the Ontario Airport and is offset north of the flight path. Therefore, there will be no impact. f) The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 2.5 miles to the west of the City's westerly limits. Therefore, there will be no impact. 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? Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 150 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 35 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act C) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: a) The project site is located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road (and immediately north of the Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail). The site is characterized by single-family residential development to the north and east, apartments and a mobile home park to the south, and commercial development to the west. The project involves the subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres (5.06 net acres) into forty-five (45) lots and the construction of forty-five (45) single-family residences. This will result in an increase in population. However, this increase will not be substantial. Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will not attract new employees to the area. The project is consistent with the General Plan designation of the project site (Medium Residential) but is only partly consistent with the Zoning designation of the project site - Medium (M) Residential District on the west half and Low Medium (LM) Residential District on the east half. The Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site. The density range for development in the Medium (M) Residential District is 8— 14 dwelling units/acre and in the Low Medium (LM) Residential District is 4 — 8 dwelling units/acre. This amendment will correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specified in the General Plan. The • density of the proposed project, will be 8.8 dwelling units/acre(based on 45 units/5.06 net acres)and will be within the density range that was analyzed as part of the build out in the General Plan FPEIR. The Development Code Amendment will provide development standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. The amendment will not affect the density range (4 — 8 dwelling units/acre) applicable to that development district. Both the Zoning Map Amendment and the Development Code Amendment will be consistent with the 2013 Housing Element Update to the 2010 General Plan. Therefore, the impact will be less-than-significant. b) The project site is mostly vacant and is developed with one (1) single-family residence that was constructed ca. 1915. As the property is mostly vacant and the single-family residence is abandoned, according to a cultural resources assessment prepared by BonTerra Psomas on January 31, 2014, there will be no displacement of housing or people. Therefore, there will be no impact. C) Refer to 13.b above. 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? Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 151 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 36 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with Than PP g Significant Mtigation Sign cant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact d) Parks? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) e) Other public facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) Comments: a) The project site is located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road (and immediately north of the Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail) and would be served by Fire Station #1 at 6627 Amethyst Avenue located about 0.58-mile to the northwest of the project site. The project involves the subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres(5.06 net acres)into forty-five(45)lots and the construction of forty- five (45) single-family residences. The Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site so that the project site is uniformly zoned Medium (M) Residential District. This amendment will correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specked in the General Plan. The Development Code Amendment will provide development standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. 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. Therefore,there will be no impact. 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. Therefore, there will be no impact. C) The Alta Loma 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. Therefore,there will be no impact. d) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park, Hermosa Park at 6787 Hermosa Avenue, is located about 0.35-mile from the project site. The project involves the subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres (5.06 net acres) into forty-five (45) lots and the construction of forty-five (45) single-family residences. The Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site so that the project site is uniformly zoned Medium (M) Residential District. This amendment will correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specified in the General Plan. The Development Code Amendment will provide development standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. 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. Therefore, there will be no impact. 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 involves the subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres (5.06 net acres) into forty-five(45) lots and the construction of Rev 2-26-13 D-1 pg. 152 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 37 ® Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact forty-five (45) single-family residences. The Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site so that the project site is uniformly zoned Medium (M) Residential District. This amendment will correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specified in the General Plan. The Development Code Amendment will provide development standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. 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, there will be no impact. 15. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) • regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: a) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest park, Hermosa Park at 6787 Hermosa Avenue, is located about 0.35-mile from the project site. The project involves the subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres (5.06 net acres) into forty-five (45) lots and the construction of forty-five (45) single-family residences. The Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site so that the project site is uniformly zoned Medium (M) Residential District. This amendment will correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specified in the General Plan. The Development Code Amendment will provide development standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. The amendment will not allow more dwelling units than currently allowed in the density range applicable to that development district. This project is not proposing substantial amounts of new housing or a 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. Therefore, there will be no impact. • b) Refer to 15.a above. Rev 2-26-13 D-1 pg. 153 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga. Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 38 Less Than Significant Less Potentially with Than Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Significant NGtlgation Significant No Mad Inca orated Invact Impact 16. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy ( ) ( ) ( ) V) 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 ( ) ( ) ( ) V) 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 ( ) ( ) ( ) V) 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 ( ) ( ) ( ) (1) (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ( ) ( ) ( ) (1) f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs ( ) ( ) ( ) (1) 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 431 vehicle trips daily. The proposed project includes the development of 45 single-family residences. The Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) estimates that each single-family residence 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 Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site so that the project site is uniformly zoned Medium (M) Residential District. This amendment will correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specified in the General Plan. The density of the proposed project, will be 8.8 dwelling units/acre(based on 45 units/5.06 net acres)and will be within the density range that was analyzed as part of the build out in the General Plan FPEIR. The Development Code Amendment will provide development standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. The amendment will not affect the density range (4 — 8 dwelling units/acre) applicable to that development district which could, as a result, affect previous analyses for traffic generation and/or trip distribution in the General Plan FPEIR. The project is in an area that is mostly developed with street improvements existing or included in project design. The project will not create a Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 154 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 39 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially with ThanSignnificaificant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact substantial increase in the number of vehicle trips, traffic volume, or congestion at intersections. As a condition of approval, the developer will be required to construct street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along Ramona Avenue, and any missing improvements along Archibald Avenue and within the trail. 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. Therefore, there will be no impact. b) The Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) estimates that each single-family residence will generate 0.75 AM peak hour daily(total AM peak hour trips generated will be 34 trips)and 1.01 PM peak hour trips hour(total PM peak hour trips generated will be 46 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. The project site is located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road (and immediately north of the Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail). The site is characterized by single-family residential development to the north and east, apartments and a mobile home park to the south, and • commercial development to the west. The Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site so that the project site is uniformly zoned Medium (M) Residential District. This amendment will correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specified in the General Plan. The density of the proposed project, will be 8.8 dwelling units/acre (based on 45 units/5.06 net acres) and will be within the density range that was analyzed as part of the build out in the General Plan FPEIR. The Development Code Amendment will provide development standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. The amendment will not affect the density range (4 — 8 dwelling units/acre) applicable to that development district which could, as a result, affect previous analyses for traffic generation and/or trip distribution in the General Plan FPEIR. The project will not negatively impact the level of service standards on adjacent arterials. As a condition of approval, the developer will be required to construct street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along Ramona Avenue, and any missing improvements along Archibald Avenue and within the trail. In addition, the City has established a Transportation Development fee that must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of building permits. Therefore, there will be no impact. C) The project site is located about 4.75 miles north of the Ontario Airport, offset north of the flight path, and will not change air traffic patterns. Therefore, there will be no impact. d) The project site is located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road (and immediately north of the Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail). The site is characterized by single-family residential development to the north and east, apartments and a mobile home park to the south, and commercial development to the west. As a condition of approval, the developer will be required to construct street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along Ramona Avenue, and any missing • improvements along Archibald Avenue and within the trail. The project design does not include any sharp curves or dangerous intersections or farming uses. The project will, Rev 2-26-13 D-1 pg. 155 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 40 LLessTlanLssIssues and Su ortin Information Sources: PotentiallyThPP g Signfieant Signitieant NoIm act Im act imp act] therefore, not create a substantial increase in hazards because of a design feature. Therefore, there will be no impact. 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 design of the project includes, or the project will be conditioned to provide, features supporting transportation and vehicle trip reduction (e.g., bus bays, bicycle racks, carpool parking, etc.). Planners; add project specific details here. 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? C) Require or result in the .construction of new storm ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could - cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) regulations related to solid waste? Comments: a) The project involves the subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres (5.06 net acres) into forty- five (45) lots and the construction of forty-five (45) single-family residences. The Zoning Map Amendment that is part of this project will change the zoning designation of the east half of the property to match the zoning of the west half of the project site so that the project site is uniformly zoned Medium.(M) Residential District. This amendment will correct the zoning so that it is consistent with the land use designation specified in the General Plan. The Development Code Amendment will provide development standards for single-family development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. 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 meet, and exceed, the wastewater requirements of added development within Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 156 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 41 • Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than Significant A/fitiga6on Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact the western and southern areas of the City. The RP-4 treatment plant has a potential ultimate capacity of 28 million gallons per day (mgd) which is considered more than adequate to treat all increases in wastewater generation at build-out of the City. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. Therefore, there will be no impact. b) Refer to 17.a above. 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. Therefore, there will be no impact. d) The proposed project will be served by the CVWD water system. There is currently a sufficient water supply available to the City of Rancho Cucamonga to serve this project. Therefore, there will be no impact. e) The proposed project will be 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. Therefore, there will be no impact. f) Solid waste disposal will be provided by the current City contracted hauler who disposes • the refuse at a permitted landfill with sufficient capacity to handle the City's solid waste disposal needs. Therefore, there will be no impact. g) This proposed project will comply 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, there will be no impact. 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? • c) Does the project have environmental effects that will ( ) ( ) ( ) (✓) cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Rev 2-26-13 D—I pg. 157 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 42 Less Than Significant Less Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With Than PP g Significant Utlgafion Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Comments: a) The project site is located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road (and immediately north of the Inland Empire Pacific Electric Trail). The site is characterized by single-family residential development to the north and east, apartments and a mobile home park to the south, and commercial development to the west. The site is not located in an area of sensitive biological resources as identified on the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Figure RC-4. Per the Biological Resources Evaluation and Analysis prepared by Hamilton Biological on February 14, 2014, based on the survey of the plant communities, the site consists of a fallow orchard and a variety of trees. Based on the survey of the wildlife, native and non-native wildlife species were detected. None of the detected flora or fauna qualify as sensitive species and, therefore, the project will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals. However, all native bird species may be considered sensitive during the breeding season, as the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Department of Fish and Game Code both prohibit interference with the nesting activities of native bird species. There are also numerous "heritage" trees within the project site according to the Tree Survey Report prepared by BonTerra Psomas on February 12, 2014. These trees are subject to the City's tree preservation requirements. Project implementation will result in the removal of these trees. The mitigation measures listed in the Biological section of this Initial Study will reduce the impacts to the nesting activities of native bird species and trees to less-than-significant. 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)). With these findings and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, no further discussion or evaluation of cumulative impacts is required. . C) Development of the site under the proposed land use change would not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The Initial Study identifies construction-related emissions of criteria pollutants as having a potentially significant impact. Proposed mitigation measures would further reduce emission levels. 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 Rev 2-26-13 D-1 pg. 158 Initial.Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Page 43 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: (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) Air Quality Assessment, KPC EHS Consultants (December 13, 2013) (T) Biological Resources Evaluation&Analysis, Hamilton Biological (February 14, 2014) (T) Phase I Cultural Resources Assessment, BonTerra Psomas (January 31, 2014) (T) Noise Analysis, Mestre Greve Associates (June 4, 2014) ® (T) Tree Survey Report, BonTerra Psomas (February 12, 2014) (T) Water Quality Management Plan, Madole and Associates (December 2013) Rev 2-26-13 D-1 pg. 159 Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga 'tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912'and Development Review DRC2013-41083 Page 4 4 APPUCANT'CERTIFICATION I certify that.1 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, l 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 signifie environmental effects would occur:Ipzol Applicants Signature: Vft.i4q,,K� Date: '713 Print Name and Title. CrA�aC V.6 Mo., - giro�eCt �KAAa" . .... ......... .... . .. Rev 2-26-13 D-1 pg. 160 City of Rancho Cucamonga - ' MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 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 D-1 pg. 161 Mitigation Monitoring Program Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 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 afterwritten 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. 9. In those instances requiring long-term project monitoring, the applicant shall provide the City with a plan for monitoring the mitigation activities at the project site and reporting the monitoring results to the City. Said plan shall identify the reporter as an individual qualified to know whether the particular mitigation measure has been implemented. The monitoring/reporting plan shall conform to the City's MMP and shall be approved by the Community Development Director or Planning Director prior to the issuance of building permits. D—I pg.,162 MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST (INITIAL STUDY PART III) Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 Applicant: Manning Homes Initial Study Prepared by: Mike Smith, Associate Planner Date: June 30, 2014 Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Fre uenc Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Com liance .. .i .. ,.. .. C ... r..,.a..:..\..l)iyy. . 4j.x :.FS, •L.f.Y '.>,}'S1':.tiYi i -`7 ..,.. :'�'.:Y: ''1. cr.d.. 11; , ar.r... .... .:....-.. .. .y.. .. f. .. _. F t. S� ..e }'.1� I.e '[•ti .qi � �'F-'la .�. .Sec ion.3..> r al �-. ..i.� t F S< .. .i r f (r: •..v xri_ i. c 1 . . ,• .1., 1. .I'', jiY .� S:'.' ,:�- w['i:. •F4�ag. fi!.3'-'i . :....,u..,} rr�-...pi::. :'iS ...�;}�'�*�`�,,�:. .:ai�.:" h .is�tt_+:m c:i:'�;• `;i£ I `•yt�i'�.I' `�'''n.`k .-...<. : .._,.. ,sem- .. _ . ::: :5.�+: �ti� � i�;#x: x•j`Scs Short Term (Construction) Emissions 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained PD C Review of plans A/C 2/4 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, PD/BO C Review of plans C 2 the developer shall submit Construction Plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction w contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)as well as City Planning staff. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed PD C Review of plans A/C 2/4 performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance BO B Review of plans A/C 2 standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following Page 1 of 13 Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Im lementin Action for MonitoringFrequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Compliance provisions: Reestablish ground cover on the BO C Review of plans PJC 2/4 construction site through seeding and watering. Pave or apply gravel.to any on-site haul BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 roads. Phase grading to prevent the BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. Schedule activities to minimize the BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. Dispose of surplus excavated material in BO C Review of plans q 4 accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering ractices. Sweep streets according to a schedule BO C During construction q 4 established by the City if silt is carried p 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 BO C During construction A 4 winds (i.e., wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard BO C During Construction q 4 ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During construction A 4 soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB]) daily to reduce Particulate Matter (PM,o) emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by BO C During construction A 4 SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PMio Page 2 of 13 Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Compliance emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize BO C Review of plans A/C 4 electric or clean alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that BO C Review of plans A/C 2/4 construction-grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. Long Term Emissions 1) Landscape with native and/or drought- PD A/B Review of plans C 2/4 resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. 2) Provide lighter color roofing and road PD/BO/CE A/B Review of plans C 2/4 materials and tree planting programs to comply with the AQMP Miscellaneous v Sources MSC-01 measure. 3) All residential and commercial structures shall BO C/D Review of plans C 2/4 be required to incorporate high-efficiency/low- polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, °v; and water heaters. 4) All residential and commercial structures shall BO C/D Review of plans C 214 be required to incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping. j 5) All new development in the City of Rancho BO A/B Review of plans C 2/4 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. .......... ( ...}.S....er.,..t.cn_.t_..tf.<�:-,n:.,r.,......r•:,......-.........:.•,o.. ....a.:.,.Na(].tt..�a..�.l,9.:<R..........e.s,....1o..stu..-:racf•.e...`F QQ:7.,.Y.i..<........,,.r..r_r.,u;........J..,,,,aj k-.�+.�W.:...a.,r...<�`.-V�.:n•J...1 t..Laid.i.,•F.r.�W...r, J..F.,,.k'J}.-_t..z a. �`.¢%1 [.'•.'.Y_.4,}s.„:+. ,b.i.l,°+..j. :?•I? .4a.J—....=-.B.}.'}...YyS;i1.1,..7.,::'�.i�<a_•11.t �:'.�iL.s�h.F!y,fid:'if..:ri°:i�±"_.:..:.:.:.:;t.�.s!::.y:r✓,F.e! MOW-Rin4 !.Bt .I :: { �,i.:•�in..!-4�.i°ce�-:.i �t...9. 1) If vegetation removal, soil disturbance, or any PD B/C Review of plans D 2/4 other construction related activity is to occur during the avian nesting season (February 1 Page 3 of 13 i Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date!initials Non-Compliance through August 31), a preconstruction nesting survey shall be conducted 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. If initial ground disturbing activities or site clearing is proposed to occur outside of the nesting season (September 1 through January 31), then a preconstruction survey would not be required and construction could commence unimpeded. 2) The trees that are located within the interior of PD B Review of plans A/C 2/3 -o the project, but not including the trees within the Final inspection �c Eucalyptus windrow along the north side of the project site, shall be replaced with new trees, on a one-to-one basis, of a minimum 15-gallon size. These trees are in addition to the trees that are required by the Development Code for new residential development. 3) The trees that are located within the Eucalyptus PD B Review of plans A/C 2/3 windrow along the north side of the project site, Final inspection shall be replaced with new trees; on a one-to- one basis, of a minimum 24-inch box size. These trees shall be planted within the rear yards of Lots 26—43 and side yards of Lots 44 and 45. These trees are in addition to the trees j that are required by the Development Code for new residential development. Page 4 of 13 Mitigation Measures No. Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance 4 • ii-R�4 . >IN 3Ye 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 PD/130 C Review of report A/D 3/4 undesignated sites from demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish its archaeological value. • Consider establishing provisions to PD/BO C Review of report A/D 3/4 require incorporation of archaeological sites within new developments, using their special qualities as a theme or focal point. 3/4 1p 0 Pursue educating the public about the PD/130 C Review of report A/D archaeological heritage of the area. & Prepare a mitigation plan consistent with P/D B/C Review of A/D Section 21083.2 Archeological Plans/Report During resources of CEQA to eliminate adverse Construction project effects on significant, important, and unique prehistoric resources, including but not limited to, avoiding archeological sites, capping or covering site with soil, planning the site as a park or green space or paying an in-kind mitigation fee. 3/4 0 Prepare a technical resources PD C Review of report A/D. 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 Paige 5 of 13 I Measures No.I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for n Action for Monitorin Fre uenc Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Com liance rchivin . 4 paleontological resource (i.e: plant or PD B Review of report A/Dl fossils) are encountered before or g grading, the developer will retain a ied paleontologist to monitor ruction activities, to take appropriate ures to protect or preserve them for. 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 PD B Review of report A/D 4 and equipped to allow the rapid removal p of fossils with minimal construction i delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. 4 Should fossils be found within an area BO B/C Review of report A/D Chbeing cleared or graded, divert earth- 00 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. 3 • Prepare, identify, and curate all PD D Review of report D recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). D 3 • Submit summary report to City of PD D Review of report Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy to the report to San Bernardino County Museum. Page 6 of 13 Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified: Sanctions for ImplementingAction for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance XW DjYQA�i :Se oO'e A OR 1) The site shall be treated with water or other BO C During construction A 4 soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM,o 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 BO C During construction A 4 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 BO C During construction A 4 wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM,o emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by BO C During construction A 4 SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain rn inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. 'E Gse,Ga I. Short Term (Construction) GHG Emissions 1) The project must comply with all rules that BO C During construction A 4 assist in reducing short-term air pollutant emission in compliance with SCAWMD Rule 403 regarding fugitive dust including treating the site with water or other soil-stabilizing agent twice daily or replanting disturbed areas as quickly as possible. 2) The construction contactor shall select BO C During construction A 4 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. Page 7 of 13 Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Mi lemontin Action for Monitorin Fre uenc Verification Verification Date/initials Non-Compliance Irn3) Trucks shall not idle continuously for more BO C During construction than 5 minutes. 4 4) Alternative fuel powered equipment shall be BO C During construction A utilized in lieu of gasoline- or diesel-powered engines where feasible. A 4 5) Construction should be timed so as not to BO C During construction interfere with peak-hour traffic. A 4 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be BO C During construction supported and encouraged for construction crew. Long Term (Operational) GHG EmissionsB D 2 1) Prior to issuance of a building permit, the PD Plan check Project Applicant shall submit to the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City) a plan for implementation of one or more of the mitigation measures/strategies to reduce 0 GHG emissions from the CAPCOA "CEQA I and Climate Change" White Paper. The total �0 reduction of the implemented mitigation selected must result in a minimum of 5%. o The selected mitigation measures/strategies and any measures for their long-term maintenance must be described and submitted as part of this report to the City for their approval. 2 2) Construction and Building materials shall berB0 A During Construction C 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. 2 3) Design all buildings to exceed California BO A During Construction C Building Code Title 24 energy standard including but not limited to any combination of: Increased insulation Page 8 of 13 Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for Implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Compliance • 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 J • Install solar or light emitting diodes (LED's)for outdoor lighting. 4) Prepare a comprehensive water conservation PD A Review of plans C 2 strategy appropriate for the project and p 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. 5) Reuse and recycle construction and CE A Review of plans C 2 demolition waste. Provide interior and exterior storage areas for recyclables and green waste in public areas. Educated Page 9 of 13 Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for lm lementin Action for Monitorin Fre uenc Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Com liance employees about reducing waste and about recycling. .,..::....:...e„x,.. ..:;:....�.,....�.t,• 'A`' :-„ """Y'� 'Ara ^il�° `%w�,,. .'„Y w .e. ,.R t :cr.:•k• :•. ti r;�3 rol yI. yy':d., t. �t�.:i�°,J a ..t �.. f '•. Sect: ;9 Q pan `, s`�:., ';;.,;} Construction Activities B/C/D A/C 2/4 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the BO Review of plans permit applicant shall submit to Building Official for approval, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system. to the maximum extent practical. A/C 2/4 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, BO B/C/D Review of plans included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control ori-site and off-site erosion -o from the time ground disturbing activities are 1° initiated through completion of grading. This v Erosion Control Plan shall include the following NJ 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. A/C 2/4 3)=sitewhen tion, temporary berms such BO B/C/D Review of plans gravel dikes must be used to e of debris or sediment from re is rainfall or other runoff. A/CB/C/D 2/4 4) During construction, to remove pollutants, BO Review of plans • street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events.and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge Page 10 of 13 Mitigation Measures No.I Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for -implementing Action for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Compliance of debris or sediment from the site. 5) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Madole and Associates in December 2013 to reduce pollutants during construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 6) The developer shall implement the BMPs BO B/C/D Review of plans AIC 2/4 identified in the Water Quality Management ; Plan prepared by Madole and Associates in December 2013 to reduce pollutants after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 7) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped v areas shall be monitored and maintained for i 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. Grading Activities 1) Prior to issuance of building permits, the BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 2) Prior to issuance of grading or paving BO B/C/D Review of plans A/C 2/4 permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Page 11 of 13 Mitigation Measures No.l Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for implementing Action for Monitoring Fre ency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Compliance 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 ction Pe rmit. : w•, .. ...... .. ..... ..,. ...,> r..:.r ..........,.. .t. ,1..,. f..,., t e•t .at•:: .a.J .,.�+! ,r :1...U...,, ....,.... .tc_. ., _ t _.., .>, •s. :..� G!C} ri. ..,�.. 7• ,fi<' c,`i< ' `k}'.• %A a z . ;.; 4tw. ;_01. t,,,u,..:;., ,e: .._.i..x,:,,.F_ ..Y�n•�Y:' .';3,a ..r e.. .. .s:s 5 .i:?. :I�`/':•`:.#Aa•' r3a:•t P< 1�, r+w d.'.' .:C:...• :r`, 1 a�`• p k s .'., a Tp_ s,' -,��"' 'u�•.` �A>1'iF:�t'N.� f.•'.�.. :7` .1� .�"" 't4i- s 1:.tip:?_ lif+_ '4:.•At.ii'i.]3i: Exterior 1) Prior to the issuance of any grading plans a PD A/B/C Review of plans AID 2/3/4/7 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 p noise from this equipment would be mitigated ! during construction. Interior 1) Construction or grading shall not take place BO C During construction A 4 between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. 2) Construction or grading noise levels shall not BO C During construction A 4 exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.66.050, as measured at the property line. The developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in' Development Code Section 17.66.050. 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 Page 12 of 13 • • Mitigation Measures No./ Responsible Monitoring Timing of Method of Verified Sanctions for -implementingAction for Monitoring Frequency Verification Verification Date/Initials Non-Compliance shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 3) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed PD C During construction A A as early as possible in the first phase. 4) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place POGO C During construction A 4/7 between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. -o Key to Checklist Abbreviations Responsible Person Monitoring Frequency Method of Verification Sanctions to 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 B-Prior To Construction B-Other Agency Permit/Approval 2-Withhold Grading or Building Permit CE-City Engineer or designee C-Throughout Construction C-Plan Check 3-Withhold Certificate of Occupancy BO-Building Official or designee D-On Completion D-Separate Submittal(Reports/Studies/Plans) 4-Stop Work Order PO-Police Captain or designee E-Operating 5-Retain Deposit or Bonds FC-Fire Chief or designee 6-Revoke CUP 7-Citation Page 13 of 13 City of Rancho Cucamonga MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION • The following Mitigated Negative Declaration is being circulated for public review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act Section 21091 and 21092 of the Public Resources Code. Project File No.: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Development Review DRC2013-01083, and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. Public Review Period Closes: August 13, 2014 Project Name: Project Applicant: Manning Homes Jim Manning/Craig Kozma Project Location(also see attached map): Located within the Medium(M)and Low Medium(LM) Residential Districts between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail -APN: 1076-181-01. Project Description: The proposed project is a subdivision of a property of 7.16 acres(5.06 net acres) into 45 lots (Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912) and construction of 45 single-family residences (Development Review DRC2013-01083). The underlying General Plan land use designation is Medium Residential. Therefore, the project includes Zoning Map Amendment DRC2014-00887 to change the zoning of the east part of the project site from Low Medium (LM) Residential to Medium (M) Residential in order for the zoning of that part of the project to be consistent with the General Plan designation of Medium Residential. As development standards such as lot dimensions,setbacks, lot coverage,etc.for single-family residential development within • the Medium Residential District are not addressed in the Development Code (only multi-family residential development is discussed), the project includes Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626 to insert these standards. Also included is Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889 for the removal of the trees on the property to allow the construction of the aforementioned houses and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161 to allow the construction of walls that will exceed, by 2 feet, the height limit that applies to walls in residential districts. FINDING This is to advise that the City of Rancho Cucamonga,acting as the lead agency,has conducted an Initial Study to determine if the project may have a significant effect on the environment and is proposing this Mitigated Negative Declaration based upon the following finding: The Initial Study identified potentially significant effects but: (1) Revisions in the project plans or proposals made or agreed to by the applicant before this proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration was released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and (2) There is no substantial evidence before the agency that the project, as revised, may have a significant effect on the environment. If adopted,the Mitigated Negative Declaration means that an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. The factual and analytical basis for this finding is included in the attached Initial Study. The project file and all related documents are available for review at the City of Rancho • Cucamonga Planning Department at 10500 Civic Center Drive (909) 477-2750 or Fax (909)477-2847. D—I pg. 176 NOTICE The public is invited to comment on the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration during the review period. August 13, 2014 Date of Determination Adopted By D-1 pg. 177 RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CALIFORNIA,APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912, A REQUEST FOR A 45-LOT SUBDIVISION OF A VACANT PARCEL OF ABOUT 7.16 ACRES WITHIN THE MEDIUM (M) AND LOW MEDIUM (LM) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, LOCATED BETWEEN ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND RAMONA AVENUE, AT THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC INLAND EMPIRE TRAIL, ABOUT 1,400 FEET NORTH OF BASE LINE ROAD; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 1076-181-01. A. Recitals. 1. Manning Homes filed an application for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution,the subject Tentative Tract Map request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of August 2014 the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. • NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting on August 13, 2014, including written and oral staff reports,togetherwith public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a parcel located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road; and b. The project site is a rectangular parcel with an overall area of about 312,000 square feet (7.16 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are about 1,200 feet deep (east to west) and 250 feet (north to south); and C. The project site is generally vacant with the exception of a single-family residence that was built circa 1915 that is located at the east side of the project site near Ramona Avenue;and d. To the west of the project site, is an equestrian/pet supplies retail store;to the north and east are single-family residences; and to the south are an apartment complex and a mobile home park; and • e. According to the Zoning Map adopted by the City Council on July 18, 2012, the project site is currently within two zoning districts. The western half of the project site, an area of about 147,000 square feet (about 3.37 acres), is zoned as Medium (M) Residential District. The D—I pg. 178 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 2 eastern half of the project, an area of about 165,000 square feet (about 3.77 acres), is zoned as Low Medium (LM) Residential District; and f. The applicant has submitted Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887 in order to change the zoning of the project site so that it is uniformly Medium (M) Residential and consistent with the General Plan designation of Medium Residential; and g. The zoning of the property to the west is Medium High (MH) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the north is Low Medium(LM)Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the east is Low (L) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the south (beyond the aforementioned trail) are partly Medium High (MH) Residential District and partly and Low Medium (LM) Residential District; and h. The proposal is to subdivide the property into 45 lots for single-family residential development; and i. As "basic" and "optional" development standards are not provided in Tables 17.36.010-1 and 17.36.010-2, respectively, of the Development Code, the lots will be developed in accordance with new development standards that the applicant, in coordination with the City, have created for incorporation into the Development Code that will apply to single-family residential development in the Medium(M)Residential Districts. The applicant in coordination with the City has submitted Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626 for this purpose; and j. Individual lot areas will range between 4,013 square feet to 10,529 square feet;the average lot area is 4,907 square feet. The depth of each lot will be at least 90 feet with the exception of Lots 26, 27,44, and 45. Those lots will have a depth of between about 60 feet and 80 feet. The width of each lot, except the above-noted lots, at the required front setback will be between 45 feet and 50 feet. Lots 26,27,44,and 45 will have a width of between 65 feet(Lot 27)to 137 feet(Lot 26); and k. This application is in conjunction with Development Review DRC2013-01083, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887,Tree Removal Permit.DRC2013-00889,Minor Exception DRC2014-00161, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed subdivision is in accord with the General Plan and the objectives of the Development Code,and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The proposal is to subdivide a property with an area of about 7.16 acres into 45 lots for single-family residential development. The underlying General Plan designation is Medium Residential. b. The proposed development,together with the conditions applicable thereto,will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The project site is generally vacant; the proposed land use is consistent with the land uses within the vicinity where it is located and the expectations of the community. The zoning of the west half of the site is Medium (M) Residential District, while the zoning of the east half of the site is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the property to the west is Medium High (MH) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the north is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the east is Low(L) D—I pg. 179 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 • Page 3 Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the south(beyond the aforementioned trail)are partly Medium High (MH) Residential District and partly and Low Medium (LM) Residential District. C. The proposed development complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The lots will be developed in accordance with new development standards that are the subject of related Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626 and will apply to single-family residential development within the Medium (M) Residential Districts. The proposed development will otherwise comply with all standards outlined in the Development Code and the design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQK)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 furtherfinds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Manager of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. D—I pg. 180 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 4 Planning Department 1) Approval is for the subdivision of a parcel of about 7.16 acres into 45 lots within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail,about 1;400 feet north of Base Line Road -APN: 1076-181-01. 2) Development of all lots shall be in accordance with the standards and requirements applicable to the Medium (M) Residential District as described in the development standards that are the subject of Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. 3) Prior to the issuance of permits for grading and/or building construction, the applicant shall consult with the City to determine the final technical and design details of the emergency vehicle access (EVA) driveway. 4) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code,Etiwanda Specific Plan,State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 5) Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, the existing single-family residence and any associated improvements shall be demolished and removed from the project site. 6) Prior to recordation of the Final Map, all lots shall be rough graded to include building pads and interim improvements (for example, drainage) as deemed necessary by the City. 7) Prior to issuance of permits for grading and/or building construction, the applicant shall consult with a qualified biologist to determine the best means(such as trapping, barriers, relocation, etc.)for controlling the migration of animals onto neighboring properties while the site is being graded and homes are being constructed. The applicant shall then submit a report indicating which methods) will be used, and implement them accordingly. 8) Approval of this application is contingent on the approval of Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887 and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. 9) All Conditions of Approval for Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161 shall apply. Engineering Services Department 1) Ramona Avenue frontage improvements are to be in accordance with City"Collector" standards as required and including: D—I pg. 181 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 • Page 5 a) Provide curb, gutter, a.c. pavement, street trees, and sidewalk. Provide curb adjacent sidewalk north of La Vine Street and property line adjacent sidewalk south of La Vine Street. b) Provide traffic signing and striping as required. c) Install one LED streetlight that complies with Southern California Edison's lighting standards. d) Ramona Avenue shall be reconstructed and widened full width to match the existing improvements to the north and south, ending at the existing full width improvements south of the Pacific Electric Trail crossing. e) The developer shall install the Master Plan Storm Drain facilities on Ramona Avenue designed by the City Capital Improvement Section. Installation will end at the first manhole south of the Pacific Electric Trail. The developer shall be eligible for drainage impact fee credit and/or reimbursement of the portion of the storm drain to be installed that is designated as a master plan facility. Fee credit and/or reimbursement is subject to the City's normal master plan storm drain policies. • 2) Archibald Avenue frontage improvements are to be in accordance with City "Major Arterial" standards as required and including: a) Protect curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lights as required. b) Protect traffic signing and striping as required. c) Remove the existing drive approach on the northerly tract boundary and replaced with curb and gutter. d) Access to/from Archibald Avenue shall be for emergency vehicle access only. The emergency access shall be 26 feet wide and shall be constructed as a limited access curb per City Std. 105-C. The material to be installed within the City right-of-way shall be reviewed and approved by The Rancho Cucamonga Fire District. No accent paving allowed within the City right-of-way. Pedestrian access to Archibald Avenue shall also be provided. 3) Interior street improvements are to be in accordance with City 'Local" standards as required and including: a) Provide curb, gutter, a.c. pavement, street trees,.and sidewalk as required. • b) Provide traffic signing and striping as required. c) The driveways are to be in accordance with the City Driveway Policy. D—I pg. 182 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 6 d) Install LED street lights that comply with Southern California Edison's lighting standards. e) Align the centerline of the proposed street with the centerline of La Vine Street. 4) Install Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) improvements along project frontage on Archibald Avenue: a) The easement for landscape purposes on Archibald Avenue should match the width of the project to the north for City to maintain a consistent look along the street. It shows 6-foot wide easement per Tract 12532. The landscape design should comply with our 60 percent landscape/40 percent hardscape standards. b) Improvements shall conform to the Archibald Avenue Beautification Master Plan. c) The maximum slope within public maintained landscape areas shall be 3:1. Where slopes occur, a 1-foot flat area behind the sidewalk shall be provided. Slopes higher than 6 feet shall have a 2-foot wide flat shelf at the top, along the base of the walls. 5) The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the project side of Ramona Avenue shall be undergrounded from the first pole south of the north project boundary to the first pole south of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. 6) Additional improvements on the community trail/SANBAG right-of-way will be required such as decomposed granite community trail with concrete mow curbs, concrete v-ditch, landscaping, trail lighting, monument and drainage inlet consistent with other segments of the Pacific Electric Trail. Environmental Mitigation Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers'specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits,the developer shall submit construction plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized,or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction D—I pg. 183 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912— MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 7 • measures imposed b the South Coast Air Quality Management District P Y tY 9 (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning staff. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. • Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local • ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds(i.e.,wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB])daily to reduce Fine Particulate Matter(PM,o)emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. • 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. D—I pg. 184 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 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. 1.4) All new development in the City of Rancho Cucamonga shall comply with South Coast Air Quality Management District's Rule 445, Wood Burning Devices. Rule 445 was adopted in March 2008 to reduce emissions of PM2.5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning devices(i.e.fireplaces/hearths) in new development on or after March 9, 2009. Biological Resources 1) 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 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. If initial ground disturbing activities or site clearing is proposed to occur outside of the nesting season (September 1 through January 31), then a preconstruction survey would not be required and construction could commence unimpeded. 2) The trees that are located within the interior of the project, but not including the trees within the Eucalyptus windrow along the north side of the project site, shall be replaced with new trees, on a one-to-one basis, of a minimum 15-gallon size. These trees are in addition to the trees that are required by the Development Code for new residential development. 3) The trees that are located within the Eucalyptus windrow along the north side of the project site, shall be replaced with new trees, on a one-to-one basis, of a minimum 24-inch box size. These trees shall be planted within the rear yards of Lots 26—43 and side yards of Lots 44 D—I pg. 185 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 • Page 9 and 45. These trees are in addition to the trees that are required by the Development Code for new residential development. 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) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures(i.e., paleontological monitoring)that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate,the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. • • Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the D-1 pg. 186 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 10 discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report.to San Bernardino County Museum. Geology and Soils 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB)daily to reduce PM,o 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. 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. D—I pg. 187 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 • Page 11 5) Construction should be timed so as not to interfere with peak-hour traffic. 6) Ridesharing and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged for construction crew. 7) Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the Project Applicant shall submit to the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City) a plan for implementation of one or more of the mitigation measures/strategies to reduce GHG emissions from the CAPCOA "CEQA and Climate Change" White Paper. The total reduction of the implemented mitigation selected must result in a minimum of 5 percent. The selected mitigation measures/strategies and any measures for their long-term maintenance must be described and submitted as part of this report to the City for their approval. 8) 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. 9) 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. 10) 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. D—I pg. 188 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 12 • Use reclaimed water for landscaping within the project if available and/or install the infrastructure to deliver and use reclaimed water. • Design buildings 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. 11) 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. Hydrology and Water Quality 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits, the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. 5) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Madole and Associates in December 2013, to reduce pollutants during and after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 6) Landscaping plans shall include provisions for controlling and minimizing the use of fertilizers/pesticides/herbicides. Landscaped D—I pg. 189 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 • Page 13 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. 7) Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 8) Prior to issuance of Grading or Paving Permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent(NOI)to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number)shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General • Construction Permit. Noise 1) 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. 2) 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. 3) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. The developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise levelmonitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of ® compliance with above noise standards or halted. 4) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in the first phase. D—I pg. 190 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 14 5) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally,if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips(counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed,and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of August 2014, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: D-1 pg. 191 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: SUBTT18912 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP APPLICANT: MANNING HOMES BETWEEN ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND RAMONA AVENUE, ABOUT 1,400 FEET NORTH LOCATION: OF BASELINE ROAD—APN: 1076-181-01. ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: • A. General Requirements Completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Approval of Tentative Tract No. SUBTT18912 is granted subject to the approval of DRC2013-00887 and DRC2014-00626. 3. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 14-25, Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 4. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning Manager hearing. a) Mitigated Negative Declaration -$2,206.25 X. 1 D-1 pg. 192 Project No. SUBTT18912 Completion Date B. Time Limits 1. This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the Engineering Services Department within 3 years from the date of the approval. C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include Site Plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all California Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and.the Building and Safety Services Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance and final acceptance granted prior to occupancy. 4. Revised Site Plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Manager review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced, whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances,and applicable Community, Specific Plans and/or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. 7. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager. For single-family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. 8. Street names shall be submitted for Planning Manager review and approval in accordance with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map 9. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination and in conformance with Building and Safety Services Department standards, the Municipal Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Department (RCFD) Standards. 10. Where comer side, interior side or rear yard property lines are adjacent to local equestrian trails, construct minimum 6-foot high decorative masonry walls. Decorative masonry shall mean split-face double sided block, `slump stone'or an alternative material that is acceptable to the Design Review Committee. 11. 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 Manager and Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 2 D-1 pg. 193 Project No. SUBTT18912 Completion Date 12. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of • all lots for Planning Manager and Engineering Services Department approval; including, but not limited to, public notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. 13. 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. 14. Construct block walls between homes(i.e., along interior side and rear property lines), rather than wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency. 15. 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. 16. For residential development, return walls and corner side walls shall be decorative masonry. 17. On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between walls/fences and sidewalk. —I_I— 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 Manager 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 Manager, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 18. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be • manufactured products. D. Building Design 1. Standard patio cover plans for use by the Homeowner's Association shall be submitted for Planning Manager and Building and Safety Official review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 2. For all residential development, provide conduit from each unittlot 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 Manager and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. E. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) 1. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. F. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the case of residential development,shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for Planning Manager 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. 3 D–I pg. 194 Project No. SUBTT18912 Completion Date 2. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 3. 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. I n addition,slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5- gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 4. For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Department to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. 5. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development Code. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 6. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to Planning Manager review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Services Department. 7. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 8. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department. 9. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. G. Environmental 1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the Planning Manager in the amount of $ 581 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. H. Other Agencies 1. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location of mailboxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mailboxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to Planning Manager review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits: 4 D—I pg. 195 Project No. SUBTT18912 Completion Date APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY SERVICES DEPARTMENT, (909)477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S). I. Building and Safety Single-Family Residential Standard Conditions General Requirements 1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan and reverse foundation plan (when applicable); c. Floor Plan; d. Roof and Floor Framing Plan and reverse Roof and Floor Framing Plan(when applicable); e. Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached) including the size of main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams; f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams, water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air conditioning; and g. Planning Department Project Number(i.e., SUBTT18912)clearly identified on the outside of all plans. • 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, two sets of energy conservation calculations, and a soils report. Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet" signature are required prior to plan check submittal. 3. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers'Compensation coverage to the City prior to permit issuance. 4. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number(i.e., SUBTT18912). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted California Codes, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Contact the Building and Safety Services Department for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to the issuance of Building Permits for a new residential project or major addition, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Feb, Permit and Plan Check Fees, and School Fees. The applicant shall provide a copy of the School Fees receipt to the Building and Safety Services Department prior to permit issuance. 3. The Building and Safety Official shall provide street addresses after tract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of Building Permits. • 4. Construction activity shall occur in accordance with the standards as stated in Chapter 17.66.050 D-4 of the Development Code. 5 D-1 pg. 196 Project No. SUBTT18912 Completion Date New Structures !-1_ 1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances /. considering use, area, and fire-resistive requirements. 2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. 3. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's"high wind" instructions. 4. The home must be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers in accordance with NFPA 13D. 5. Annexation of the parcel: Annexation of the parcel into the Community Facilities District#85- 1 or#88-1 is required prior to the issuance of grading or Building Permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AT, (909)477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: The project must comply in design and constructed in accordance with the 2010 California Building and Fire Codes,the RCFPD Ordinance FD50 and the RCFPD Standards. The RCFPD ordinance, procedures &standards which are referenced in this document can be access on the web at www.cityofrc.us. J. Single-Family Tract Standard Conditions FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply 1. The public water supply and fire hydrants shall be design in accordance with RCFPD and CVWD Standards and Policies. 2. The private water supply (when applicable) and fire hydrants shall be design in accordance with the RCFPD Ordinance, Standard 5-10 and the current edition of the California Fire Code. FSC-2 Fire Flow 1. Fire review and approval of the public water plans to be submitted to CVWD for permit issuance. 2. Building Permits will not be issued until public fire protection water plans are approved and adequate water supply is provided for construction purposes. 3. On all architectural plan sets to be submitted for building plan check provide a Site Plan that illustrate all the proposed public and private fire hydrants located on/and within 600-feet of the project site. 4. The required fire flow for this project is calculated gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This requirement is made in accordance with California Fire Code Appendix, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances:The required minimum fire flow for this project may be reduced by 50 percent when automatic fire sprinklers are installed. 5. Public fire hydrants located within the immediate vicinity of the proposed project may be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property shall not be used to provide required fire flow. FSC-9 Single-family Residential Sales Model homes require approved Fire District vehicle _/—/— access and water supply from a public or private water main system before construction. FCS-10 Fire Sprinklers: All structures must be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers in accordance with NFPA 13D and the current edition of the California residential Code. FSC-13 Alternate Method Application: Fire Construction Services staff and the Fire Marshal will review all requests for alternate method, when submitted. The request must be submitted on the 6 D-1 pg. 197 Project No. SUBTT18912. Completion Date Fire District"Application for Alternate Method"form along with supporting documents and payment • of the review fee. FCS-15 Annexation of the parcel map: the project must be annexed into the Community Facilities — District #85-1 or #88-1. The annexation must be completed prior to the issuance of grading or Building Permits. Chronological Summary of RCFP® Standard Conditions PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS–Please complete the following prior to the issuance of any Building Permits: 1. Public Water Supply(Domestic/Fire)Systems: The applicant shall submit a plan showing the locations of all new public fire hydrants for the review and approval by the Fire District and CVWD. On the plan, show all existing fire hydrants within a 600-foot radius of the project. Please reference the RCFPD Standard#10-5. 2. Construction Access: The access roads must be paved in accordance with all the requirements of the RCFPD Fire Lane Standard #14-1. All temporary utilities over access roads must be installed at least 14' 6" above the finished surface of the road. 3. Fire Flow: A current fire flow letter from CVWD must be received. The applicant is responsible for obtaining the fire flow information from CVWD and submitting the letter to Fire Construction Services. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION–Please complete the following: 1. Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with the City of Rancho • Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers". On private property, the markers shall be installed at the centerline of the fire access road, at each hydrant location. 2. Public Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire access roadways must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and acceptable to Fire Construction Services. 3. Address: Prior to the granting of occupancy, single-family dwellings shall post the address with minimum 4-inch numbers on a contrasting background. The numbers shall be internally or externally illuminated during periods of darkness. The numbers shall be visible from the street. When building setback from the public roadway exceeds 100-feet, additional 4-inch numbers shall be displayed at the property entry. 7 D–I pg. 198 RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083, A REVIEW OF A PROPOSAL FOR 45 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A 45-LOT SUBDIVISION OF ABOUT 7.16 ACRES WITHIN THE MEDIUM (M) AND LOW MEDIUM (LM) RESIDENTIAL LOCATED BETWEEN ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND RAMONA AVENUE, AT THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC INLAND EMPIRE TRAIL,ABOUT 1,400 FEET NORTH OF BASE LINE ROAD;AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF —APN: 1076-181-01. A. Recitals. 1. Manning Homes filed an application for Development Review DRC2013-01083 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of August 2014, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. ® NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on August 13, 2014, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a parcel located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road; and b. The project site is a rectangular parcel with an overall area of about 312,000 square feet (7.16 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are about 1,200 feet deep (east to west) and 250 feet (north to south); and C. The project site is generally vacant with the exception of a single-family residence that was built circa 1915 that is located at the east side of the project site near Ramona Avenue; and d. To the west of the project site, is an equestrian/pet supplies retail store;to the north and east are single-family residences; and to the south are an apartment complex and a mobile ® home park; and D-1 pg. 199 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 2 e. The proposal is to construct 45 single-family residences in conjunction with Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912; and f. The applicant proposes four(4)distinct footprints—Plans 1,2,and 3, and reverse footprints of each for a total of six (6) footprints. The floor area of the houses will be between 2,566 square feet(Plan 1) and 3,163 square feet (Plan 3). The number of available footprints will comply with Table 17.122.010-1 of the Development Code; and g. As "basic" and `optional" development standards are not provided in Tables 17.36.010-1 and 17.36.010-2, respectively, of the Development Code, the lots will be developed in accordance with new development standards that the applicant, in coordination with the City, has created for incorporation into the Development Code that will apply to single-family residential development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. The City has submitted Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626 for this purpose; and h. This application is in conjunction with Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, Minor Exception DRC2014-00161, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed subdivision is in accord with the General Plan and the objectives of the Development Code,and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The proposal is to construct a single-family residence on each lot of a 45-lot subdivision (Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912) for a total of 45 single-family residences. The underlying General Plan designation is Medium Residential. b. The proposed development,together with the conditions applicable thereto,will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity.. The project site is generally vacant; the proposed land use is consistent with the land uses within the vicinity where it is located and the expectations of the community. The zoning of the west half of the site is Medium (M) Residential District, while the zoning of the east half of the site is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the property to the west is Medium High (MH) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the north is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the east is Low(L) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the south(beyond the aforementioned trail)are partly Medium High (MH) Residential District and partly and Low Medium (LM) Residential District. C. The proposed development complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The lots will be developed in accordance with new development standards that are the subject of related Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626 and will apply to single-family residential development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. The proposed development will otherwise comply with all standards outlined in the Development Code and the design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and D—I pg. 200 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 • Page 3 Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that,with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter; the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it,finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (ii)that, based on the imposition of mitigation measures, there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission further finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. C. The Planning Commission has also reviewed and considered the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project that has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and finds that such Program is designed to ensure compliance • with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Planning Commission therefore adopts the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project. d. The custodian of records for the Initial Study, Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring Program and all other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based is the Planning Manager of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909)477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the development of 45 single-family residences in conjunction with a 45-lot subdivision of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts, located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road -APN: 1076-181-01. 2) Development of all lots shall be in accordance with the standards and requirements applicable to the Medium (M) Residential District as described in the development standards that are the subject of Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. D-1 pg. 201 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083-MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 4 3) Add stone veneer to the Cottage theme and brick veneer to the Traditional theme (front and rear elevations). 4) Pot shelves shall be provided beneath some of the windows of each house. 5) Fifty percent of the houses shall have garage doors with windows. 6) The molding along the top of the stone or brick veneer wainscots shall also be stone or brick and not foam. 7) Prior to issuance of permits for grading and/or building construction, the applicant shall consult with the City to determine the final technical and design details of the emergency vehicle access (EVA) driveway. 8) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, Etiwanda Specific Plan,State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 9) Model homes shall require the review of a separate Temporary Use Permit (Model Home) and fee prior to the submittal of documents for plan check and construction. Note: Parking in the street will not be permitted for this purpose. A temporary off-street parking area that complies with all applicable parking requirements will be required and must be shown on the plans for this permit. 10) Prior to grading and/or construction, the applicant shall consult with a qualified biologist to determine the best means (such as trapping, barriers, relocation, etc.) for controlling the migration of animals onto neighboring properties while the site is being graded and homes are being constructed. The applicant shall then submit a report indicating which method(s)will be used, and implement them accordingly. 11) Approval of this application is contingent on the approval of Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887 and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. 12) All Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161. Engineering Services Department 1) Ramona Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Collector" standards as required and including: a) Provide curb, gutter, a.c. pavement, street trees, and sidewalk. Provide curb adjacent.sidewalk north of La Vine Street and the property line adjacent sidewalk south of La Vine Street. b) Provide traffic signing and striping as required. D-1 pg. 202 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083— MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 • Page 5 c) Install one LED streetlight that complies with SCE's lighting standards. d) Ramona Avenue shall be reconstructed and widened full width to match existing improvements to the north and south,ending at the existing full width improvements south of the Pacific Electric Trail crossing. e) The developer shall install the Master Plan Storm Drain facilities on Ramona Avenue designed by the City Capital Improvement Section. Installation will end at the first manhole south of the Pacific Electric Trail. The developer shall be eligible for drainage impact fee credit and/or reimbursement of the portion of the storm drain to be installed that is designated as a master plan facility. Fee credit and/or reimbursement is subject to the City's normal master plan storm drain policies. 2) Archibald Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with City "Major Arterial" standards as required and including: a) Protect curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street lights as required. b) Protect traffic signing and striping as required. c) Remove the existing drive approach on the northerly tract boundary and replaced with curb and gutter. d) Access to/from Archibald Avenue shall be for emergency vehicle access only. The Emergency Access shall be 26 feet wide and shall be constructed as a limited access curb per City Std. 105-C. The material to be installed within the City right-of-way shall be reviewed and approved by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District. No accent paving allowed within the City right-of-way. Pedestrian access to Archibald Avenue shall also be provided. 3) Interior street improvements to be in accordance with City 'Local" standards as required and including: a) Provide curb, gutter, a.c. pavement, street trees, and sidewalk as required. b) Provide traffic signing and striping as required. c) The driveways are to be in accordance with City Driveway Policy. d). Install LED street lights that comply with Southern California Edison's lighting standards. • e) Align the centerline of the proposed street with the centerline of La Vine Street. D—I pg. 203 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 6 - 4) Install Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) improvements along project frontage on Archibald Avenue: a) The easement for landscape purposes on Archibald Avenue should match the width of the project to the north for City to maintain a consistent look along the street. It shows a 6-foot wide easement per Tract 12532. The landscape design should comply with our 60 percent landscape/40 percent hardscape standards. b) Improvements shall conform to the Archibald Avenue Beautification Master Plan. c) The maximum slope within public maintained landscape areas shall be 3:1. Where slopes occur, a 1-foot flat area behind the sidewalk shall be provided. Slopes higher than 6 feet shall have a 2-foot wide flat shelf at the top, along the base of the walls. 5) The existing overhead utilities(telecommunications and electrical) on the project side of Ramona Avenue shall be undergrounded from the first pole south of the north project boundary to the first pole south of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. 6) Additional improvements on the community trail/SANBAG right-of-way will be required such as decomposed granite community trail with concrete mow curbs, concrete v-ditch, landscaping, trail lighting, monument and drainage inlet consistent with other segments of the Pacific Electric Trail. Environmental Mitigation Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers'specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits,the developer shall submit construction plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning staff. D-1 pg. 204 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 ® Page 7 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and . 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. • Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. • Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local ordinances and use sound engineering practices. • Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if • silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. • Suspend grading operations during high winds(i.e.,wind speeds exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 requirements. • Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means. 6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and Regional Water Quality Control Board [RWQCB])daily to reduce Fine Particulate Matter(PM,o)emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403. 7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce PM,o emissions. 8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel-powered equipment where feasible. 9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use. ® 10) Landscape with native and/or drought-resistant species to reduce water consumption and to provide passive solar benefits. D—I pg. 205 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 8 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 PM2.5 and precludes the installation of indoor or outdoor wood burning devices(i.e.fireplaces/hearths) in new development on or after March 9, 2009. Biological Resources 1) 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 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. If initial ground disturbing activities or site clearing is proposed to occur outside of the nesting season (September 1 through January 31), then a preconstruction survey would not be required and construction could commence unimpeded. 2) The trees that are located within the interior of the project, but not including the trees within the Eucalyptus windrow along the north side of the project site, shall be replaced with new trees, on a one-to-one basis, of a minimum 15-gallon size. These trees are in addition to the trees that are required by the Development Code for new residential development. 3) The trees that are located within the Eucalyptus windrow along the north side of the project site, shall be replaced with new trees, on a one-to-one basis,of a minimum 24-inch box size. These trees shall be planted within the rear yards of Lots 26—43 and side yards of Lots 44 and 45. These trees are in addition to the trees that are required by the Development Code for new residential development. D—I pg. 206 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 • Page 9 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) If any paleontological resource (i.e. plant or animal fossils) are encountered before or during grading, the developer will retain a qualified paleontologist to monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve them for study. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures(i.e., paleontological monitoring)that may be appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate,the program must include, but not be limited to, the following measures: • Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities. • Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed salvage. If construction personnel make the • discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor of the find. D—I pg. 207 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 10 Prepare, identify, and curate all recovered fossils for documentation in the summary report and transfer to an appropriate depository (i.e., San Bernardino County Museum). • Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum. Geology and Soils 1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB)daily to reduce PM,o emissions, in accordance with SCAQMD Rule 403 or re-planted with drought resistant landscaping as soon as possible. 2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established by the City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of construction. 3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to minimize PM10 emissions from the site during such episodes. 4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to reduce 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. D—I pg. 208 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 11 • Ridesharin and transit incentives shall be supported and encouraged 6) g PP for construction crew. 7) Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the Project Applicant shall submit to the City of Rancho Cucamonga (City) a plan for implementation of one or more of the mitigation measures/strategies to reduce GHG emissions from the CAPCOA "CEQA and Climate Change" White Paper. The total reduction of the implemented mitigation selected must result in a minimum of 5 percent. The selected mitigation measures/strategies and any measures for their long-term maintenance must be described and submitted as part of this report to the City for their approval. 8) 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. 9) 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. 10) 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 buildings to be water efficient by installing water efficient D—I pg. 209 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083-MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 12 • Design buildings 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. 11) 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. Hydrology and Water Quality 1) Prior to issuance of grading permits,the permit applicant shall submit to the Building Official for approval a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) specifically identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that shall be used on-site to reduce pollutants during construction activities entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 2) An Erosion Control Plan shall be prepared, included in the Grading Plan, and implemented for the proposed project that identifies specific measures to control on-site and off-site erosion from the time ground disturbing activities are initiated through completion of grading. This Erosion Control Plan shall include the following measures at a minimum: a) Specify the timing of grading and construction to minimize soil exposure to rainy periods experienced in southern California, and b) An inspection and maintenance program shall be included to ensure that any erosion which does occur either on-site or off-site as a result of this project will be corrected through a remediation or restoration program within a specified time frame. 3) During construction, temporary berms such as sandbags or gravel dikes must be used to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site when there is rainfall or other runoff. 4) During construction, to remove pollutants street cleaning will be performed prior to storm events and after the use of water trucks to control dust in order to prevent discharge of debris or sediment from the site. 5) The developer shall implement the BMPs identified in the Water Quality Management Plan prepared by Madole and Associates in December 2013, to reduce pollutants during and after construction entering the storm drain system to the maximum extent practical. 6) 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 D-I pg. 210 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 • Page 13 i submitted to the City for review and. approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. 7) Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the applicant shall submit to the City Engineer for approval of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), including a project description and identifying Best Management Practices (BMPs) that will be used on-site to reduce pollutants into the storm drain system to the maximum extent practicable. The WQMP shall identify the structural and non-structural measures consistent with the Guidelines for New Development and Redevelopment adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in June 2004. 8) Prior to issuance of Grading or Paving Permits, the applicant shall obtain a Notice of Intent(NOI)to comply with obtaining coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)General Construction Storm Water Permit from the State Water Resources Control Board. Evidence that this has been obtained (i.e., a copy of the Waste Discharger's Identification Number)shall be submitted to the City Building Official for coverage under the NPDES General Construction Permit. Noise • 1) 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. 2) 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. 3) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line. The developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the Building Official. Said consultant shall report their findings to the Building Official within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Building Official. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above noise standards or halted. 4) The perimeter block wall shall be constructed as early as possible in the first phase. 5) 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 D—I pg. 211 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 14 time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally,if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips(counting both to and from the construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced,passed,and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of August 2014, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: D—I pg. 212 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - DEPARTMENT • STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT#: DRC2013-01083 SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICANT: MANNING HOMES BETWEEN ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND RAMONA AVENUE, ABOUT 1,400 FEET NORTH LOCATION: OF BASELINE ROAD—APN: 1076-181-01. ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: ® A. General Requirements Completion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 14-26, Standard Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect. 3. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning Manager hearing. a) Mitigated Negative Declaration-$2,206.25 X • 1 D-1 pg. 213 Project No. DRC2013-01083 completion Date B. Time Limits 1. Any approval shall expire if Building Permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date of approval or a time extension has been granted. C. Site Development 1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the'approved plans which include Site Plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and grading on file in the Planning Department, the conditions contained herein, and the Development Code regulations. 2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager. 3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all California Building Code and State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Services Department to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance and final acceptance granted prior to occupancy. 4. Revised Site Plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be submitted for Planning Manager review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment, building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved use has commenced,whichever comes first. 6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community, Specific Plans and/or Master Plans in effect at the time of Building Permit issuance. 7. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall 2_/_ be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Manager. For single-family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults. 8. Street names shall be submitted for-Planning Manager review and approval in accordance �— with the adopted Street Naming Policy prior to approval of the final map 9. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, including proper illumination and in conformance with Building and Safety Services Department standards, the Municipal Code and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Department (RCFD) Standards. 10. Where comer side, interior side or rear yard property lines are adjacent to local equestrian trails, construct minimum 6-foot high decorative masonry walls. Decorative masonry shall mean split-face double sided block, 'slump stone'or an alternative material that is acceptable to the Design Review Committee. 11. 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 Manager and Engineering Services Department review and approved prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 12. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all lots for Planning Manager and Engineering Services Department approval; including, but 2 D–I pg. 214 Project No. DRC2013-01083 Completion Date not limited to, public notice requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community • concerns, hours of construction activity, dust control measures, and security fencing. 13. 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. 14. Construct block walls between homes(i.e., along interior side and rear property lines), rather than wood fencing for permanence, durability, and design consistency. 15. 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. 16. For residential development, return walls and comer side walls shall be decorative masonry. 17. 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 Manager 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 Manager, prior to accepting a cash deposit on any property. 18. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured products. • D. Building Design 1. Standard patio cover plans for use by the Homeowners Association shall be submitted for Planning Manager and Building and Safety Official review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. 2. 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 Manager and Building Official review and approval prior to issuance of Building Permits. E. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans) 1. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth from back of sidewalk. F. Landscaping 1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in the case of residential development,shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and submitted for Planning Manager 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. • 2. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for 3 D—I pg. 215 Project No. DRC2013-01083 Completion Date erosion control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 3. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size shrub per each 100 sq.ft.of slope area,and appropriate ground cover. In addition,slope banks in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5- gallon or larger size tree per each 250 sq.ft.of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent.irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy. 4. For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold and occupied by the buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be conducted by the Planning Department to determine that they are in satisfactory condition. 5. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development Code. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and slope planting. 6. The final design of the perimeter parkways, walls, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in the required landscape plans and shall be subject to Planning Manager review and approval and coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the Engineering Services Department. 7. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer. 8. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Services Department. 9. Landscaping and irrigation shall be designed to conserve water through the principles of water efficient landscaping per Development Code Chapter 17.82. G. Environmental 1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the Planning Manager in the amount of$ 581 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. H. Other Agencies 1. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and �— location of mailboxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for mailboxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the overhead structure shall be subject to Planning Manager review and approval prior to the issuance of Building Permits. 4 D–I pg. 216 Project No. DRC2013-01083 Completion Date APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY SERVICES DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2710, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S). I. Building and Safety Single-Family Residential Standard Conditions General Requirements 1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: a. Site/Plot Plan; b. Foundation Plan and reverse foundation plan (when applicable); c. Floor Plan; d. Roof and Floor Framing Plan and reverse Roof and Floor Framing Plan(when applicable); e. Electrical Plans(2 sets, detached) including the size of main switch, number and size of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams; f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams, water and waste diagram, sewer or septic system location,fixture units, gas piping,and heating and air conditioning; and g. Planning Department Project Number (i.e., DRC2013-01083) clearly identified on the outside of all plans. 2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, two sets of energy conservation calculations, and • a soils report. Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet" signature are required prior to plan check submittal. 3. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers'Compensation coverage to the City prior to permit issuance. 4. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. Site Development 1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be marked with the project file number(i.e., DRC2013-01083). The applicant shall comply with the latest adopted California Codes, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in effect at the time of permit application. Contact the Building and Safety Services Department for availability of the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts. 2. Prior to the issuance of Building Permits for a new residential project or major addition, the applicant shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to: City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and Plan Check Fees, and School Fees. The applicant shall provide a copy of the School Fees receipt to the Building and Safety Services Department prior to permit issuance. 3. The Building and Safety Official shall provide street addresses after tract/parcel map recordation and prior to issuance of Building Permits. ® 4. Construction activity shall occur in accordance with the standards as stated in Chapter 17.66.050 D-4 of the Development Code. 5 D—I pg. 217 Project No. DRC2013-01083 Completion Date New Structures —/= 1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances considering use, area, and fire-resistive requirements. 2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. 3. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's"high wind"instructions. �— 4. The home must be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers in accordance with NFPA 13D. 5. Annexation of the parcel: Annexation of the parcel into the Community Facilities District#85- 1 or#88-1 is required prior to the issuance of grading or Building Permits. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AT, (909)477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: The project must comply in design and constructed in accordance with the 2010 California Building and Fire Codes,the RCFPD Ordinance FD50 and the RCFPD Standards. The RCFPD ordinance,procedures & standards which are referenced in this document can be access on the web at www.citvofrc.us. J. Single-Family Tract Standard Conditions FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply 1. The public water supply and fire hydrants shall be design in accordance with RCFPD and CVWD Standards and Policies. 2. The private water supply (when applicable) and fire hydrants.shall be design in accordance with the RCFPD Ordinance,Standard 5-10 and the current edition of the California Fire Code. FSC-2 Fire Flow 1. Fire review and approval of the public water plans to be submitted to CVWD for permit issuance. 2. Building Permits will not be issued until public fire protection water plans are approved and adequate water supply is provided for construction purposes. 3. On all architectural plan sets to be submitted for building plan check provide a Site Plan that illustrate all the proposed public and private fire hydrants located on/and within 600-feet of the project site. 4. The required fire flow for this project is calculated gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This requirement is made in accordance with California Fire Code Appendix, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances.The required minimum fire flow for this project may be reduced by 50 percent when automatic fire sprinklers are installed. 5. Public fire hydrants located within the immediate vicinity of the proposed project may be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property shall not be used to provide required fire flow. FSC-9 Single-family Residential Sales Model homes require approved Fire District vehicle access and water supply from a public or private water main system before construction. FCS-10 Fire Sprinklers: All structures must be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers in accordance with NFPA 13D and the current edition of the California residential Code. FSC-13 Alternate Method Application: Fire Construction Services staff and the Fire Marshal will review all requests for alternate method, when submitted. The request must be submitted on the 6 D-1 pg. 218 Project No. DRC2013-01083 Completion Date Fire District"Application for Alternate Method"form along with supporting documents and payment ® of the review fee. FCS-15 Annexation of the parcel map: the project must be annexed into the Community Facilities District#85-1 or #88-1. The annexation must be completed prior to the issuance of grading or Building Permits. Chronological Summary of RCFPD Standard Conditions PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS–Please complete the following prior to the issuance of any Building Permits: 1. Public Water Supply(Domestic/Fire)Systems: The applicant shall submit a plan showing the locations of all new public fire hydrants for the review and approval by the Fire District and CVWD. On the plan, show all existing fire hydrants within a 600-foot radius of the project. Please reference the RCFPD Standard#10-5. 2. Construction Access: The access roads must be paved in accordance with all the _/—/— requirements of the RCFPD Fire Lane Standard #14-1. All temporary utilities over access roads must be installed at least 14'6"above the finished surface of the road. 3. Fire Flow: A current fire flow letter from CVWD must be received. The applicant is responsible for obtaining the fire flow information from CVWD and submitting the letter to Fire Construction Services. PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION–Please complete the following: 1. Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with the City of Rancho ® Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134,"Installation of Reflective Hydrant Markers". On private property, the markers shall be installed at the centerline of the fire access road, at each hydrant location. 2. Public Roadways: Prior to the issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy, the fire access roadways must be installed in accordance with the approved plans and acceptable to Fire Construction Services. 3. Address: Prior to the granting of occupancy, single-family dwellings shall post the address with minimum 4-inch numbers on a contrasting background. The numbers shall be internally or externally illuminated during periods of darkness. The numbers shall be visible from the street. When building setback from the public roadway exceeds 100-feet, additional 4-inch numbers shall be displayed at the property entry. 7 D-1 pg. 219 RESOLUTION NO. 14-27 • A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2013-00887, A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF PART OF A PROPERTY OF ABOUT 7.16 ACRES LOCATED BETWEEN ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND RAMONA AVENUE, AT THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC INLAND EMPIRE TRAIL, ABOUT 1,400 FEET NORTH OF BASE LINE ROAD FROM LOW MEDIUM (LM) RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM (M) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PROPOSED 46-LOT SUBDIVISION; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF -APN: 1076-181-01. A. Recitals. 1. Manning Homes filed an application for Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Zoning Map Amendment request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of August 2014, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. • NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on August 13, 2014, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a parcel located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road; and b. The project site is a rectangular parcel with an overall area of about 312,000 square feet (7.16 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are about 1,200 feet deep (east to west) and 250 feet (north to south); and C. The project site is generally vacant with the exception of a single-family residence that was built circa 1915 that is located at the east side of the project site near Ramona Avenue; and d. To the west of the project site, is an equestrian/pet supplies retail store; to the north and east are single-family residences; and to the south are an apartment complex and a mobile home park; and • e. According to the Zoning Map adopted by the City Council on July 18, 2012, the project site is currently within two zoning districts. The western half of the project site, an area of about 147,000 square feet (about 3.37 acres), is zoned as Medium (M) Residential District. The eastern half of the project, an area of about 165,000 square feet (about 3.77 acres), is D—I pg. 220 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-27 ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2013-00887—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 2 zoned as Low Medium (LM) Residential District as shown as Attachment A to this resolution; and f. The General Plan land use designation of the project site is Medium Residential shown as Attachment B to this resolution; and g. The change of the zoning of the project site will make it uniformly Medium (M) Residential and consistent with the General Plan designation of Medium Residential; and h. The zoning of the property to the west is Medium High (MH) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the north is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the east is Low (L) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the south (beyond the aforementioned trail) are partly Medium High (MH) Residential District and partly and Low Medium (LM) Residential District; and 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed Zoning Map Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for the logical development of the surrounding area; and b. The proposed Zoning Map Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and C. The proposed Zoning Map Amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and 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. D-1 pg. 221 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-27 ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2013-00887— MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 • . Page 3 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 Manager of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014. ® PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of August 2014, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: • D—I pg. 222 Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887 Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161 ILJz o z Camden Drive a� c� La Vine Street Project Site LH e I r E AciElectric Trail ,vAA - iVEVW FW W ECJ 1 UW1 I 1 r 1 � t i .�w�i n ar��x�x'y s ,. ;ywh1 a,T!v.,, � ..� �� ,s:� + r' y;{2�X�� �c�'�;' • �'" C rr?•'3z a r • �� �,1 Mil' alb � "N�.,X.� j'-w}' b`Ln • - M ��x R.;`-x�.ya.N�„'3Ld}a Yr.ePr;' y .. -. a �r� fi �' � 1 � 'i3 - v r> .x psi �• • � r • i RESOLUTION NO. 14-28 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00889, A REQUEST TO REMOVE TREES IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PROPOSED 45-LOT SUBDIVISION OF A VACANT PARCEL OF ABOUT 7.16 ACRES WITHIN THE MEDIUM (M) AND LOW MEDIUM (LM) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, LOCATED BETWEEN ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND RAMONA AVENUE,AT THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC INLAND EMPIRE TRAIL, ABOUT 1,400 FEET NORTH OF BASE LINE ROAD; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 1076-181-01. A. Recitals. 1. Manning Homes filed an application for Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Tree Removal Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of August 2014 the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. ® 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on August 13, 2014, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a parcel located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road; and b. The project site is a rectangular parcel with an overall area of about 312,000 square feet(7.16 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are about 1,200 feet deep(east to west) and 250 feet (north to south); and C. The project site is generally vacant with the exception of a single-family residence that was built circa 1915 that is located at the east side of the project site near Ramona Avenue;and D—I pg. 225 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-28 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00889—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 2 d. To the west of the project site, is an equestrian/pet supplies retail store;to the north and east are single-family residences; and to the south are an apartment complex and a mobile home park, and e. According to the Zoning Map adopted by the City Council on July 18, 2012, the project site is currently within two zoning districts. The western half of the project site an area of about 147,000 square feet (about 3.37 acres) is zoned as Medium (M) Residential District. The eastern half of the project, an area of about 165,000 square feet (about 3.77 acres), is zoned as Low Medium (LM) Residential District; and f. This application is in conjunction with Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Development Review DRC2013-01083,Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887,Minor Exception DRC2014-00161, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626; and g. The application includes numerous trees at various locations within the project site. The applicant submitted a Tree Survey Report, prepared by BonTerra Psomas on February 12, 2014, that included the description and health of the individual trees and their overall health and condition. The survey identified 117 of these trees as"heritage"trees which are subject to the City's tree preservation requirements as described in Section 17.80.050 of the Development Code; and h. The proposed project includes the planting of new trees on a one-to-one basis to replace the trees that are removed. The trees that are located within the Eucalyptus windrow along the north side of the project site will be replaced with new trees of a minimum 24-inch box size. These replacement trees will be in addition to the trees that are required by the Development Code for new residential development; and i. There are also numerous fruit-bearing trees within the project site that will be removed—these trees are not subject to the City's tree preservation requirements; and j. The trees are not designated as historically significant; and k. It is necessary to remove the trees in order to grade the site, and construct future single-family residences and associated improvements,which will allow economic enjoyment of the property; and I. There are a significant number of trees within the surrounding residential neighborhoods to the north,south,and east. The removal does not affectthe established character of the area and the property values; and m. The trees cannot be preserved by pruning and proper maintenance or relocation rather than removal; and n. The trees do not constitute a significant natural resource of the City. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: D—I pg. 226 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-28 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00889— MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 3 a. The proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and b. The proposed project is in accord with the objectives of the Municipal Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and C. The proposed project is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and d. The proposed project, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. 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 Manager 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. D—I pg. 227 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-28 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00889—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 4 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the removal of trees in conjunction with a proposed 45- lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts, located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road -APN: 1076-181-01. 2) The trees that are located within the interior of the project, but not including the trees within the Eucalyptus windrow along the north side of the project site, shall be replaced with new trees, on a one-to-one basis, of a minimum 15-gallon size. These trees are in addition to the trees that are required by the Development Code for new residential development. 3) The trees that are located within the Eucalyptus windrow along the north side of the project site, shall be replaced with new trees, on a one-to-one basis, of a minimum 24-inch box size. These trees shall be planted within the rear yards of Lots 26 through 43 and side yards of Lots 44 and 45. These trees are in addition to the trees that are required by the Development Code for new residential development. 4) This permit shall be valid for a period of 5 years, unless an extension is requested in writing at least 30 days prior to the expiration date. 5) All Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 shall apply. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2013. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary D—I pg. 228 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-28 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00889- MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 5 I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced,passed,and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of August 2013, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: • D-I pg. 229 RESOLUTION NO. 14-29 ® A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,APPROVING MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2014-00161, A REQUEST TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF INTERIOR PROPERTY LINE AND PROJECT PERIMETER WALLS THAT WILL EXCEED THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMIT OF 6 FEET (BUT NOT EXCEED 8 FEET IN HEIGHT)DUE TO GRADE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN LOTS IN CONJUNCTION WITH A PROPOSED 45-LOT SUBDIVISION OF A VACANT PARCEL OF ABOUT 7.16 ACRES WITHIN THE MEDIUM (M) AND LOW MEDIUM(LM)RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS LOCATED BETWEEN ARCHIBALD AVENUE AND RAMONAAVENUE,AT THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PACIFIC ELECTRIC INLAND EMPIRE TRAIL, ABOUT 1,400 FEET NORTH OF BASE LINE ROAD; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 1076-181-01. A. Recitals. 1. Manning Homes filed an application for Minor Exception DRC2014-00161 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Minor Exception request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of August 2014, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on said application and concluded said hearing on that date. • 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced meeting on August 13, 2014, including written and oral staff reports,together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to a parcel located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road; and b. The project site is a rectangular parcel with an overall area of about 312,000 square feet (7.16 acres). The overall dimensions of the site are about 1,200 feet deep (east to west) and 250 feet (north to south); and C. The project site is generally vacant with the exception of a single-family residence that was built in circa 1915 that is located at the east side of the project site near Ramona Avenue; and • D—I pg. 230 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-29 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2014-00161 —MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 2 d. To the west of the project site, is an equestrian/pet supplies retail store;to the north and east are single-family residences; and to the south are an apartment complex and a mobile home park; and e. According to the Zoning Map adopted by the City Council on July 18, 2012, the project site is currently within two zoning districts. The western half of the project site, an area of about 147,000 square feet (about 3.37 acres), is zoned as Medium (M) Residential District. The eastern half of the project, an area of about 165,0.00 square feet (about 3.77 acres), is zoned as Low Medium (LM) Residential District; and f. This application is in conjunction with Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Development Review DRC2013-01083,Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887,Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626; and g. The applicant is requesting a Minor Exception to allow the construction of combination walls(garden/screen walls on top of retaining walls)with a height of up to 8 feet along the rear and interior property lines of several lots within the proposed subdivision; and h. Per Table 17.48.050-1 of the Development Code, the maximum wall height of fences and walls along the rear and interior property lines is 6 feet. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this. Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The Minor Exception is consistent with the General Plan. The General Plan designation of the project site is Medium Residential and the zoning of the property is Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The Minor Exception does not affect the General Plan designation, zoning designation, or the residential purpose of the project site. b. The Minor Exception is compatible with the existing and proposed land uses in the surrounding area. The Minor Exception will not result in a substantially larger house, an increase in lot coverage, an increase in density, or adjustments to the physical lot area of the subject lots. C. The proposed exception to the specific development standard(s) is necessary to allow creative design solutions compatible with the desires of the community and/or to accommodate unique site conditions. The proposed walls will be located generally where there are grade differences that warrant retaining walls. Generally the natural terrain of the project site slopes from west to east. Therefore,the usual alternative, an earthen slope,is not practical because of the lack of available space in the side yards between the house(which with a few exceptions,are on the east and west sides of the house) and the property line wall. d. The granting of the Minor Exception will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district, and will not be detrimental to public health, safety or welfare or materially injurious properties or improvements in the vicinity. The Minor Exception will allow the applicant to construct walls that will provide adequate property screening/security and usable yard area and are similar to other walls that have been constructed for the same purpose because of similar site conditions. The walls will be consistent with the standards and guidelines of the City. D—I pg. 231 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-29 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2014-00161 -MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 3 • 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as follows: a. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the City's local CEQA Guidelines, the City staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project. Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, City staff determined that,with the imposition of mitigation measures, there would be no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment. Based on that determination, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared. Thereafter, the City staff provided public notice of the public comment period and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration. b. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration and all comments received regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and, based on the whole record before it,finds: (i)that the Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in compliance with CEQA; and (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 Manager of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909)477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the construction of interior property line and project perimeter walls that will exceed the maximum height limit of 6 feet(but not exceed 8 feet in height) due to grade differences between lots in conjunction with a proposed 45-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of • about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts, located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona D—I pg. 232 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-29 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2014-00161 —MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 4 Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road -APN: 1076-181-01. 2) The wall segments that are visible to the public and/or are located along the perimeter of the project site shall be constructed of decorative masonry block such as slumpstone or stackstone or have a decorative finish such as stucco. Final design shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval during plan check. 3) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, Etiwanda Specific Plan,State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 4) All Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 shall apply. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced,passed,and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of August 2014, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: D—I pg.233 i • RESOLUTION NO. 14-30 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2014-00626, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT CODE TO INCORPORATE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS SUCH AS MINIMUM LOT DIMENSIONS, SETBACKS, LOT COVERAGE, ETC. FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE MEDIUM (M) RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS; AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga filed an application for the approval of Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Code Amendment request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of August 2014, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. • B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing August 13, 2014, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. Currently, "basic" and `optional' development standards are not provided in Tables 17.36.010-1 and 17.36.010-2, respectively, of the Development Code; and b. These standards describe the requirements for minimum lot area, minimum lot dimensions (width, depth, street frontage, etc.), building setbacks, lot coverage, etc. and are necessary in order to guide the City and applicants in developing residential projects that are consistent with the General Plan, in accordance with the objective of the applicable development district (zoning), and comply with other standards and guidelines described in the Development Code; and C. As the standards do not exist, a set of development standards have been created for incorporation into the Development Code and is shown as Attachment A to this Resolution; and • d. These development standards will apply to all single-family residential projects that are proposed in the Medium (M) Residential Districts in the City except within areas of the City governed by separate specific/community plans such as Terra Vista, Victoria, and Etiwanda. In those D—I pg. 234 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-30 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2014-00626—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 2 specifictcommunity plans, such development standards already exist or, if they don't exist, will require separate review and action by City and, therefore, are not subject to this amendment; and e. This request is in response to a proposed single-family residential development that was proposed by Manning Homes that contemplates a 45-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts, located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road -APN: 1076-181-01; and f. In the absence of development standards for single-family residential development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts, Manning Homes would not be able to develop the property as proposed; and g. Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626 conforms to and does not conflict with the General Plan, including without limitation, the Land Use Element thereof, and will provide for development in a manner consistent with the General Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed Development Code Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for the logical development of the surrounding area; and b. The proposed Development Code Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and C. The proposed Development Code Amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and 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 ("CEQK) 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 D-1 pg. 235 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-30 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2014-00626—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 3 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 Manager of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909)477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. • APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of August 2014, by the following vote-to-wit: • D—I pg. 236 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-30 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2014-00626—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 4 AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: D-1 pg. 237 Tract 18912 Proposed Tract ® Design Guideline Summary Standard 18912 Minimum Lot Area(minimum) 4,OOOsf 4,013sf Minimum Lot Area(minimum net ave) 4,OOOsf 4,907sf Lot Width(minimum) 45ft 45ft Lot Width(comer lot) Soft 60ft Lot Depth(minimum) 80ft 83ft Minimum Frontage 30ft 45ft Minimum Frontage(flag lot) 20ft n/a Allowed Density(dwelling units per acre) Minimum Density(Net/excluding streets and ROW) 8 du/ac 8.88 du/ac Maximum Density(Nettexcluding streets and ROW) 14 du/ac 8.85 du/ac Minimum Setback Front Yard' (from curb face) 27ft 27ft ® Comer Side Yard (from curb face) 15ft 20ft Interior Side Yard 5/5 5/5 Rear Yard 15ft 15ft Building Height Primary Buildings 35ft 29ft max Lot Coverage Lot Coverage' 50% 45.5%max Open Space Requirement Private Open Space(excludes street&parkway) 35%min 62% Minimum Patio/Porch Depth 6ft 6ft 'Front yard setback can be reduced up to 5'to provide variation along the street. Does not include eves. 'Lot Coverage includes building footprint(incl.garages)and covered porches. Does not include eaves. ATTACHMENT A- D-1 pg. 238 STAFF REPORT • PLANNING DEPARTIMENT DATE: August 13, 2014RANCHO TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission CUCAMONGA FROM: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager BY: Steve Fowler, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION DRC2014-00678 - GAGGLES INC - A request to modify the floor plan and hours of operation to an existing Conditional Use Permit DRC2013-00519 at a restaurant with a full-service bar and entertainment within the Neighborhood Commercial District, located at 6321 Haven Avenue - APN: 0201-272-06. This item is categorically exempt per Section 15301 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines - Existing Facilities. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Conditional Use Permit Modification DRC2014-00678 through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Approval and Standard Conditions. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning: North - Single-Family Residential — Low Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per ® acre) South - SR-210 Freeway East - Condominium Complex- Medium-High Residential (14-24 dwelling units per acre) West - Commercial retail Center— Neighborhood Commercial District B. General Plan Designations: Project Site - Neighborhood Commercial North - Low Residential South - SR-210 Freeway East - Medium-High Residential West - Neighborhood Commercial C. Site Characteristics: The application proposal applies to an existing full-service restaurant with a bar in a single tenant building located within an existing 13-acre shopping center bounded by Lemon Avenue to the north, Haven Avenue to the west, the SR-210 Freeway to the south and an existing condominium complex to the east. The single tenant building includes a 4,368 square foot interior space with a 377 square foot outdoor patio. The building is located directly at the southeast corner of Haven Avenue and Lemon Avenue and is approximately 14 feet below the street grade from Lemon Avenue. ' The site is currently improved with multi-tenant, pad tenant, and in-line tenants with landscaping, lighting, and parking areas. BACKGROUND • On March 22, 2000, Conditional Use Permit 00-03 was approved for McAlan's Pub and Grill, which permitted the operation of a bar in conjunction with a restaurant. Concurrent with that approval, the Planning Commission also approved Entertainment Permit EP00-01, which allowed for acoustic trio Item 1-1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2014-00678—GAGGLES TAPROOM AND CHOW August 13, 2014 Page 2 music performances and karaoke. The original hours of operation and entertainment hours for CUP00-03 and EP00-01 were as follows: Hours of Operation Sunday through Thursday: 11:30 a.m. until 11:00 p.m. Friday through Saturday: 11:30 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. Entertainment Type Wednesdays: Karaoke Thursday through Sunday: Singer, Bands, Piano Subsequently, on June 14, 2000, a Modification to Conditional Use Permit CUP00-03 was approved by the Planning Commission to permit a 377 square foot outdoor patio area for dining and alcohol consumption. On June 23, 2010, the Planning Commission approved an application for Conditional Use Permit DRC2010-00188 requesting modifications to the floor plan, hours of operation, and the type and hours of entertainment. The application is summarized as follows: Hours of Operation Sunday through Wednesday: 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. Thursdays: 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. Friday through Saturday: 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. (2:00 a.m. for major holiday weekends — New Years, Labor Day, Memorial Day, Saint Patrick's Day) Entertainment Type/Hours Thursdays: 8:00 p.m. to 12:30 a.m. Bands* or Karaoke Friday through Saturday: 8:00 p.m. to 1:30 a.m. Bands* or Karaoke *At no time shall there be more than two (2) nights of bands each week. In addition to the applicant's request, an additional condition was included to cease all alcohol sales and consumption no less than thirty (30) minutes before closing. This condition was to ensure that all patrons had adequate time between consuming a drink and leaving the establishment. On June 22, 2011, the Planning Commission approved another application for a modification to Conditional Use Permit DRC2010-00188M requesting a change to the hours of operation. The modification allowed the Restaurant/Bar to be open from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. seven days a week. At that time, an Entertainment Permit was in effect.. In March of 2012, under previous ownership, the Entertainment Permit was surrendered. On September 25, 2013, the Planning Commission approved Entertainment Permit DRC2013-00519 for McAlan's Pub and Grill that was operated by Mr. Jason Shaw to allow live entertainment such as a DJ, live bands, karaoke, and dancing within an existing restaurant with a full service bar. The entertainment was approved to occur seven days a week, Monday through Friday 6:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. and Saturdays and Sundays from 1:00 p.m. to 1:00 a.m. A Security Plan was submitted and approved with the application and is still valid. Item J-2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2014-00678—GAGGLES TAPROOM AND CHOW August 13, 2014 ® Page 3 ANALYSIS: A. General: The applicant is proposing to take over McAlan's Pub and Grill by changing the name to Gaggles Taproom & Chow and modifying the existing floor plan by moving the bar off to the east side of the restaurant so it is not the focal point when entering the restaurant. The applicant is also modifying the hours of operation. Generally, the business will be open Sunday through Thursday 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 midnight, with Friday and Saturday hours being 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. The applicant is requesting the maximum hours of operation to be from 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. to allow for flexibility with special events. B. Compatibility of Use: The subject application is a request to modify the existing floor plan and to modify the hours of operation as stated above. The subject site has a General Plan land use designation of Neighborhood Commercial, which is defined as: "The Neighborhood Commercial designation provides for small-scale shopping centers (5 to 15 acres in size) located near or within residential neighborhoods and offering convenient retail goods and services for residents. Examples of permitted uses include small-scale restaurants, grocery and convenience stores, service businesses that generate limited traffic, and boutique retail sales. Neighborhood Commercial centers should be compatible in design and scale with adjacent residential areas." The subject site is located in close proximity to residential neighborhoods, and therefore could potentially create impacts unless mitigated. Because of the fact that the existing building is approximately 14 feet below street grade, and all parking areas are located south of the building, potential impacts from noise and light issues are sufficiently attenuated. Staff believes that with the previous conditions of approval and the operational Security Plan, the potential operational impacts of the business are addressed. The applicant also operates "Corky's" restaurant within the same shopping center near the southeast corner of the site. This establishment has been operating for many years without incident. The model of the new restaurant is a family restaurant with a sports bar feel with several televisions and different types of entertainment in the evening such as live bands, karaoke, and a DJ. C. Environmental Assessment: The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies as a Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) because the project entails the minor operational changes to an existing restaurant and bar including changes to the hours of operation and modification to the floor plan, and there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a 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. Respectfu submitted, Candyce rnett Planning anager • CB:SF/ge Item J-3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DRC2014-00678—GAGGLES TAPROOM AND CHOW August 13, 2014 Page 4 Attachments: Exhibit A = Business Plan Exhibit B - Floor Plan Exhibit C - Site Plan Exhibit D - Aerial Exhibit E - Menu Draft Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit DRC2014-00678 Item J-4 City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department, ® Here is a brief description of our potential concept. Keep in mind all of the small details are subject to change, but the broad scope should be pretty accurate. Name: Gaggles Taproom and Chow Tag Line: "Eat. Drink. Flock." Mission: • Unforgettable Hot and Cold Deli Fare, Gourmet Burgers and Panini's alongside Ice Cold Craft Beers with a family friendly environment Concept Ideas (food) • New York Style Hot and Cold Deli Sandwiches with meat stacked so high you need a fork and knife, using premium Deli Meats from National Meats for imported Salamis, Prosciutto's, capicola, cheeses, etc. • In-House Preparation using slow cookers for Roast Beefs, Tri Tips, Corned Beefs, Prime Ribs, Turkey, Chicken, Etc. • Signature Criss Cut style fries with 4-5 homemade seasoning flavors (Habanero Lime, Cajun Chili, BBQ Ranch, Sea Salt and Vinegar) • Salted Peanuts in the shell at all tables. Shells to be discarded on the floor • Home-made Potato Salad, Home-Made Pasta Salad, Coleslaw, Etc. • • Premium Burgers ground with Short Rib and Angus Chuck • Premium Rolls and Breads • Large Portions with left overs to take home • Unique Appetizer Offering • Limited Salad Offering • Kids Meal Offering • Limited Dessert Offering Concept Ideas (beverage) • 25 craft beers on tap, highlighting some local breweries (hangar24, Dale Brothers) with tap system keeping beer at 29 degrees with visible to the public digital thermometers. • Beer Served in frozen Goblets Medium and Large • Popular Domestic Beers on Tap • Tappers encased in ice by dripping water over a refrigerant coil • Full Bar offering • Fresh Squeezed Lemonade and Flavored Teas Concept Ideas (interior design) • Interior Walls paneled with raw wood planks, and rusted iron hardware • Floor natural concrete with polished finish • • Lighting retro barn looking hanging shades EXHIBIT A Item J-5 • Open Ceiling • Lots of Flat screen Ns with lots of sports • Open Loose Seating with both high top tables and seating-and low top tables and seating for families • Decorate with rusted type decor and old refrigerator doors mounted to the walls • Light, open, and Airy • Wrap Around Bar for the 21 and over Patrons Hours of Operation: • lam to tam will be the maximum hours of operation however hours will vary from day to day and throughout the year; typical hours may be: o Sunday thru Thursday 11am-12pm o Friday and Saturday 11am-2am Number of Employees During Peak Operational Hours: • 15-20 Entertainment: • Family Friendly Entertainment in early evenings (ie 2-3 piece acoustic bands). Later evening entertainment would be 3-4 piece amplified bands, Dj's, Karaoke Item J-6 i 1■t 1■1 1�1 a■i 1 f• • • • to 1■i - li ■.� I t■1 1 1 1■1 1■1 '1■1 1■1 1.1 1.1 1■1 RPTAUPANT LEMON AVE. o J _, rT� _ _ NN j2j — — -- i - - e� ,e a e �,: _ ♦���:%. Hag NORTH TWO PA IR WL SLOPE NOT TO EXCEED 5X CMD CROSS PnOF TR SrrB PLAN OT To EXCEED 2X V= W. (SEE OMABLED ACCESS NOTES) FLOOR PLAN LEGEND NCRTH FLOOR PUN PL-1 i1 t t l i lEls1�f11liBIliIIIa1,1 till - -mss.unu --* - I RIM • • I I oa � I I � I W� i V W I } zoc ® EXHIBIT C Item J-9 ... a � o � x y' ..y. - j ... n.. l J .. '�.^4...IS•..rywyr,.giro Ar 1 ��_� l� �t'1't�ad 1 . t fs+r+. 1.� 1 }' ° •..41 ....r -ye -�1� '�� �,f _^ - 1: ♦ i�� �. y,. X11.1., �,, . f # a `d iia 1 ice- '- .: V'%-,s,Ls 1�,. '^ e 'PYA w ITT, myy; ��.�t'+s°tr F � ,./ `fie..,.;S i �,s1'�•L-..., �' � !•, ei, e T '�,! .�, . �!►•� +ria°` �-e�"��6'• •` '�l �.;+ i, tt 'r• , , _. 4,"VP lli ..r: +,. .:- y� r` ..� . ,. � - .. .�1. ani.'. ... .x. v+•. ...--r.-�. a v'4"'jf4C�LPWL'iYC'�wawwe.i�frarr.+�_-"'`uiY111���""-• � t Y�• ' � !331 � Y �h.. �y� '^»—C . GAGGLES Mahi Fingers Crisp Mahi-Mahi Fingers served with Waffle Fries&Chipotle Ranch Dipping Sauce. Half Pound Pretzel Cheese Bites • With Dark Ale Mustard Aioli&Sea Salt Asian Beef Short Rib Bites With Sweet Thai Chili Glaze&Wasabi Cream, All Sandwiches made Exclusively with apt All-Natural Metro Deli Meats, Grilled Little Piggy Sandwich • Grilled Ham,Oven-Roasted Pork&Crisp Bacon served on a Buttered Roll topped with Habanero Cheese and Roasted Garlic Aioll served with Fries. ir Turkey Cranberry Baguette Warm Artisan Baguette stuffed with Oven-Roasted Turkey&slathered with Cranberry Aioli topped with lettuce,Tomato&served with a side ofTurkey Gravy. The Croissant Club Warm Croissant Bun filled with Oven-Roasted Turkey, All-Natural Honey Ham,Apple-Wood Smoked Bacon,lettuce 3 Sliced Tomato,Red Onion&our Oil-Vinegar Blend. Italian OETRO Artisan Baguette filled with All-Natural Pepperoni,Mortadella, EL1.11Genoa Salami,Un-Cured Pastrami,Pepperonccini,Sliced Tomato, Red Onion,Provolone Cheese&our 0111-Vinegar Blend.57 i Avocado Veggie Sandwich <. Cracked Pepper Sun stuffed with Roasted Peppers,Zucchini,Baby Spinach &Avocado topped with Horse-Radish Chive Cheese&lathered with Herb Aioli. • �, THE GODFATHA' Juicy Bacon wrapped Meatloaf topped with a Cheesy,Gooey Mac n'Cheese served on Parmesan Grilled Foccada with Sliced Tomato&Caramelized Onion. The Pastrami Torta = Soft Telera Roll topped with All-Natural Un-cured Pastrami, ; Swiss Cheese&Dark Ale Mustard Atoli. ` The Spicy Hammy -' Grilled Sweet All-Natural Honey Ham served in a Multi-Grain Baguette a-t= with Dark Ale Mustard,Herb Mayo&Habanero Cheese. y `- Triple Berry Cobbler Tart Fresh seasonal Berries&Apples stuffed into a Crisp Tart Shell ,. then topped with Streusel Crumbles&finished with Rich Vanilla Bean Ice Cream. Apple Tarts Milk Shake Premium Rich Vanilla Ice Cream,Crisp Fart Dough,Spicy Cinnamon Apples, Caramel drizzle&finished with Fresh Whipped Cream. . Sweet Waffle Sandwich. Fresh Sweet Waffle stuffed with Chocolate'lce Cream,Candied Bacon &Caramelized Bananas.Sweet"Dough-Nuts' Served with Salted Caramel Ice Cream,Whipped Cream &topped with Candied Bourbon Bacon. EXHIBIT Ems. Item J-11 RESOLUTION NO. 14-31 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CALIFORNIA,APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2014-00678,A REQUEST TO MODIFY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2010-00188M TO MODIFY THE FLOOR PLAN AND HOURS OF OPERATION FOR A 4,368 SQUARE FOOT FULL-SERVICE RESTAURANT AND BAR INCLUDING A 377 SQUARE FOOT OUTDOOR PATIO, NORTH OF THE SR-210 FREEWAY AND SOUTH OF LEMON AVENUE WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 6321 HAVEN AVENUE;AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF—APN: 0201-272-06. A. Recitals. 1. Mr. Mike Towles, owner of Gaggles, Incorporated,filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit DRC2014-00678, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 13th day of August 2014, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded the public hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. • B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on August 13, 2014, 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 6321 Haven Avenue with a street frontage of approximately 975 feet and lot depth of approximately 615 feet and which is presently improved with an existing shopping center consisting of pad buildings, inline tenant buildings, parking areas, and landscaping; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is an existing single-family subdivision within the Low Residential zoning district;the property to the south consists of the SR-210 Freeway; the property to the east is an existing condominium complex within the Medium High Residential zoning district; and the property to the west is an existing shopping center within the Neighborhood Commercial District; and • C. The subject site has a General Plan land use designation of Neighborhood Commercial. The proposed use is in accordance with General Plan Policy that encourages commercial centers to provide a broad range of retail and service needs for the community. With Item J-12 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-31 ORC2014-00678-GAGGLES TAPROOM AND CHOW • August 13, 2014 Page 2 the modifications of the floor plan and the hours of operation of the restaurant, including the applicable conditions,the restaurant can expand its services and attract a wider range of residents to the shopping center; and d. The proposed use will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare,or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity as conditions have been imposed to ensure the proper service of alcohol to patrons, and the building complies with all applicable Fire and Building Codes; and e. The proposed use complies with each applicable provision of the Development Code as the use occupies an existing building that is in conformance with the Development Code as it relates to parking, setbacks, height, etc., and sufficient conditions have been imposed to ensure that the use will comply with the Performance Standards set forth in Section 17.66.050 of the Development Code and will not create adverse impacts upon the adjacent uses. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the Development Code,and the purposes of the district in which the site is located as it is a commercial use that provides choices and competition for merchants and residences. b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity since the use is compatible with the surrounding land uses. C. The proposed use complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code as it requires a Conditional Use Permit to serve distilled spirits for on-site consumption with a meal and this application satisfies that requirement. 4. The Planning Department staff has determined that the project is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines. The project qualifies under the Class 1 exemption under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 - Existing Facilities, because the project is only for the modification of the hours of operation and interior floor plan for an existing restaurant. In addition, there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Planning Commission has reviewed the Planning Department's determination of exemption,and based on its own independent judgment, concurs in the staffs determination of exemption. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions and the Security Plan attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is hereby granted for Conditional Use Permit DRC2014-00678, the modification of Conditional Use Permit DRC201 b-001 88M,including modifications to the hours of operation and floor plan for an existing Item 1-13 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-31 DRC2014-00678-GAGGLES TAPROOM AND CHOW August 13, 2014 Page 3 • 4,368 square foot full service restaurant and bar including a 377 square q 9 q foot outdoor patio located north of the SR-210 Freeway and south of Lemon Avenue within the Neighborhood Commercial District,located at 6321 Haven Avenue-APN: 0201-272-06. 2) The days and hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m., seven days a week, with the business generally operating Sunday through Thursday 11:00 a.m.to 12:00 midnight and Friday and Saturday from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. 3) The sale and consumption of alcohol shall cease no less than thirty (30) minutes before the closing times as indicated in Condition#2. 4) 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. 5) No modification to the floor plan or intensification of the use shall be permitted without prior review and approval by the Planning Manager. Alcohol Service • 6) The applicant must use an identity card scanner(ID Scanner)anytime the premises is selling alcoholic beverages and has entertainment as defined by Section 5.12 of the Municipal Code. (Definition of ID Scanner: An ID Scanner automates and documents the age of verification process by scanning the ID through a card reader). The ID Scanner should record and timestamp the name, identification number, and date of birth on the identity card provided by patrons. This information should be recorded and maintained for a minimum of thirty (30) days. The business will provide the ID Scanner records to law enforcement upon request. 7) If persons under 21 years of age are allowed on the premises after midnight, the licensee(s) must utilize separate types of glassware to distinguish alcoholic drinks from non-alcoholic drinks. Additionally, persons over 21 years of age shall have a unique mark or symbol applied to the backside their hand that readily identifies them as a person who can be served an alcoholic drink. 8) Patrons who appear obviously intoxicated shall not be served any alcoholic beverages. 9) There shall be no promotions encouraging intoxication or drinking contests or advertisements indicating "Buy one drink, get one free." "Two for the price of one," or "All you can drink for..." or similar language. • 10) There shall be no "stacking" of drinks, i.e., more than one drink at a time, to a single patron. Item J-14 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-31 DRC2014-00678—GAGGLES TAPROOM AND CHOW August 13, 2014 Page 4 11) Except for wine bottles, oversized containers or pitchers containing in excess of 25 ounces of an alcoholic drink shall not be sold to a single patron for their sole consumption. 12) The sale of alcoholic beverages for consumption off the premises is strictly prohibited. 13) Employees and contract security personnel shall not consume any alcoholic beverages during the work shift. 14) A file containing the names and dates of employment of every person serving alcoholic beverages for consumption by patrons on the licensed premises, and every manager,shall be kept on the premises. The file shall also include a copy of each person's certificate of completion of the Department of Alcohol Beverage Control L.E. A. D. course (Licensee Education on Alcohol and Drugs) or equivalent. Upon request, said file shall be made available for review to representatives of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Police Department. New employees will have 90 days from date of employment to obtain L.E.A.D. certification or equivalent. 15) There shall be a Designated Driver Program wherein there is an incentive to the person not drinking alcoholic beverages, who is in a group of three or more, to be the designated driver for that group of patrons. 16) There shall be a taxi-ride program where the establishment will offer to call a taxi for patrons when it seems appropriate. Phone numbers of local taxi companies shall be posted for viewing by patrons. Security issues 17) Except in case of emergency, the licensee shall not permit its patrons to enter or exit the licensed premises through any entrance/exit other than the primary entrance/exit, excluding entrances/exits from patio areas. Steps shall be taken by the licensee to discourage unauthorized exiting. 18) Any patron who (1) fights or challenges another person to fight, (2) maliciously and willfully disturbs another person by loud or unreasoned noise, or(3)uses offensive words which are inherently likely to provoke an immediate violent reaction shall be removed from the premises. 19) An incident log shall be maintained at the licensed premises on a continual basis with at least one year of entries and be readily available for inspection by a police officer. The log is for recording any physical altercations, injuries, and objectionable conditions that constitute a nuisance occurring in, on, or at the licensed premises, including the immediately adjacent area that is owned, leased, or rented by the action taken. "objectionable conditions that constitute a nuisance" means disturbance of the peace, public drunkenness, drinking in Item J-15 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-31 DRC2014-00678—GAGGLES TAPROOM AND CHOW August 13, 2014 Page 5 • public, harassment of passersby, gambling, prostitution, loitering, public urination, lewd conduct,drug trafficking,or excessive loud noise. 20) The owner or manager of the licensed premises shall maintain on the premises a written security policy and procedures manual addressing at a minimum the following items: Handling obviously intoxicated person;establishing a reasonable ratio of employees to patrons based upon activity level in order to monitor beverage sales and patron behavior; handling patrons involved in fighting or arguing; handling loitering about the building and in the immediate adjacent area that is owned, leased, rented or used under agreement by the Licensee(s); verifying age/checking identification of patrons; warning patrons of reaching their drinking limit/potential intoxication and refusing to serve; calling the police regarding observed or reported criminal activity. 21) Contract security services shall be familiar with establishment's written security policy and procedures by reviewing them and signing they have read and understood the policy. The signed acknowledgement shall be kept in file relating the security manual. 22) Prior to utilizing a contract security guard company,the establishment shall verify the security company has a current City of Rancho Cucamonga Business License. • 23) The applicant shall maintain a closed circuit television system capable of readily identifying facial features and stature of all patrons entering the establishment during hours of type operation. Cameras are to be recorded and a library of events shall be kept and available for a minimum of 30 days for inspection by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Police Department. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary Item J-16 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-31 DRC2014-00678—GAGGLES TAPROOM AND CHOW August 13, 2014 Page 6 I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed,and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of August 2014, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: Item 1-17 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS PROJECT #: DRC2014-00678 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICANT: GAGGLES TAPROOM AND CHOW LOCATION: 6321 HAVEN AVENUE-APN: 0201-272-06 ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: ®A. General Requirements Como letion Date 1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense.any action brought against the City, its agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition. 2. The applicant shall be required to pay any applicable Fish and Game fees as shown below. The project planner will confirm which fees apply to this project. All checks are to be made payable to the Clerk of the Board Supervisors and submitted to the Planning Commission Secretary prior to the Planning Commission or Planning Manager hearing. a) Notice of Exemption -$50 X • 1 Item J-18 HE L SIGN-IN SHEET PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING RANCHO C,,UCAMONGA AUGUST 13, 2014 NAME COMPANY ADDRESS/EMAIL M4VAIIr n/` U WORKSHOP July 25,_, 20.14 .. To: Planning Department, City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. BOX 807 Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91729 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Re: DCR #2013-0087 JUL 2.9 2014 2013-01083 SUBTT 18912 RECENM - PLANNING File No. : Tract 18912; proposed Development of 45/46 Single family Homes' by Manning Homes & Watermi.11 Homes Location: between Ramona Ave. and Archibald Ave, north of bike trail Gentlepeople: I am not able to attend your Public Hearing set for August 13, 2014 regarding the above captioned matter. My concerns are expressed in this writing . The above captioned proposed development will substantially interfere with the use and enjoyment of my property located at 9801 Yale Dr. , adjacent to the proposed site (P. S. ) . 1 . ) The Low. Medium (LM) density zone that currently exists over the middle and eastern portion of the P. S . should be extended westward, over the rest of the site and it is requested that the Medium Residential zoning designation be changed to Low Medium Residential (LM) . This change would reduce congestion, noise, pollution, and traffic. The lower zone would be consistent with the neighboring (LM) density zones that will lead in and out of the P. S . . The area of the P. S. that is currently designated (M) abuts Archibald Ave. , but there will be no ingress or egress onto busy Archibald from this or any area of the P. S. and thus no need for the Medium Residential designation . I object to changing any zoning, designation from LM to M. 2 . ) Construction work should be limited to reasonable times; after 8 am and before 5 pm, and not on weekends or holidays . 77- I-;.- 3. ) Construction equipment and vehicles should be fitted .... ... . .. ..................... ........... with-- smog and--no i s-e---reFdu-cti6ft--­d­eVi-C(�sr 4 . ) Parking for employee and construction vehicles should be restricted and away from neighboring homes. 5 . ) A common area should be developed on the P. S . so that pre existing small common areas and parks outside the P. S. are not crowded with the residents of the P. S. (example: I pay homeowner' s fees for the upkeep of the small park across the street from my property and it was not intended to be used by a multitude of non H. O.A. members . ) Please mention and discuss my concerns at your upcoming meeting on August 13th, and before City Council for final action. Thank you for your time and attention. Ve.ry truly your, Ai-Lun "Ellene" Tseng 9801 Yale dr. Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91701 1 PROOF OF SERVICE _..._ ----- --- -----At- t e- time--.of- the -service-I--wa-s at least--18- pears --of---age-an-d- 2 -of--agerarid-2 not a party to this legal action. 3 2 . My residence or business address is : P.O. Box 9615 Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91.701 4 3. I mailed a copy of a letter dated 7/25/2014 to Planning 5 Department, City of Rancho Cucamonga re: SUBTT 18912 from Ellene Tseng as follows : 6 a . [X] Mail . I am a resident or employed in the county where 7 the mail occurred 8 (1) I enclosed a copy in an envelope AND 9 (a) [x] deposited the sealed envelope with the United 10 States Postal Service with the postage fully prepaid 11 (b) [ ] placed the envelope for collection and mailing 12 on the date and at the place shown in items below following our 13 ordinary business practices . I am readily familiar with this 14 business' s practice for collecting and processing correspondence 15 for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is place for 16 collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course 17 of business with the United States Postal Service in a sealed 18 envelope with postage fully prepaid. 19 (2) The envelope was addressed and mailed as follows : 20 (a) Name of person served: Planning Department, City 21 of Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 22 (b) Address on envelope: P.O. BOX 807 Rancho Cucamonga, 23 Ca. 91729 24 (c) Date of mailing: July 28, 2014 25 (d) Place of mailing: Rancho Cucamonga, Ca . 26 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state 27 of California that the foregoing is true d correct 28 Date: MANNING CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HOMES AUG 111014 Tract 18912 RECEIVED - PLANNING 45 Single Fancily Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga,Ca. Letter of Sggport (Name) (Address) (Cfwstate) I have reviewed the most current siteplan(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single family Homes with a cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton Pl)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. signature) (Date) ..._ ._ .... _.. -Z- MANNING CITY 0)'RANCHO HOMES CUCAWWA AUG f 110% Tract 18912 RECEIVED - pLMNIN 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of SunDort (Name) 703-y ye Wo u•e P/.z c L, ( ) #kt,%.r,A. C✓Gnc..:,a` GA '7/70 4 (City/State) I have reviewed the most c mreut siteplan(Traci 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. (Signature) (Date) 6M A N N 1 N G CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HOMES. AUS 12 2014 Tract 1$911 RECEIVED - PLANNING 45 Single Family Re916neee 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga,Ca Leiter of Suooart 9' (N ) 7011. � (Addresy (Ci 0tate) I have fevlewed the most curtefit siteplan (rr9A 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Hrnnes with a cul-de-w design(with no-cotwection to Nowtou pl.)proposed by Manning Hoibes and.I am in supportof the development as designed. (Sim (Date) MANNING CITY OF RANCHO CUCV1IONQA HOMES AUG 111014 Tract 18912 RECENED - PLANNING 4S Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Fetter of Somnort J03 Eeu (Nam) 71L16 7 r. k)A 0 (Address) A L-r.4 (city/ tate) I have reviewed the most current siteplan (Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-de-sac design (with no connection to Newton Pl.)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. ra (Date) CW OFRANCHO CUCA� MANNING pNa HOMES AUG 12 2014 , RECEIVED - PANNING Tract 18912 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga,Ca. Letter of Snuuort ljvj AND v (Address) vf� (Caty/State) I have reviewed the most cm=siteplan (Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Domes with a cul-de-sac design (with no connection to Newton Pl.)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. (bate) ................ MANNING CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HOMES AUG 12 2014 Tract 18912 RXENED - PLANNING 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of Sumort Lr (Namq) 7 [Jim (Address) 44'4t&q. (City/State) I bave reviewed the most =wt simplan(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single,Family Homes with a cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. N&C�W* -— .�'� (Signature) (Date) MANNING CRY OF RANCHO CUCAMO HOMES NGA AUG 12 2014 Tract 18912 RECENED - PLANNING 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of Sunnort (Nam) 70300y4� O (City/State) I have reviewed the most current sitepim(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support ofthe development as designed. (S'gnatiae (Date) MANNING JUN.-I 22014 HOMES CITY OP RANCHO CUOUMO ► AUG 12 20% Tract 18912 Proj"--- Ac&No.: 45 Single Family Residences P.Ox .: — RKEKD - PLANNING 7074 Ramona Avenue Fo��pr.: Appr.: Rancho CucamonM Ca. JCM Appr.: Letter of Sump oe &rwd4 (Name) qo%, (Address) q1 7ol (City/State) I have reviewed the most current siteplan Meet 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cal-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support oftbe development as designed. c ) (Date) AIIANNINO HOMES CITY OF RANCHO CUC ANONQi4 AUG 12 2014 Trset 18912 43 Single Family Residences RECEIVED . PL4NNI 7074.R4mong AvepuO Rancho Cucamonga, Co. Lefter of b0gort 4B-L:�-4 f7--- -AVV Q2 MIZE Z- (Mani) (Addrm) (City./State) Y have reviewed the most curse piteplatt(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Horttes with a cul-do-sac design.(with no connectiQa to Newton fl.)proposed by Mming Homes attcl j am in support of the development as designed (5igi�attue) (Date) MANNING CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HOMES AUG 12 2014 Tract 10912 RECEIVED - PLANNING 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of Snuuort (Na=) (Address) (City/state) I have reviewed the most current siteplan(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a c aWeo-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed, Co (Signature) ate) _ ........ . ... - - -R�INCNQ-CtJCAIIfOiV�q� .:_--- MANNING HOMES AUG 12 1014 RECENED - PLANNING Tract 18912 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of Support (Name) PA- (Address) (City/State) I have reviewed the most c=mt siteplan(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cal-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. L , (Signature) (Date) MANNING CITY OFRANCHO CUCAMONGq HOMES AUG ' z 29% Tract 18912 RECEIVED - PLANNING 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of Suunort (Name) (Address) (City/State) I have reviewed the most cwrent siteplan(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Humes and I an in support of the development as designed. k.n- Z,—,a ( _. . _ MANNING -CITYDFRANCHO CUCAMONGA --- t1NA� � HONES AUS 12 2014 S RECEIVED - PLANNING Tract 18912 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga,Ca. Leer of S. N &-0 qA0 (Name) ya, O pC#State) I have reviewed the most current siteplan(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with.a cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton Pl.)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. 6131-W (Sign (Date) MANNING HOMES AUG 12 2014 RECEIVED - PLANNING Tract 18912 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga,Ca. Letter of SM22ort :Tw Dint ?Axrt Nwn (Nam) 1�q qq r� (Address) S. (City/State) I have reviewed the most curtest siteplan(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes With a cal-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. 1 . _t ($igna 'e) (Date) MANNING AUG 111014 ' HOMES RECEIVED - &MNI NG Tract 18912 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter d Sumort �� PQ (Nam) t 7038 Nw+om Pj O -Raoc,6 Cur-ain im !R a CA (city/State I have reviewed the most current siteplan ('Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-de-sac design(with Ao connection to Newton Pl.)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. (Signature (Dace) _CITY OF RANCHO C MANNING AUG 12 2014 HOMES RECEIVED - PLANNING Tract 18912 45 Single Family Resfdences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga,Ca. ILIM of SM-1DOlCt V (Address) ' A-4a- Lyne., CA �17a (CwState) I bave revieweTtbe most c=02 siteplam(TnIO 18912)consisting of 45 Single Family Homes ' with a cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Mmming Homes and I am in support ofdw developer as deigned. J. s•a9. (S e) (Dee) .... CITY 0RA MANNING HOMES AUG 111014 RECENED • PANI NG Tract 1$012. 45 Single.FaMily Residences 707.4 Rmnena Avenue Rancho C,icsanOP, Cn, Letter of S its (NAM) (Address) Pat (City/state) I have teviewed the most.current siteplan (Tract 19912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a Cul-de sae design (with no connection to Newton Pl.) proposed by Manning Homdes and I am iAsupport of the development as 4e4igned. (SIgnature) (Date) ---- �tTYOF�ARCH�-�ICAM�II�A MANNING AUS 12 2014 HOMES RECEIVED - PUNNING Tract 18912 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga,Ca. Letter of Sunoort (Nam) rr� � q qet� yf' r �Ci9�t/C.fJ�[7 �GCAiYD�tl6a/F 04 G/17a (As) (City/State) _ I have,reviewed the most cwent siteplan(Tract j 8912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a,cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am is support of the development as designed, i ' (Date) _r+- y ,r - 1 i t 1 - \1 '1 _ r t 1 y v. • J li4-t i \r�i `F 1y -ftl t r ; r S + ~� 4 :t 1�s h r+F . !fir i.f i t X .•* J ` r f.,r I.- - ,r J•. !ffes)_i. _ I,... .T_. -_ i J. i !t' i. ar. I' ,.2, '+La •` r; 11' a:- t `- `^`,t^YF'�•�. / ,z-},„ 1 t1 n :•1... ?.lr_:"-�1 ?it' Ir''i'� "1., t' f °i t --t..:-4 }-.:;i•t r-• fir' s, •1` y. t''>,•'n i r ,`-;•4i�.1'A :J 1 i.Y„ _ r 'ciJ.f, J_x ti tiJ'.. ra,a4a1'S?i' r :1- t 1 'ir♦�• ';r.R'?. .at; r* C.y -.,�. f' 1.�.t+ t_ A .'•r:, f :e. 7.3 'i:� 'r•(- Y!`:',S�l�_; J :1r_' ., - :.! ''..ni 11 �. -^t- t'j r'r.1 ...an r •Jw'• i(:•t',L� -s't• r .kar - ~} 't:F_ ! ,J,4 t-^'.. y K,. -J, }.:.?• . tc' - :b :.T , !'..y;•.:.t: r \13._ t: .r: �J:: y r -Y ''F.2. .J•.: :..f.S! r r+,. ♦y t>-4 t i.' -*t: •N..I, •il:+. =.>.., "F YYt,�r M•f"y...,_ :rs yj•!.i�-• ',.'I;yio;.n •.(..t.4_., .fi T!/.' ,.• yr.j. r 4 1 :aG, •:r. t :2'. .�.. :-:- 7N`_.hrni.; ♦ .,�'. :risco- :.l-M� v` /.:..� �f� -rt,{+'S. ?r ,t'�-•'''` . i r-_y -tr4; :�- .d' it r .-. .a _.I, �' r -.tY '.c' it:. f S t=`,.;. ,t_. •tai.:: ,.. �+, x. •a+ �':cC�•4' `ty ♦ ..,. _..,,r(: �,.a,t 'x_, '! _ ?':� - 't9 'i !. t.•c,�".1'.a-r t.r=�t�`•�'i�(f. 7=��-._ ±t.r.lY'_.t.. _ :-�_. ,":'.>Yf .. •�..:....,7-'4 _J':S. i/}f; 2 ti' -+.•t: t f... '.a:.y 1 :-?•'•s':.�: .'r3Y:!Yil��l r,I F..�hrl�.. -r✓is:�;t�--l..,rt•t::. i >-.ti. ,,.i;. -�.. h-1.,. ft., �.. 6 e,,'a:r. r. �i .r�'� !K::. .�!' r•y,-ti t.a'.'• y ' lr.. ,,,,. r:•^1:E ik`. a»y'�= tj;r.�--:`:r.r• i. i a..r.: (. e r• - r �:,�]t'� - �. ..,. i:l•l�r':3;•e'i:=::, "'. `_s. .J�y,. en-q '.:'�,_ t:i •t. i :5..'{'[.- i. :-4, iN.:k' >..n t.. ��.. .�} •.T•, R-L i�- _ y, 1_` i+! a ,. ? •j .i +i'- /.• l .r.�-::, t• 1 , tt J'f rl.: ,r. Z •' =a..[i•; .T f,:,.:'i'"'ar�r -:t••'=.•::.u��. 1r: 1, r .i:.�tiw+`• .'f•-• -t,�• +a.yti�-,1-.. ,. •..=: - •�f,�� .,� .�-r ,1;i' .:i:, ']F-!d,- fi t't'l r+.r+ .S., -R ] :-h.N: _.1:� .ti.r r•:J', _ 'ev :.'r ,Yyd..v.. r f, ;Y;'L••�r`i=-i,:- •7r r.^i i t. . :ti ti ..+:+".,: .. [ -.,7�:r .yrr�•4,r.�a,;.:yr' 73':.!•.":,r_.+-• .'ny..r, \ A,:",i ' yY,+ti:.•-.`'_S ->,".fia.. _..►�C -•�. `.f:.- ,i'.�.-a-,C _•t, t\, J•Y•-.-�ti F 2 ; JY ✓'�'I` 4:a`.♦{,fY::,i'.° i�:titii�5,r r, .,4- -.,w1 t.�-- *I<.i¢:F,: :J.• r t i TJJ,. x ar' F,. !�t�l� t. r x, I, r , x. il�T `�= ,` :.,�Y ; . � ~•a�.�L.• 1' ..j`d r•.. ..It`-"!;,j �V.. , .;1r�aC 4� - .,. 1.I-o L, \ :., nk•_I.iy 1?:,. J` r 7r-R&.�a�:rR._ .i�. ,>� �'1. ?'%S'''c��:}' •.N: ;..r ' `id:.21: •!,r J!. - i 1 i Tw, i)�r.). .w fr., ,Ip•n- �, y. -•1' i t ^a ;r.. ;:� :y::bs; ;I: �kr [!`. .[ -er�+�r..t�f`rr-+ .r ;v' wi �. �a Y1�•i?' t- t :, .;1' .d..=4; .moi- t �' Ji tM.,';aq- C I,. h.,=1�''� n.:1. M;.7-:- 1` i'?-.tl' ;•�,' .;.r- h.�r•'.f a �i .,' .r ;r t«►J j7r [. ...}•.rr: .`... .:�}`c•...-� `, :�. ,i�F , z 3 i •,r ;r•<S,i <_ ,� 1 y.:• a...% :t^ :1;,Jl ('�5•r.._.,,... tit t: �!'Lii'ra'i,: a�,y�• .J . ^S_ 1. .'?, S. •.,'�F..• '.,t :.[:.;.f.6.r r O•:r: ;. 1. ;tl 1 c" } ,Rv'•-K -1=,. t� =l ry_'�'` n t 10-[ 1 c'C -1=i`. a. .r),. �1•i1,}. _,�_-(: •. 1, t �?!SJ;t , r �•t. •-1� -•}-S. tirTti .,.ft ,t .. ,,C' i �A'.i•" ftF .—A s - C., .:e:. ''A•,. �.. '.,•-• � �'- },- a.J.a�l•Li��rar- -T I�fi` :iM. «A .i t- :.;� .t ,.�T-`.,t�:�.::Pi^�:%,;$4 .r. -a5. -l'jt�'-'ir• a.='t't'., •y,,, is �5�� �. ,'C',i'• .ar, / .t. 1' J,.•-t , .�„T,_i"'•"Jr.Ji !.7a....�rV- i. r. 1 N`;_ .r• f}'. ts:a, .14t.,j!' .,.3 J• e4`•a... e• q... i1'":�'. trc.`L,'r•i:.. •(.`. 1 -T.'�„ _:�t�.:J ii!�l,t,.. .Y.�1i.Gi, L•dr•_a-f�: .F`�„•��.j::,.i+ •r ,iA `•l I. Fl tt •:� '�'��: .: 7i. :i►-J, .Y.Y.,-.:-, �C'*:\. --_y,:l.�ri`7...i c•: J t: ?.t+:.�.. - '+•• ,t..” h:.�' '?,��• rL Jt �./.•ir-'+.! _ -;C •L_ it w..ti. .1�-• al;:i ..fY l .a,r�t�-,7,. ?� .,' -/ - �.:-, 7r\ _ >; .5,.� 4 ,Y�' .� '�1• SYI .L ;: ! _ �•�t' '•'.'f. ! .,J.f, 10,t :Ct!':'r. fr,. '�: + i _ t? �1• jr :J Z�..t•. •tn ��'' ,t; i�'1;r.+`t:%rt )1 �!• .ti: I r S:,:hl,;y'_.� :4•, r,:t:': ..r n �'• ]iCC� •, -.i'1 + ..=r! i�,,.;- 1_�-_ ('''. .f f;'.:' .,1 �'L:r , I -G V. s�." , i. �j +.:e +`��9 r tiy'.../,�V ':,.�'. ..+�.�.1•t:i•:r,.a+.�::.io;gw;. .,:7' S t _ •'ri. .. J•:t ♦ r :�'�•,.•,: , �'-� / i't: ;... J •R• Y i:- Ih w t3, .:r_ ra :GT.t�E.,.r..t,},tf V, `^_1I.T, +:4• •(J 3 •,�,,r:•i- �a. i;�,;_n.�•,.. 1 +�-i n. �..• t Z t.✓rrr ;t '�' i. �:s �! ..a..r<:1?: e4� a.. .t, r �,,. `•fir ,.\ Jr� � >J.�•_-v n .! ��'c r '. 4� ''��t ,{ay' {t 5tfresy a,"`f . •. .;--'f"��,-+ S: :.J:'ya- r - �. 'ri: r;i':r .,-,. +`�! ;fir: :`t'., a._-,�;:•;:t,• .. h' '/ rr .:t..,r.., v' '.:r,r,t: •t �,i•orftCt,.., i,•4.r"C::4`•:tZ.J' �'Si .d •i••:^.r+ ,j,(:a.,1: •rl:.y Ct`t '_� .fir'-c•..4 L.r,4�: - ,^'t-.`. 1': + .S. .r '1+' ,�•. )y� ' r..rr r. '1. r-,'J. - xt.-„,,,t -'R',-�.. C•. /! T_.,.C� .H t. t •p.r,...n ! `: :"7, �.,, ,J:=ti;. ..., :,.� i t Y -.1. ,,.._,.,-•a„ --~'i�,. �, -1. ri,i ::1.I . - K�::':l..dN”. '�-• :•,i'taai",-t fX?' is yn ;:,• .�,^ii X 1 �'• v. '`3r!�,.a *tS, `t : , ..i •�''�:;.:r;.' '.v-' -a C-' » •r„ .r:f.t'• rj_< •�� .tY.. !:.: !ti.a;��.: .-:7• -.,'j.A �\^t,-::t'." lC:,,74.t,-.��•r..c .; ti xt:.... -:. •��'.,:i ir' i;k' , ..l`'�..;;L,:_,ii".,r ,"r;"it+.a � .�'' t..•,,s_7 -•'e`-•'Cs.V., 'l':;5•- :'r w...C, �,.. .t-♦:,: _ ...- •.•v - .. l: -,Jc,: .tT r. --:j.. 4:,.r. �••;;,.`ir -a,fi`.•:1.t;;':f°t''S;'r..:::'`'-a. i• ,y. L+ lat": v),.,1.. r v` AT p-l- ,,. , ,','Y• J a. L .j ..1,.J c•?f �,.._ :a"-S, LC C,,c Ywi� a i::�' S art L. Yr e;,_•'.;: ;�: n J c Jrr_ :/t _`�,:?Jtj�.�. C.._!t '�.y,.Gi. S.�J1-.J;.-,�++' ,•a�►�'t�L.r`�• �F.. .. -- .,g- .n.x:':..,,tT ti"?2[c 1,+.J•c-•,J.:.G:: ' V, , t r; "..".i 'Y �` m•1 eLq a (T ��r f.. r r:! -! C (. ' �:vwJ, ej �:'rr. . + :U.'7.i.. 'ti�`C,.t l: l .r.. ..,:i"• '�,+,,?:.'C• ' .j A.4,:,� +h,�r.,_,: o .a _;�.- l�"„' r }�� -t k C ,t. :t +-, �, t�S- :=�+t:;1 F:?!WS c �";s• .:i rty' .. +., ^: " .�}(c)A:: r..l 3 r� _ •.r•.�s• .j t� � .J� ,11 ;.f r �j Fl h`v. L,:r. ,.1 _ tsw- '+�.v w :n, rF f ti,..;. ..� _ -fir• r+- 1 •.a.--. •'t�:..•i,•'.,�'i(v-, �t'_i .k�5i.:t::: .,.;:j.l•• .. .. - 'v,. .!:9:'..6-1 t•;i't�i=iS:.�wC..tii :•' PL:.^_,;• :.,,at�r ::il�t wt�.•:,f7�. .�ih�. •�:Jf:•�t•.t,.e?:£'+ �"f`J ^Si. n.i'7':•iget.L _•�` :,(.: Vis, • `.+ '�:'fr:rv'vr. -sy - .i'�••..� '• t•, ..t f-Y�r+ •^r. �'.Y't t ,.1J-r ...,-S tv •:�i�.."�J¢'`^�:Y.G;. !;I:'LE. .i .:�t• :.•:.I;,i�T••. �',t'�!:k.;i' .w: ,•! .y t,�.r• `i''?- t,. - _ :�`j r'•w: a .r"- ...> ,7� -w -t, `a•+:•, ,•-•'.'C4�:1- J.t`-�.:• .e•- �c„- •.ia.•y�Sa.' •-�.,.y -,!�.k.• �,. cs .+d� :'.N„ r y?C�L1i+`. . : .,1 ,1 ' , j+ �1 !� r;•_ 'tc).a.v..` 't41. . a• t. A �i �?! a` 5: C V'::::.. , ..s: •,.,, l” !"t 1 ;l'r'♦-^�1•-+.y1; h.ie,:i^t- (! ..•,i.,.t• ;�'L.,y'L.. { ,:tl�-:;-.,.. f`t •sv... �._�.+A�;� r�',;,.t?��nrr"'.f 1 �n..'� : .r,. „-t •4 "�...1��,,11,,,. .�-rt L.t'.t,R.•�'.�i`�. �t. +rir •.'E.3 ..t. .,Y , }iy.: �� T. „�`ra.+'9�"y�<r'�:t:.%.:' _sL.-: r.1 �.'•..tom)..,.•t1.. '°- ..a..-. fw a47;'r 4 ' z. ;!J,.da.`,�' -� � ( .r ', 3-`r -�a. -:�, -r :i: a'• .yL'�'T?C.,: , d .r .+.' :;cr,rv_. �r: ..:.c7: n^- C, '!•+r Yty- - _:Y. ; 2b 1..�. �;"i s,•�t rt �.:t: .:1. :CL 4. -1. ..4_. : �r� ll.t.. �:'•.;flyer f- •f3'���j f.{';A• J 1,��7 '1,♦1.N,t•'.'•r\.f '`�e\ItT .,—.,W�••,r. •4y j, 4: -.�,.1 vR: Y ` 4'+<J thf- .s.L.li ! -i-i.4 `-:'rm'ly 1;:._ w•1 L ♦.i. �"R" 4�.+.`•'1 '�%S:, I -`4 .Iw•L, 1•'.f j.ti;„ I_. (' .«'2"d'r _A:'- T' w�:,,::-• .y Y` .:,! '.tt J ::•:-i•t'.r'''i:i: tw. - .+tit' .c:-'r n , ;:'•;c *-,-- I 'f •T� I. •✓Y 1. .'�•rr.. •rt,. ...i... ,.y.., e.`^ ,�"T .5r ;�•:,.r� ja< +"".i, ✓.;i�..,.3:-0'.,,'.7 x t.:,. -Y- !- ,t�•[�: 'IN Ki? :... -et a• \ V, . ` :^" �•, .�U' !vi':_.L'•.',er..t _'0.i _?hM-L'x• .+:►.• r•�-:�•1ti. .a� t +-r.� 1,.. ''� ,i 'i: = r;_:J Al ..- .{ W J...r.- _ ►-.`.... ,•;♦ f' .i: ,t 'rsat, 'r1+r.�?*_,-S�. ,c"• �',A:.,. , 'y t , . 7, -:j,L: ,,,f.r'e. • <t• "iT. _I.-' "*.f..•+��-, ,. 1fl,lr;.• - •i{ti� Fiti.±;'N+ 4 1 u•. ..�5.: E. jS+S: --i/ 'Y.t k i„, ''+'-:.Y-'. ,rt., f •.•1 >.t•r :..1:'.:.�. _'2�-1t"�i1:r .i7!404 err . .: p, - ,}t� ,1 :>fi u?L` '�. '-�'•, ° yy� e ” }�i�..,;. :%}Z t..:�{�-Y•-!. TC [J .`r,. +3f � �: -.t; Pr.:, „r.,� d k wS1 `r" )- r •.� i.�. 7i .s ?r -t ems, 1. /.. .:i,, . t '=>1 d :r..it- �. ,.e,•, a. _a. .. t' _a.r. 3'..3-J 7-`� ,:; •"::•-r?r s• ! rt 't^1;:.. + 7 :3: 41, L.��+ r^.f:. rr aly :?.,G i! .r.-f}�� 'f•• i,,h�tf,•tt �7 .+' .rl �,r,a+:.� .'( rte :_S.• :rl'ty�h'��:..7 i :f•: ,•,fr v.. ,Y- L' .i:.• t. , 1..•.:,•3..•::h ^,:� ,'1's�..: r -JY �.' Z�� ci�~�� J A -.x.-r tf-'r.i` ,k r ,�T.,_ -n,.+( •,. r .r`:L ".11a;'- ..t/'r i r4 •.�. t' r z t 7. ` :1.+IJI • r _^ .:,r> ,2!" -� ".rw..-�ls,Jy, V-st�j4l. - .;:`yi'r+".•}=,'1: 1� .) i• a;�` ""r.Z a1 :S' .t:- �r:':;�(:."G "Ln+. \ ,,,rr _ .J� ,i'r;#,, �" i f < �„_-^ .r/y- r- ;Ir` '..� :a..L ;q• 1 Ci r 'ia'ii`L_.' 1` ?w x',r. ��;. "s,� _Y, �.'•t _. .rt..t_K. +:-,:�., ;,Mt; 7 \+ a �'.a.Y{�t� • .� - ; �. >:.^{y �-�,, �Ld�t:rr. t 1 :+ _ �; J , .C!.:"t ,� R .` i•2J-L j..n_.(' t n.t,,.11 +^1_1"�kn ;i t�%'Lf"7A%.',,-.,., L!S�,y..t J� '�ll-r 5 .5:�'�Y �'7�. :r.•�•r{`f:•+,.)-.R>;t: ., .:t •.t __ -t,x S:t t =e; ... ' '- w =_.t'y}! }.�.tJr•�� - - r 1Y '+.:�,+:1 ••'�' `< J 1- ,'i_�� �t - y.. ^•..1~L.�u`Z-'Y� 1 -L:r .1`-.•t(•'tt•:•���'r::.�.. ,:,. _ ."tT .r. '',' +.i .-y� . 1 r .�', ',� J Tom. ♦ •).t.t) •[ ,,,,.�1r -•;1••.t,. 1 .a.�.•.� �1..• .1. h,! :J_ C ��.75._ y }' 1 i - f_l ,--,41�! _{ir 'RI C.,'I m1.Y1( _S.'. ,c'J!.�.S,I 1•t;F_tt1 ,JY.k�-s•>+':E,t:�Y.ii�h.�,�•� :,[^.ra �,.I-�Yat:7�r:•r T +�f. [ .�,'Ya�^•'+,:: I f'r, •. •r, S t t 7 a r. ryr 2.l i >t"-r - ;l a .11 1r }• -re 4 A -� - �,t. .+,:aJ_::'i'i..'cd.•'f.RY„'v"`..�__h. 'tq. r. !r �,•h y, • .,L.f��" r. , -w= .•••t^!si•'. ` \!+'f.j^�* -�1�t�•r.-tt.t: „''`;.!'-. Y:Sj .t,•-e *AT �,.,y.,t,r..,�,�_ � .z "= h��. tS .0 �• '! •Ti:.::._ - _t r,v.. •}lit•�:' :'�.:Z'-,•t,. 4`.i 4 ��pfr-...li .- �•:�%e'- w_`�lx' •f ♦r•1 _(F`t.� tJ-t� s t a :� Th--(:.•� , 1 ., i -1 `,f., `kl�i:_' �;..,,$'e.L •vY r:'�1:'_ti..�X:-'-• 'S•L, ::?.. ,rf 'i� t ''1 iL ,- i ' ., .Y v :`.' '`- ti,. t ,�,. t i• _5,_: Y:�f c r 3••:i��•1r�+'r s a Lq�r:y 'i .a �ti Nr ��e '1 t! �`i:°'?"."'; 4fa.,,tn+ y `, ,y. C .,._, L - 4 :l �"_sir Y s: .�'�yto 4h 't••. i.i.'r-', .?' -tr :`.aff'.• ::rk ic^.:'..-. �C_ +i`.;.,,tV _ n, ,} .T:- a y .� C.ib:•.�o p-:* �, — •;*1; •,-"fit. �. t .sYr•.. fh -i .L. r >.r-�t•.:,,;'_?.c. 1 ! t r. Y Y •'T-,,' ,.:,7,.- :f'c•4Y '" •J'i. J., lf..M �� y .� r!- - � � ,.t;•r,, t•..�1 t , , t r C +� 'kY'ii,,.L,�'-t•:�r'!e. _ t. t :T f -r + •�• :y.'r 'Iy t', i {.„4 rtt,-•,.�f 1r e ..n>.':h::'. .i=•',•`•ks -!-�`L tri } k �..j,f `;:1 r / ! J + '� 1.t 4: a tri. �4 r ; Ff t`jr,,�„it� r + �)-, ., � 1 fl, Er soya ti..�', F.. fy - i n tr}1w7 ate J -� .. J., .J r; ..,t:r�1^J• r �''•t:,,- 'Y t \.f�•L•.! 1, j ,. . ��s�-a,S .14 K ,J o{� x r.r, tib. J �f.]I t a1�'s:n,- ,Z'..r zrar.J'r`J..•(r;,3, r i'Yy{` YN1; ` < .fit /s.�k �St '/'.iLl '•}- ' _ _ n 1. ' S r + •r , f. t .,tj,,tr J.y, ! f Y ti��','>;;t .r.5 1F✓ r ��-r Jti3 1�.rt ,:=+•1..;:r.;t. x' r. - .` 1 y_J 1 . t' q•. `.�yl'�••` a 1../j` n,}• r f •-r+ v"f t<�I _ .ry "+ ` .2`C- +- t t. i - ) r1td': r y ,n1 .1!y -r K�1 '1.S� r'+..t- f .J'•'•r _� 1_ C. `''+ ♦ :,� f-f \rs..+� 't.,r 1 �.`3` _ r fSl ``Xyr,'t'r ���- } , �} Y,.1 a t� _`�J ` _ _ ,. 4+ ':k„`-i J'"�• �' fx -�ti t ,y4.. at..i:M/ tr ti. \ 'r1~ V. i•2 �: .'7•' [Ir rit- :,W - S i _` .`. 1.., + SJ t t to £''rt qC�:1. .-Frio `I '�'F,•_y1�.,. X4.. .a�,..<._ '(J _e�". t t (,1-1>,: 'i1C�•''l .......:S:rL.r .lr�r:+hl:rH1 'L\`�,r.7/j •y,? > 't,•,lr ,.i ,e 'T,t.( `.r 1 Jl`.. -', t ( r:i•,!� ..r, ! : -> .j AaL.<i:.Wiz+-'.�''fa t rSr +l1i,..JYf'L L' f '�,r i `r",�-sZ.� ::� j ^ 1.i {�- r T. lt'+ 'J 1 y�`r 'F *. 'mak,f'L'�"t _ �.+-�-`�� ,, :s ,fr y. •1. '• ! . �R J. ° , - I 0.. t tr .L .r 1o•J'fVit..-.rirr }•,,�',k� t t jY 1. .f- .a L J :.�.r v} t,.' rotiy c ,t4.+t. �,y „ r 4,• �� a� -� •c '1.�t E.`Y1 y,t Jk; *'f [ rr.' �'Y,�y'.�J�. t K•+.-yy�} ,`>,� •.c./t�Jl F".r7 •.,\•'..^j 1 � 3,:;Z - a- .,.. '1 t:. �• ! :+.C4,t+,'i{ 1 t F ,t(U f KI I :. .•.,a1,�,,s,'����E„z:•,�(7•'!a•i, �y4 tt J- +1�-..i:%T:�11• /.�tr,, t ��. I - -} t rZ ;! 1 , r \.! r J`,� R .,f 'kg.,¢ '. '���.'• YJ._irh;,?,' ..,+x 1'`•iJ "'•!.�: :a _ 1.S' t'.!] .f, t• , _.; Y �• ;.? 1�*lLat�•r ) x' {ti! ..c'-► �.t.7'.a rJ •�) L , _ t. 'tt yr' `T I-t f Y - J s T i• r G' �.i r7 J +, v i 1 r 1 , ftp'J' .� ,. �:� r �!t'f♦x::- .a' r •,- t 1. aF- . i A. > *%. *� ur :4^ t �.. c av '<il l J. � 4r... + t , ' 14�,E}ri'a•w . :� L�+i+�tl f �� a.f rte. A" r 11 i i,- r - < - L a _r.`,1 T. 1G.r• t itl Vt:)f\.. , •: 'i y' !- f �itf r a� t/- !t _ t J J7 r / ) r 0 <i. r Tkl�r��Lrt-T~ M 1+' t t �,,�1~ 'i i -'" - mfr m. I -t: i _ 1. r , r:_` r` l .�- t r oti.rf3'r:T�•-S't:r}yi'' t'�'.' r ?'7 .�.• k. .:�.'i s:. I 1, +' i it:.J f PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912 — MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 4 Planning Department 1) Approval is for the subdivision of a parcel of about 7.16 ac r s into 45 lots within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Resi ential Districts located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Av nue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail,abo 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road -APN: 1076-181-01. 2) Development of all lots shall be in accordan with the standards and requirements applicable to the Medium ) Residential District as described in the development standa s that are the subject of Development Code Amendment DRC 14-00626. 3) Prior to the issuance of per . s for grading and/or building construction, the applicant shall nsult with the City to determine the final technical and design det 's of the emergency vehicle access (EVA) driveway. 4) Approval of this request s II not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Cod , Etiwanda Specific Plan,State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform B 'ding Code, or any other City Ordinances. 5) Prior to the recorda on of the Final Map, the existing single-family residence and any ssociated improvements shall be demolished and removed from th project site. 6) Prior to record tion of the Final Map, all lots shall be rough graded to include buil ing pads and interim improvements (for example, drainage) deemed necessary by the City. 7) Prior to i suance of permits for grading and/or building construction, the ap icant shall consult with a qualified biologist to determine the best eans (such as trapping, barriers, relocation, etc.)for controlling the igration of animals onto neighboring properties while the site is bei g graded and homes are being constructed. The applicant shall th n submit a report indicating which method(s) will be used, and i plement them accordingly. 8) Approval of this application is contingent on the approval of Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887 and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. 9) All Conditions of Approval for Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, and Minor Exception DRC2014-00161 shall apply. Grading 1) 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 Official prior to issuance of the grading l>-T APleA I radid 5 4 COO. Cavo. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912 —MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 5 permit for any underground water quality management plan (WQMP) best management practices (BMPs). 2) An HCOC exists for the downstream receiving water. The downstream receiving water (Mill Creek, Prado Area) is experiencing significant degradation of its banks. The project shall implement a volume-based treatment control BMP (retention/detention facility)on each lot. The Storm Water Quality Management Plan and the grading plan must contain an appropriate volume based BMP prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 3) The site shall be rough graded to eliminate all cross-lot drainage, (except in approved facilities adjacent to private trails). All slopes and retaining walls necessary to accomplish this shall be installed prior to final map approval. 4) Flow lines steeper than 6 percent could be erosive. The applicant shall provide hard lines gutters and swales where concentrated flows exceed 3fps, and anywhere that flow lines exceed 10 percent. 5) The precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout(Information for Grading Plans and Permit". Engineering Services Department 1) Ramona Avenue frontage improvements are to be in accordance with City "Collector" standards as required and including: a) Provide curb, gutter, a.c. pavement, street trees, and sidewalk. Provide curb adjacent sidewalk north of La Vine Street and property line adjacent sidewalk south of La Vine Street. b) Provide traffic signing and striping as required. c) Install one LED streetlight that complies with Southern California Edison's lighting standards. d) Ramona Avenue shall be reconstructed and widened full width to match the existing improvements to the north and south, ending at the existing full width improvements south of the Pacific Electric Trail crossing. e) The developer shall install the Master Plan Storm Drain facilities on Ramona Avenue designed by the City Capital Improvement Section. Installation will end at the first manhole south of the Pacific Electric Trail. The developer shall be eligible for drainage Project No SUBTT18912 Completion Date 3. Roofing material shall be installed per th nufacturer's"high wind" instructions. 4. The home must be equi with automatic fire sprinklers in accordance with NFPA 13D. 5. Annexatio the parcel: Annexation of the parcel into the Community Facilities District #85- #88-1 is required prior to the issuance of grading or Building Permits. Grading 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The grading and drainage plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual grading and drainage plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 3. A 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 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. If human remains are discovered on-site before or during grading, 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 and California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. 7. 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. 8. 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 the Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 9. 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. 10. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage easements prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. 11. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage acceptance letter(s) from adjacent downstream property owner(s) or discharge flows in a natural condition (concentrated flows are not accepted) and shall provide the Building and Safety Official a drainage study showing the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. 7 Project No SUBTT18912 Completion Date 12. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain written permission from the adjacent property owners to construct walls on property lines or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed off-set from the property line. 13. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on-site construction where possible, and provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 14. The Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code. 15. All slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot off-set from the public right-of-way or adjacent private property. 16. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. 17. The final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100 feet beyond the project boundary. 18. 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. 19. The precise Grading and Drainage Plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout"Information for Grading Plans and Permit." 20. Grading Inspections: a. Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre-grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a pre-grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations, the Grading Permit may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector; b. The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Services Department at least 1 working day in advance to request the following inspections prior to continuing grading operations: i. The bottom of the over-excavation; ii. At the completion of Rough Grading, the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety Services Department 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. 21. 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. 8 Project No SUBTT18912 Completion Date 22. The Water Quality Management Plan shall include;a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. M. Water Quality Management Plan 1. A full size Site and Drainage Plan labeled as Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan shall be submitted for review with the Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. THE APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: N. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map. O. Street Improvements 1. All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 2. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. 3. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Curb& A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other Ramona Avenue X X X X X X Interior Streets X X X X X X 4. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety I_I 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. 9 Project No SUBTT18912 Completion Date 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 I I_ 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. 5. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. 6. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction legend stating: "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on Sheet_(typically Sheet 1)." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. Min. Grow Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spacing Size Qty. Ramona Avenue Pyrus betulaefolia Dancer Flowering 3' 20' 15 "Paradis" Pear 0.C. Gal Interior Streets SELECT APPROPRIATE TREE FROM THE APPROVED STREET TREE Provide Street LIST FOR RANCHO CUCAMONGA. LIST EACH STRET AS A SEPARATE Names LINE ITEM WITHIN THIS LEGEND. 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. Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. 10 Project No SUBTT18912 Completion Date P. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans pe: 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:: Archibald Avenue. 2. Public landscape areas are required to incorporate substantial areas( percent) of —/—/— mortared cobble or other acceptable non-irrigated surfaces 3. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and —/—/— Lighting Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 4. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by —/— the developer until accepted by the City. 5. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective —/—/— Beautification Master Plan Archibald Avenue Beautification Master Plan. Q. Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. —/—/- 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the —/—/— Cucamonga Valley Water District(CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. —/—/— Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. R. General Requirements and Approvals 1. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their —/—/— right of-way: SANBAG 2. 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. 3. 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 percent of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department when the first 11 Project No SUBTT18912 Completion Date Building Permit application is submitted to the Building and Safety Services Department. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. PLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE CONSTRUCTION RVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING C DITIONS: The project must comply in design and constructed in accordance with the 2010 Califor ' Building and Fire Codes, the RCFPD Ordinance FD50 and the RCFPD Standards. The RCFPD o ' ance, procedures&standards which are referenced in this document can be access on the web at www.c' ofrc.us. S. Single-Fa ily Tract Standard Conditions FSC-1 Public an Private Water Supply 1. The public wate upply and fire hydrants shall be design in accordance with RCFPD and CVWD Standards a Policies. 2. The private water supply hen applicable) and fire hydrants shall be design in accordance with the RCFPD Ordinance, tandard 5-10 and the current edition of the California Fire Code. FSC-2 Fire Flow 1. Fire review and approval of the public w er plans to be submitted to CVWD for permit issuance. 2. Building Permits will not be issued until public fire rotection water plans are approved and adequate water supply is provided for construction pu oses. 3. On all architectural plan sets to be submitted for building an check provide a Site Plan that illustrate all the proposed public and private fire hydrants loc d on/and within 600-feet of the project site. 4. The required fire flow for this project is calculated gallons per min at a minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This requirement is ma in accordance with California Fire Code Appendix, as adopted by the Fire District Ordin ces. The required minimum fire flow for this project may be reduced by 50 percent when auto tic fire sprinklers are installed. 5. Public fire hydrants located within the immediate vicinity of the proposed project y be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. P 'vate fire hydrants on adjacent property shall not be used to provide required fire flow. FSC-9 Single-family Residential Sales Model homes require approved Fire District ve 'cle access and water supply from a public or private water main system before construction. FCS-10 Fire Sprinklers: All structures must be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers in accordance with NFPA 13D and the current edition of the California residential Code. FSC-13 Alternate Method Application: Fire Construction Services staff and the Fire Marshal will review all requests for alternate method, when submitted. The request must be submitted on the Fire District "Application for Alternate Method" form along with supporting documents and payment of the review fee. FCS-15 Annexation of the parcel map: the project must be annexed into the Community Facilities District #85-1 or #88-1. The annexation must be completed prior to the issuance of grading or Building Permits. 12 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-25 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP SUBTT18912— MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 3 Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the south (beyond the aforementioned trail)are partly Medium High (MH) Residential District and partly and Low Medium (LM) Residential District. C. The proposed development complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The lots will be developed in accordance with new development standards that are the subject of related Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626 and will apply to single-family residential development within the Medium (M) Residential Districts. The proposed development will otherwise comply with all standards outlined in the Development Code and the design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends the City Council adopt the 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("CEQK)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 recommends the City Council adopt 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 recommends the City Council adopt 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 recommendation is based is the Planning Manager of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083 — MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 2 e. The proposal is to construct 45 single-family residences in conjunction with Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912; and f. The applicant proposes four(4)distinct footprints—Plans 1,2, and 3, and reverse footprints of each for a total of six (6) footprints. The floor area of the houses will be between 2,566 square feet (Plan 1) and 3,163 square feet (Plan 3). The number of available footprints will comply with Table 17.122.010-1 of the Development Code; and g. As "basic" and "optional' development standards are not provided in Tables 17.36.010-1 and 17.36.010-2, respectively, of the Development Code, the lots will be developed in accordance with new development standards that the applicant, in coordination with the City, has created for incorporation into the Development Code that will apply to single-family residential development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. The City has submitted Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626 for this purpose; and h. This application is in conjunction with Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, Minor Exception DRC2014-00161, and Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed subdivision is in accord with the General Plan and the objectives of the Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located. The proposal is to construct a single-family residence on each lot of a 45-lot subdivision (Related file: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912) for a total of 45 single-family residences. The underlying General Plan designation is Medium Residential. b. The proposed development,together with the conditions applicable thereto,will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. The project site is generally vacant; the proposed land use is consistent with the land uses within the vicinity where it is located and the expectations of the community. The zoning of the west half of the site is Medium (M) Residential District, while the zoning of the east half of the site is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the property to the west is Medium High (MH) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the north is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the east is Low(L) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the south (beyond the aforementioned trail)are partly Medium High (MH) Residential District and partly and Low Medium (LM) Residential District. C. The proposed development complies with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code. The lots will be developed in accordance with new development standards that are the subject of related Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626 and will apply to single-family residential development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts. The proposed development will otherwise comply with all standards outlined in the Development Code and the design and development standards and policies of the Planning Commission and the City. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends the City Council adopt a PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083— MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 3 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 recommends the City Council adopt 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 recommends the City Council adopt 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 recommendation is based is the Planning Manager of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the development of 45 single-family residences in conjunction with a 45-lot subdivision of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts, located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road -APN: 1076-181-01. 2) Development of all lots shall be in accordance with the standards and requirements applicable to the Medium (M) Residential District as described in the development standards that are the subject of Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-27 ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2013-00887 —MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 2 zoned as Low Medium (LM) Residential District as shown as Attachment A to this resolution; and f. The General Plan land use designation of the project site is Medium Residential shown as Attachment B to this resolution; and g. The change of the zoning of the project site will make it uniformly Medium (M) Residential and consistent with the General Plan designation of Medium Residential; and h. The zoning of the property to the west is Medium High (MH) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the north is Low Medium (LM) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the east is Low (L) Residential District. The zoning of the properties to the south (beyond the aforementioned trail) are partly Medium High (MH) Residential District and partly and Low Medium (LM) Residential District; and 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed Zoning Map Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for the logical development of the surrounding area; and b. The proposed Zoning Map Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and C. The proposed Zoning Map Amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends the City Council adopt 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 recommends the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-27 ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2013-00887 —MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 3 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 recommends the City Council adopt 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 Manager of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusion set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of August 2014, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-28 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00889— MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 3 b. The proposed project is in accord with the objectives of the Municipal Code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and C. The proposed project is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code; and d. The proposed project, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessmentfor the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends the City Council adopt 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 furtherfinds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings,the Planning Commission recommends the City Council adopt a 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 recommends the City Council adopt 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 recommendation is based is the Planning Manager of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-28 TREE REMOVAL PERMIT DRC2013-00889—MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 4 Planning Department 1) Approval is for the removal of trees in conjunction with a proposed 45- lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts, located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road -APN: 1076-181-01. 2) The trees that are located within the interior of the project, but not including the trees within the Eucalyptus windrow along the north side of the project site, shall be replaced with new trees, on a one-to-one basis, of a minimum 15-gallon size. These trees are in addition to the trees that are required by the Development Code for new residential development. 3) The trees that are located within the Eucalyptus windrow along the north side of the project site, shall be replaced with new trees, on a one-to-one basis, of a minimum 24-inch box size. These trees shall be planted within the rear yards of Lots 26 through 43 and side yards of Lots 44 and 45. These trees are in addition to the trees that are required by the Development Code for new residential development. 4) This permit shall be valid for a period of 5 years, unless an extension is requested in writing at least 30 days prior to the expiration date. 5) All Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 shall apply. 6) Approval of Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889 is contingent upon the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Development Review DRC2013-01083,Minor Exception DRC2014- 00161, Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626, and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2013. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Secretary PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-29 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2014-00161 —MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 3 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration,togetherwith all written and oral reports included forthe environmental assessmentfor the application,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends the City Council adopt 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 recommends the City Council adopt 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 recommends the City Council adopt 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 recommendation is based is the Planning Manager of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below. Planning Department 1) Approval is for the construction of interior property line and project perimeter walls that will exceed the maximum height limit of 6 feet(but not exceed 8 feet in height) due to grade differences between lots in conjunction with a proposed 45-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts, located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-29 MINOR EXCEPTION DRC2014-00161 —MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 4 Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road -APN: 1076-181-01. 2) The wall segments that are visible to the public and/or are located along the perimeter of the project site shall be constructed of decorative masonry block such as slumpstone or stackstone or have a decorative finish such as stucco. Final design shall be subject to Planning Director review and approval during plan check. 3) Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with any sections of the Development Code, Etiwanda Specific Plan,State Fire Marshal's regulations, Uniform Building Code, or any other City Ordinances. 4) All Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 and Development Review DRC2013-01083 shall apply. 5) Approval of Minor Exception DRC2014-00161 is contingent upon the approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912, Development Review DRC2013-01083, Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889, Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626,and Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-00887. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed,and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of August 2014, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-30 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2014-00626— MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 2 specific/community plans, such development standards already exist or, if they don't exist, will require separate review and action by City and, therefore, are not subject to this amendment; and e. This request is in response to a proposed single-family residential development that was proposed by Manning Homes that contemplates a 45-lot subdivision of a vacant parcel of about 7.16 acres within the Medium (M) and Low Medium (LM) Residential Districts, located between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenue, at the north side of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, about 1,400 feet north of Base Line Road -APN: 1076-181-01; and f. In the absence of development standards for single-family residential development in the Medium (M) Residential Districts, Manning Homes would not be able to develop the property as proposed; and g. Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626 conforms to and does not conflict with the General Plan, including without limitation, the Land Use Element thereof, and will provide for development in a manner consistent with the General Plan. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in Paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The proposed Development Code Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for the logical development of the surrounding area; and b. The proposed Development Code Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and C. The proposed Development Code Amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends the City Council adopt 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 ("CEQK) 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 I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-30 DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2014-00626— MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 3 the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission. Based on these findings, the Planning Commission hereby recommends the City Council adopt 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 recommends the City Council adopt 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 recommendation is based is the Planning Manager of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Those documents are available for public review in the Planning Department of the City of Rancho Cucamonga located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, telephone (909) 477-2750. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2014. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: Frances Howdyshell, Chairman ATTEST: Candyce Burnett, Planning Manager I, Candyce Burnett, Secretary of the Planning Commission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 13th day of August 2014, by the following vote-to-wit: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083— MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 6 4) Install Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) improvements along project frontage on Archibald Avenue: a) The easement for landscape purposes on Archibald Avenue should match the width of the project to the north for City to maintain a consistent look along the street. It shows a 6-foot wide easement per Tract 12532. The landscape design should comply with our 60 percent landscape/40 percent hardscape standards. b) Improvements shall conform to the Archibald Avenue Beautification Master Plan. c) The maximum slope within public maintained landscape areas shall be 3:1. Where slopes occur, a 1-foot flat area behind the sidewalk shall be provided. Slopes higher than 6 feet shall have a 2-foot wide flat shelf at the top, along the base of the walls. 5) The existing overhead utilities (telecommunications and electrical) on the project side of Ramona Avenue shall be undergrounded from the first pole south of the north project boundary to the first pole south of the Pacific Electric Inland Empire Trail, prior to public improvement acceptance or occupancy, whichever occurs first. 6) Additional improvements on the community trail/SANBAG right-of-way will be required such as decomposed granite community trail with concrete mow curbs, concrete v-ditch, landscaping, trail lighting, monument and drainage inlet consistent with other segments of the Pacific Electric Trail. Gradinq 1) 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 Official prior to issuance of the grading permit for any underground water quality management plan (WQMP) best management practices (BMPs). 2) An HCOC exists for the downstream receiving water. The downstream receiving water (Mill Creek, Prado Area) is experiencing significant degradation of its banks. The project shall implement a volume-based treatment control BMP (retention/detention facility)on each lot. The Storm Water Quality Management Plan and the grading plan must contain an appropriate volume based BMP prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 3) The site shall be rough graded to eliminate all cross-lot drainage, (except in approved facilities adjacent to private trails). All slopes D - 1 14aex- yIxkNy -f- Rvj. cvNd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 14-26 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2013-01083— MANNING HOMES August 13, 2014 Page 7 and retaining walls necessary to accomplish this shall be installed prior to final map approval. 4) Flow lines steeper than 6 percent could be erosive. The applicant shall provide hard lines gutters and swales where concentrated flows exceed 3fps, and anywhere that flow lines exceed 10 percent. 5) The precise grading and drainage plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout(Information for Grading Plans and Permit". Environmental Mitigation Air Quality 1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per manufacturers'specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the construction site for City verification. 2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits,the developer shall submit construction plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that low-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) as well as City Planning staff. 3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1113. Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, low-pressure spray. 4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD Rule 1108. 5) All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions: • Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and watering. • Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads. • Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time. • Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil during and after the end of work periods. I Project No. DRC2013-01083 Completion Date 3. Roofing material shall be installed per the facturer's "high wind" instructions. 4. The home must be equipped i automatic fire sprinklers in accordance with NFPA 13D. 5. Annexation of the rcel: Annexation of the parcel into the Community Facilities District #85-1 or#88- 's required prior to the issuance of grading or Building Permits. L. Grading 1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with current adopted California Building Code, City Grading Standards, and accepted grading practices. The grading and drainage plan(s) shall be in substantial conformance with the approved conceptual grading and drainage plan. 2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to perform such work. Two copies will be provided at grading and drainage plan submittal for review. Plans shall implement design recommendations per said report. 3. A 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 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. If human remains are discovered on-site before or during grading, 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 and California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. 7. 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. 8. 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 the Precise Grading and Drainage Plan/Permit. 9. 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. 10. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage easements prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. 11. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to acquire any required off-site drainage acceptance letter(s) from adjacent downstream property owner(s) or discharge flows in a natural condition (concentrated flows are not accepted) and shall provide the Building and Safety Official a drainage study showing the proposed flows do not exceed the existing flows prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit. 7 Project No. DRC2013-01083 Completion Date 12. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain written permission from the adjacent property owners to construct walls on property lines or provide a detail(s) showing the perimeter wall(s) to be constructed off-set from the property line. 13. The Grading and Drainage Plan shall implement City Standards for on-site construction where possible, and provide details for all work not covered by City Standard Drawings. 14. The Final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show the accessibility path from the public right of way and the accessibility parking stalls to the building doors in conformance with the current adopted California Building Code. All accessibility ramps shall show sufficient detail including gradients, elevations, and dimensions and comply with the current adopted California Building Code. 15. All slopes shall be a minimum 2-foot off-set from the public right-of-way or adjacent private property. 16. Private sewer, water, and storm drain improvements will be designed per the latest adopted California Plumbing Code. 17. The final Grading and Drainage Plan shall show existing topography a minimum of 100 feet beyond the project boundary. 18. 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. 19. The precise Grading and Drainage Plan shall follow the format provided in the City of Rancho Cucamonga handout"Information for Grading Plans and Permit." 20. Grading Inspections: a. Prior to the start of grading operations the owner and grading contractor shall request a pre-grading meeting. The meeting shall be attended by the project owner/representative, the grading contractor and the. Building Inspector to discuss about grading requirements and preventive measures, etc. If a pre-grading meeting is not held within 24 hours from the start of grading operations, the Grading Permit may be subject to suspension by the Building Inspector; b. The grading contractor shall call into the City of Rancho Cucamonga Building and Safety Services Department at least 1 working day in advance to request the following inspections prior to continuing grading operations: i. The bottom of the over-excavation; ii. At the completion of Rough Grading, the grading contractor or owner shall submit to the Permit Technicians (Building and Safety Services Department 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. 21. 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. 8 Project No. DRC2013-01083 Completion Date 22. The Water Quality Management Plan shall include a copy of the project Conditions of Approval. M. Water Quality Management Plan 1. A full size Site and Drainage Plan labeled as Preliminary Water Quality Management Plan shall be submitted for review with the Conceptual Grading and Drainage Plan. THE APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2740, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: N. Dedication and Vehicular Access 1. All existing easements lying within future rights-of-way shall be quit-claimed or delineated on the final map. O. Street Improvements 1. All public improvements (interior streets, drainage facilities, community trails, paseos, landscaped areas, etc.) shown on the plans and/or tentative map shall be constructed to City Standards. Interior street improvements shall include, but are not limited to, curb and gutter, AC pavement, drive approaches, sidewalks, street lights, and street trees. 2. Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 16.37.010, no person shall make connections from a source of energy, fuel or power to any building or structure which is regulated by technical codes and for which a permit is required unless, in addition to any and all other codes, regulations and ordinances, all improvements required by these conditions of development approval have been completed and accepted by the City Council, except: that in developments containing more than one building, structure or unit, the development may have energy connections made in equal proportion to the percentage of completion of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval, as determined by the City Engineer, provided that reasonable, safe and maintainable access to the property exists. In no case shall more than 95 percent of the buildings, structures or units be connected to energy sources prior to completion and acceptance of all improvements required by these conditions of development approval. 3. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: Curb& A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike Street Name Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other Ramona Avenue X X X X X X Interior Streets X X X X X X 4. Improvement Plans and Construction: a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to final map approval or the issuance of Building Permits, whichever occurs first. b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a construction permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Services Department in addition to any other permits required. 9 i Project No. DRC2013-01083 Completion Date 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. 5. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in accordance with the City's street tree program. 6. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed legend (box below) and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans. Street improvement plans shall include a line item within the construction legend stating: "Street trees shall be installed per the notes and legend on Sheet_ (typically Sheet 1)." Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public landscape improvement plans. Min. Grow Street Name Botanical Name Common Name Space Spacing Size Qty. Ramona Avenue Pyrus betulaefolia Dancer Flowering 3' 20' 15 "Paradis" Pear 0.C. Gal Interior Streets SELECT APPROPRIATE TREE FROM THE APPROVED STREET TREE Provide Street LIST FOR RANCHO CUCAMONGA. LIST EACH STRET AS A SEPARATE Names LINE ITEM WITHIN THIS LEGEND. 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. Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only. 10 I Project No. DRC2013-01083 Completion Date P. Public Maintenance Areas 1. A separate set of landscape and irrigation plans per Engineering Public Works Standards —/—/— shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department for review and approval prior to final map 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:: Archibald Avenue. 2. Public landscape areas are required to incorporate substantial areas ( percent) of �— mortared cobble or other acceptable non-irrigated surfaces 3. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and —/—/— Lighting Districts shall be filed with the Engineering Services Department prior to final map approval or issuance of Building Permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer. 4. All required public landscaping and irrigation systems shall be continuously maintained by �— the developer until accepted by the City. 5. Parkway landscaping on the following street(s) shall conform to the results of the respective —/—/— Beautification Master Plan Archibald Avenue Beautification Master Plan. Q. Utilities 1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, —/—/— gas, electric power, telephone, and cable TV(all underground) in accordance with the Utility Standards. Easements shall be provided as required. 2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. �- 3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the �— Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from the CVWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first. Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential projects. 4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. Approval of of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from them. R. General Requirements and Approvals 1. Permits shall be obtained from the following agencies for work within their —/—/— right of-way: SANBAG 2. 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. 3. 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 percent of all wastes generated during construction and demolition are diverted from landfills, and appropriate documentation is provided to the City. Form CD-1 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department when the first 11 Project No. DRC2013-01083 Completion Date Building Permit application is submitted to the Building and Safety Services Department. Form CD-2 shall be submitted to the Engineering Services Department within 60 days following the completion of the construction and/or demolition project. APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DEPARTMENT, FIRE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: The project must comply in design and constructed in accordance with the 2010 California Building and Fire Codes, the RCFPD Ordinance FD50 and the RCFPD Standards. The RCFPD ordinance, procedures &standards which are referenced in this document can be access on the web at www.cityofrc.us. S. Single-Family Tract Standard Conditions FSC-1 Public and Private Water Supply 1. The public water supply and fire hydrants shall be design in accordance with RCFPD and CVWD Standards and Policies. 2. The private water supply (when applicable) and fire hydrants shall be design in accordance with the RCFPD Ordinance, Standard 5-10 and the current edition of the California Fire Code. FSC-2 Fire Flow 1. Fire review and approval of the public water plans to be submitted to CVWD for permit issuance. 2. Building Permits will not be issued until public fire protection water plans are approved and adequate water supply is provided for construction purposes. 3. On all architectural plan sets to be submitted for building plan check provide a Site Plan that illustrate all the proposed public and private fire hydrants located on/and within 600-feet of the project site. 4. The required fire flow for this project is calculated gallons per minute at a minimum residual pressure of 20-pounds per square inch. This requirement is made in accordance with California Fire Code Appendix, as adopted by the Fire District Ordinances. The required minimum fire flow for this project may be reduced by 50 percent when automatic fire sprinklers are installed. 5. Public fire hydrants located within the immediate vicinity of the proposed project may be used to provide the required fire flow subject to Fire District review and approval. Private fire hydrants on adjacent property shall not be used to provide required fire flow. FSC-9 Single-family Residential Sales Model homes require approved Fire District vehicle access and water supply from a public or private water main system before construction. FCS-10 Fire Sprinklers: All structures must be equipped with automatic fire sprinklers in accordance with NFPA 13D and the current edition of the California residential Code. FSC-13 Alternate Method Application: Fire Construction Services staff and the Fire Marshal will review all requests for alternate method, when submitted. The request must be submitted on the Fire District "Application for Alternate Method" form along with supporting documents and payment of the review fee. FCS-15 Annexation of the parcel map: the project must be annexed into the Community Facilities District #85-1 or #88-1. The annexation must be completed prior to the issuance of grading or Building Permits. 12 741--wMANNIN HOMES �PR� t ■■ tn.e �. � pr pr1 VIP- ti it ..s+We•:mai w0i�r�'./f. ! 01CL NbRrYnW1[RF PLAN 1C-COTTAGE PLAN 2A-TRADITIONAL PLAN 3D-SPANISH PLAN 2B-BUNGALOW low AZA L EA Tract No. 1 45 Single Family Residence ProposedTract 1891 Plan 116 Ian Plan 2 (14) Plan 3 (15) 2,526 sq. ft. 2,877 sq. ft 3,143 sq. ft. IAW o ti *JFAI� z % �Ar Q a � c, z _- Prchlbaltl Ave - Le .. r All J it 6. m m u lo D9or cr -i w d � via9 •c o 1, and anus � t sus ,Mqw A Z A L E A MAN N I N G H O M E S L III wR7 1 , LLJ 1 I • rdJ' � 1 L 7 Z L O LA VINE STREET - Q Cl- C, l-C L_ 1 — $ 14 a s —�r� �[�_ # a '� rr a a .a ..r ♦ 18 � a tt # a tY e 7 - — PACriC ELECTNC BYCE ifiN_ Ir fqA 101 fl�l�l�u�v�HCL,'�aIIviM_ of wt v,r •t..,t STRFFTtI Tract 18912 PLAN 1 PLAN 2R PLAN 3 w. Proposed Site Plan J —•� Plant if 1 Plea 2 14 Plrt} is _ TM, I 2.sdc.I.n I z.Rn.y.n z,ifa.y.n Prop—d Trad 18912 A—gc L.Sim 4,907,q.ft. - a�t�.l.r rrz:rn.trrrtar Minimum La Size:4,013 q.n(45xR9) �mm�,iw. C—,D—iy:6.60 unity— oe.trpm�Mm�newrropmm Minimum L.m Size:3.280 q.n(40x82) rt ruz•:m,w.c.�au.�twmuwa Gross D—ky:7.70unitsJ— ZONING MAP HOMES SITE IS ZONED MEDIUM ON GENERAL PLAN JL ALL Residential 0 Very Low(<2 du/ac) UL, 0 Low(2-4 du/ac) Lj Low Medium (4-8 du/ac) ■ r Medium �8-.14 du/acL, ) ......M...... .... ....edium High (14-24.. du/ac.) 1 • High (24-30 du/ac) 8-14 4-8 DU/AC DU/AC MH _ ENC k[� MH I NC PROPOSED TRACT 18912 Low Medium (4-8 du/ac) Medium , . NINGMANNING • HOMES - r 13 Yale. r r ALLOWED 74 Units MEDIUM DENSITY LOW MEDIUM DENSITY ' - � 8-14 du/ac 4-8 du/ac 47 Units Maximum 27 Units Maximum � _ _— Pacific Electric Bike T it=- - - - 45 Units -- ----- - PROPOSED HMO TRACT 18 D Minimum Lot Size: 4,013 sq.ft. (45 x89) :0 40 Gross Density: .0 units/acre 7.70 units/acre Front Yard Set Back: 27 ft. Minimum Rear Yard Set Back: 15 ft. Average Lot Size: •0 MediumZoned: Medium Low �W r cn .r �i + f • i prr C cn 5:-Aiv" .. I` 0 1 t 9ij��yy �^ _ F .� •fit � N .. r r O Z 3Z 44 rn r 40 r � VP w 5 fill v��i t-.� 17iv� J 3r� �,� . 'Kar -+t3ti-r •..J' �.��c\\` `_ _ m Z v -war 'y f a� *F - r 0 ' Sf i �t a1 . ' a r'�i • sr 9 x MANNING HOMES Ar s . _O •r �r Ch1 -40n1 4 L �= f1 Li JF r, Hyl _�P• . `Pc V Z � z Q = t' c G 7 _ ,r MANNING WY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HOMES AUG 12 2014 Tract 18912 RECEIVED - PLANNING 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of Sunoort (Name5 (Address) I rd"j &,k— .,�b - I (City/State) I bave,reviewed the most Current siteplan(Tract 18912) consisting of 4s Single Family Homes with a cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. SW) (Date) 'D- 11 �gAlt MANNING- .------------------------- - ---- -....-----------------_— __ HOMES WY OF RANCHO CUCAWNGA AUG i 11014 Tract 18912 RECEIVED . p1ANNING 45 Single]Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of SHBRort (Name) 7734 Aleh/ti-, P/gcs. (Address) . 4^'Cho GA 1170 1 (City/State) I have reviewed the most current siteplan(Pratt 18912) consisting of 45 Single Fancily Homes with a c"e-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support ofthe development as designed. (Suture) (Date) MANNING CITY OF RANCHO cucmOWA HOMES AUG 12 26% rrgrt is �a RECENED - PLANNING 45 Singld Family Residenea 7074.Ramon91 Avenue Rancho:Cucsunongs,Ca. Lefter of:Suagort Daniel lggG eui're �Addresaj (city/Stste) I have reviewed the moat curfefit eiteplan (Treat 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes With a Cul-de-sic dosign(with no-connc tion to Nowtoa PQ proposed.by Marming Hotness and,l an;}n support of the di ve-lopment as designed. (Signator (Date) .......................................................... ............. ........... ..................................................... .............. MANNING WY OF RANCHO CUCMONGA HOMES AUG 12 2014 Tract 18912 RECEIVED - PLANNING 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of Support (Nam) 71L16 ML �JA V (Address) A 114 �� . (City tate) I have reviewed the most current siteplan (Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-de-sac design (with no connection to Newton PQ proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. 5 (Date) ....................... ............ ..................... ................. ............. . ........-............................................................... .... ................. ............... MANNING RANCIJO CUCAMONA HOMES AUG 12 2014 Tract 18912 RECENED PANING 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of SuMport f 0a m e) (Aaress) (City/State) I have reviewed the most current siteplan (Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-de,-sac design (with no connection to Newton Pl.)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. (bate) ................. ......... ................... ..................... ........... MANNING CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HOMES AUG 12 20% Tract 18912 RECEIVED - PLANNING 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of Suinort Lr (Name) 7 (Address) (City/state) I have reviewed the most c=ent siteplan(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-d"ac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homo and I am in support of the development as designed. (signature) (Date) ............ ........... ..................... ............ .......... ............... MANNING MY OF HOMES RANCHO CUCAMONG.4 AUG 1.2 2014 Tract 18912 RECEND - PLANNING 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of Sunnort Vk/ (Name) (Address) �N q,�� D (City/state) I have reviewed the most current siteplau(Tract 189.12) consisting of 45 Single Family Homo with a cul-de-sac design (with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. miia:64 (Date) MANNING JUN.-I 22014 HOMES CRY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AUG 12 2014 Tract 18912 Prof--Draw#: Acct.No.: 45Single Family Residences P.oic.o.: RKEKD PMNiNG 7074 Ramona Avenue Freid Appr.: Office Appr.: Rancho Cucamonga,Ca. JCM Appr.: ------------- L_e`of SMport oe (Name) rlovwzwd� (Address) /0(�, 4:L7�rk �70� (City/State) I have reviewed the most current siteplan(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PI)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. ( ) (Date) MANNING HOMES CffY OFRANCHO CUCAM OIVGA AUG 12 2014 Tract 18912 RECEIVE 45-Single Fatally Residences NED m PLANNING Romona Avenue Rabeho Cucamonga,.Ca. Lefter of guuuort (Name) (Address) Y have reviewed,the most curroM aiteploft(Traet 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes witb a cul-do sm"gn (with no conneetioo to.Newton PL)Proposed by Maming Hoines.and I amAn support"of the development as designed: (5ignattue) (Dafe} ............. ........ ........................ ....... MANNING CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA HOMES AUG 121014 RECEIVED - PLANNING Tract 18912 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of Suu»ort (Name) 0( k( V- (Address) , CIA- 9 ( -101 (City/State) I have reviewed the most current siteplan(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support oftbe development as designed. G� (Signature) ate) C, .......................... MA14NING HOMES AUG 12 2014 RECEIVED - PLANNING Tract 18912 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga,Ca. Letter of Support (Name) (Address) PQM �Q- (City/State) Y I have reviewed the most current siteplan(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. (Signature)(j (Date) C` C.;.:. MANNING CITYOFRANCHO CUCAMONGA HOMES AUG 111014 Tract 18912 RECENED PANING 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga,Ca. Letter Of_Suuuort (Name) (Address) (City/State) I bave reviewed the most current siteplan(Trail 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. oil LIL (Signatur (Date) C �.. -.._.._.._... -..._..--._..._........_..._.... - _..-.. -..__.........._... -........_......._.._...... ..._.. .. ................_.................................-...................................................._._.....................- -- .._._._........ - ._... -- _ ..... --- - ...._....._....................__._._.._._....._.. .................. _......-...._......-.. MANNiN0 —CRYO 1�41VCH0 CUCAWIONGA HOMES ' AUG12 201 S 4 RECEIVED • PLANNING Tract 18912 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of Suumort (Name) a. (Address) ,H4k� (City/State) I have reviewed the most current siteplan(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with.a cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton Pl.)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed. 1 61 / (Signature (Date) i i � p .__.._..._.-_....__.__..-......_._.—..__..___._.._..............____..._...._.._._ _._.__.......___._....._..._..........._.._..._____.........__............___.._......_._._...._-........................_....._...............__...._..._.........................._......_... .. .._....__......._..._.._._._.._.__.__._.—._._..__.._..._....._........._._...._.______.. MANNING HOMES AUG 12 2014 RECEIVED - PLANNING Tract 18912 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga,Ca. Letter of Support (Name) Coq qq ajlr ri (Address) 6- uo A A (City/State) I have reviewed the most current siteplan(Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-do-sac design(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes and I am in support of the development as designed 1 . -z (she) (Date) i , OF RA MANNING , ' HOMES AUG Z 2014 RECEIVED - PLANNING Tract 18912 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Letter of Support (Name) �e re S � � t - 07039 Nw+on Plat (Address) (City/state Y have reviewed the most current siteplan (Tract 18912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-de-sac design (with no connection to Newton Pl.)proposed by Manning Homes and Y am in support of the development as designed. (Signature ()ate) CITY OF RANCHO Cuce�un,u.�. MANNING AU6 12 2014 H oM E S RECEIVED - PLAN NINC Tract 18912 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga,Ca. Letter of AM rt (Name) (mew) A-4r.,, Oma. CA �17a ' (City/State) . I ba"reviewed'ft most cin M sitepl=(Tract 18912)consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a cul-de-sac dmP(with no connection to Newton PL)proposed by Manning Homes aMd I am in support ofdw development as designed. s•a-9. (side) (fie) CITY AF R,ANCM ............---------- MANNIND HOMES AUG 12 2014 REC&ED pLMNING Ttact 18912- 45.Singb:Famfly Residence 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cupam9n - ' IC Letter of Support #am (NAM) (Address) I UV6 baview6d.the tn6st;curmnt siteplan (Tract 19912) consisting of 45 Single Family Ho-aws with-a-cul-do-.540 design (with i10 connedioft to Newton Pl.) proposed Vy Manning Homes Md.I amb!support of.t4edevelopment 0 designed. (S.lili;lilmm). (Date) -- ------ --._..._...__._..._..._.........__....._.... ........_._.._._.._......... —.._......_...................................._ _.__..._.. ---..__._.........__...—...._._._............_.. .................._..._.__...__...._..... ------._--------------_....._...._. --_ __-w: _...._..--------.---------...-----..._.._._.._._...------._.._-CCITY��OCH�-�TICAMON�A MANNING AUG 111014 HOMES RECEIVED - PLANNING Tract 19912 45 Single Family Residences 7074 Ramona Avenue Rancho Cucamonga,Ca. Letter of Sunnort (Name) �� �,.r'� 7�. r �4r'l/C.f,Ycy �GC/•�/Y4Nl7dl• �sLl ��/7a f�t'o�'�`11e;¢ •l��/ 115 ,� hre: �i�T� (Address) (City/State) I havo reviewed the most current site-plan(Trmct j 8912) consisting of 45 Single Family Homes with a,cul-de-sac design(with no connection to Newton PQ proposed by Manning Homcs and I am in support of the development as designed, 0/w Stu (Date) ! .-., r � 1,,e P ,t .til G' {„1a... -{ >- tlj rr.. , F- •t/', \.,.3 r4 1. ,-•,_ r. .a' r F.,hJ:i:1:. ,a "li g }..ti,. ,v;rd, t. fi ',- l �''.. :': ;f`..i.:.:,•. •�. •n,. ,;. .•!:^731 is 1 S f-� �. .�i:s'�at�.J hh,f :� i.,3 S - "! .7' >: "(- .y-t r r t,_ l ..,`.. _ .:7 .' , 1 ..ir':,4 'c!+' ''f'l ,' S -r'. ,��1. :?:, .j:,. �.{'' TANO , r �r r• � 1. v: rt rr _ l�l r } ..l,t r .l t.' < r,: t_. - -.1 �' '`- a _!Asono- t - '•7.- f 17 1 j '_ v i.r t ,-.{- rte. -f s' - ! .L r .4 t V` `f' r r - t ) L / •+ -fl r,+ ''l-1 d. �.`.9 ,� rt l !. ti. -. \.. ti r ,l r v T. r ll r�. !}1 t rs-t f T �Y It i EI ? .. I rq > tIS r i -1 - a 4. .i7 ,,,b in .a {�r.t r 'ti w'; i;J 4 .-t:5 r r { i •:•- ,. t.,:'rs r ti ' r. ,It , t JJ _t ��, <ALL"dt f}.r r i r,r °. r 1syny q t, , y',, f S tk,.- r.. . V.f `rs ��"w r''fr Y i�. rL t r r ' - `_ is It. y;r i,! ,;,ry,, s. .. V t -. c, rt_f ,. r. r, ,,,J1 /.• s _ J .S , ,r- t� r 1.n.: y'^ , 7 r r r - �v,t:: .;-r t J_- t,° `• L'rA 1: f, „�� (+,t7> r r''-`' ' 1 '<(r ';:til , t �L ',t r 1�t 5. - r - ;,t ,�-,F :" .r' r Y r .Sn �^ t h -4 -Z.L - tt r..t b -'yt,r =i•- S r t.�,r Its ti .�5�,.,.<QO"5 �' 7•; .S,l�t.. ! . ,/t6' ;: , •- .ila r� r; r L. ".> x - - ' +t"�. � 't"- s•i.-i, a�'r;.l;a`•''r,�-}{% ..r' a, n1! .i•.` - .:t4 r`r t "?. .r• �1':';" 1 tir.^� ri. ....- .,d.F`.•5.- v:7'-'.i' ~':tel s.._ , t {_? 4'?rr. �,yr Tlr :F.. f i r tr ��- r J 1 1 7 I-' .� , 1 .-r.y 4n .r .1L a,y t.. . .< .V'1 u " .rte , -rt T i r 5 l_ ? -i. r`rr �-1.I >--- ti ,� t J-S. r �.4 t r Z1 S err 1 " r - •4' - S 1. . 4 (1� ., L 1�CY 1 c ."', &'>ty t S� F`' /�L'Y.K/lj'% ) �.Y F 1•l 7 r-., },•.t J ,> r ; . .a - h 7"trrtr „a t' �.;3,,,� „4 .yr , ti' - { �I .. ;t rT_ :t:r.':G i •r. rr t - : r ;�'Y _ v ,'Z: iF�,, v ,� ;J. x `t.?'}r11 �. t -i t ) :{2 L _ f11 1'a•. a - 't rr't+ ,,1- - .i.y 1. r S4.i(.,•': i.'�1, -1t;.'. .G;; .r : �' ,t..- .�' '1 - r. - t3 » '`,} �kn, 1 r t,� ''r!� {.`!:1r,i- "_tls}.. �t;.a J' ,� .t` 1-` r. ' ;.�' v.-,- r �.� \�il,. ,.{., -"Yt'':t'sJ ii =-i3,h1 Y�. i1'' 'k. r; - "� -.0 y ,-L� X' ; �' ' •�:� '„ J - J� %- !;! :;a . i ti;s':i7 J - j:- , ;Zr '.r, c i L ''!'t_ 3 - T' v - r t� , n t:,hi.f.l i.>rh�'+ fcQ}+- • �• A ,.,- -A r7 �v;F�r,#' :>kY 1._�;yl;�r'':e � a I`. ' .3'�.'` :� L .i S 7..1`{. - 1 S.A.:P. J 't�}ic'Y'F•'�_S .,.5 J,.LI.r`id f.L, ,�...;�i .j ti_tl..+) P+ Y 4. t. -�1K C >r'r•``•.'F:.:. r tt f '. T - _ t Sin t '� .., ', { U ry } �•j-'i 'r,� -r i.-� t. ,. y ,, 't A ,}- s - �.. < .ac�.y a 1� :ry,i't c-'r 1 -��=r ,' F'�':5.1 -r,'t �, t �J rt{ Jt'.( vy1 t ''vfYir c r_ L „r1' R''•,s r t ,.� f11� rs 5`(•a 1 T..4"`i- ,r- - r !7< i .x=ap 1.5 +,`.. rt t I. ,.c �.',; ::i `'i.'_" ) :! u. -r .:r-. .ct '(' 1.t.. _ „Y., ,;,!t4: .S. _ i. �1::' ,,- ..�... ,�4-, t z>1_a.�,_ ,4:,. ?f;:a, ;.y._-1i .�. , ".i"t�•r r 'we' - t i' }: 2�.�� -t, t - -Ni .� r - r: `{Y _-,t rt: � '-ti (''L: -�,P` r- rr' cF'-'•ti`:'. tl J� n N 5` '�" :y, .,e,.,;f; July 25, 2014 To: Planning Department, City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. BOX 807 Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 917/29 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Re: DCR #2013-0087 JUL 2..9 2014 2013-01083 SUBTT 18 912 RECEIVE - PLANNING File No . : Tract 18912; proposed Development of 45/46 Single family Homes by Manning Homes & Watermill Homes Location : between Ramona Ave. and Archibald Ave, north of bike trail Gentlepeople: I am not able to attend your Public Hearing set for August 13, 2014 regarding the above captioned matter. My concerns are expressed in this writing. The above captioned proposed development will substantially interfere with the use and enjoyment of my property located at 9801 Yale Dr. , adjacent to the proposed site (P. S. ) . 1 . ) The Low Medium (LM) density zone that currently exists over the middle and eastern portion of the P. S . should be extended westward, over the rest of the site and it is requested that the Medium Residential zoning designation be changed to Low Medium Residential (LM) . This change would reduce congestion, noise, pollution, and traffic. The lower zone would be consistent with the neighboring (JM) density zones that will lead in and out of the P. S . . The area of the P. S. that is currently designated (M) abuts Archibald Ave. , but there will be no ingress or egress onto busy Archibald from this or any area of the P. S . and thus no need for the Medium Residential designation . I object to changing any zonin; designation from LM to M. 2 . ) Construction work should be limited to reasonable times; after 8 am and before 5 pm, and not on weekends or holidays . I I 3 . ) Construction equipment and vehicles should be fitted with smog and noise reduction devices . i 4 . ) Parking for employee and construction vehicles should be restricted and away from neighboring homes . 5. ) A common area should be developed on the P. S . so that pre existing small common areas and parks outside the P. S . are not crowded with the residents of the P. S. (example : I pay homeowner' s fees for the upkeep of the small park across the street from my property and it was not intended to be used by a multitude of non H.O.A. members . ) Please mention and discuss my concerns at your upcoming meeting on August 13th, and before City Council,. for final action. Thank you for your time and attention. Very truly your, Ai-Lun "Ellene" Tseng 9801 Yale dr. Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91701 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 1 . At the time of the service I was at least 18 years of age and 2 not a party to this legal action. 3 2. My residence or business address is : P. O. Box 9615 Rancho Cucamonga, Ca . 91701 4 3 . I mailed a copy of a letter dated 7/25/2014 to Planning 5 Department, City of Rancho Cucamonga re: SUBTT 18912 from Ellene Tseng as follows : 6 a. [X] Mail . I am a resident or employed In the county where 7 the mail occurred 8 (1) I enclosed a copy in an envelope AND 9 (a) [x] deposited the sealed envelope with the United 10 States Postal Service with the postage fully prepaid 11 (b) [ ] placed the envelope for collection and mailing 12 on the date and at the place shown in items below following our 13 ordinary business practices . I am readily familiar with this 14 business' s practice for collecting and processing correspondence 15 for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is place for 16 collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course 17 of business with the United States Postal Service in a sealed 18 envelope with postage fully prepaid. 19 (2) The envelope was addressed and mailed as follows : 20 (a) Name of person served: Planning Department, City 21 of Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 22 (b)Address on envelope: P. O. BOX 807 Rancho Cucamonga, 23 Ca . 91729 24 (c) Date of mailing: July 28, 2014 25 (d) Place of mailing: Rancho Cucamonga, Ca . 26 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state 27 of California that the foregoing is true d correct 28 Date: Planning Commission RANCHO UCAMONGA August 13, 2014 ALIFORNW • Zoning Map Amendment DRC2O13-0887 • Development Code Amendment DRC2O14-00626 • Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 • Development Review DRC2O13-01083 • Minor Exception DRC2O14-00161 0 Tree Removal Permit DRC2O13-00889 am 11 am .1 I-J! 1 11 1 A �44 uj t_ IM4 Q i n, f "Off n M E vrs TA 1:7 :Z7 71 MR�TAO R rc Ip ingle-Family p CAMDEN It JL ML 4_ Residential A A T r';i c t 12 53 2, YALE NZ I n g e; a a nn,. v Re Resi d e n ot IqIN 9A 50 0 Iff 4 Project Site$' ­ 14 AIL gill P, P FePO nt -ALBANY was -Ake A4 ad� rt 6 t Mobile Home Pa r k LO MI TA (Sycar-nore, Springs = (Ramona Villa) LOMfTA 7nninri im f% p nocirinatinn JI ? A CHESAPEAKE Y MDNTE VISTA ^ z ;r UiUi LA _OLLA z MONTE VISTA .W. -- - _— _WES TPO RT_ z Q if Q 00 tL Low-Medium Medium z CAMDEN �- — _Reside'ntial j + Pesidential } (4 - 8 du/ac) -- YALE ft �� a (8 - 14 lac) w i _ W `= _w Medium Low Medium z — LAWNE � Residential Project Site Residential -Medium High (8 . 14 du/ac) (4 - 8 du/ac) pa. sidential, : how i 14 - 24'du ac) Residential (2 - 4 du/ac) _ ALBANY s ,ice. Medium High Low Medium - -4Res identialResidential -'24 du/ac) (4 - 8 dulac) LO MITA L - — -- LO MITA I General Plan Land Use Designations z CHESAPEAKE MONTE VISTA Q y 0 r _ r m LA JOLLA z � MONTE VISTA X W 0 J WES TPn RT Z Z m Medium Z0 CAMDEN Residential "a k Residential YALE a Low vzi Residential= W 4 m z LA VINE Medium Project Site Medium. , � edium High Residential Residential Residential Open Space ALBANY Medium High Low Medium Low Residential 1 Residential Residential LO MITA a • LO MITA Zoning Map Amendment RANcHo ,. .UC'.AMONGA D RC200" 1 -008�. 7 �AL1FORNL-k • According to the current Zoning Map, the project site is currently within two zoning districts; • The west half of the site, an area of about 3. 37 acres, is zoned as Medium Residential District. The east half of the site, an area of about 3. 77 acres, is zoned as Low Medium Residential District; -} Zoning Map Amendment RxNcHO UC.AMONGA DRC2013-00887 AL1FORNIA • The underlying land use designation of the entire project site is Low Medium according to Figure LU-2 of the General Plan ; • The applicant has submitted a request to amend the Zoning Map to make the zoning of the site consistent with the General Plan ; • The amendment only affects the zoning designation of the project site. Zoning Map Designation ( proposed ) ° j CHESAPEAKE j x - MON TE urs TA o _ o �---- — ---•-I � � LLJ� I m LA JOLLA "' „'" i� z - - MONTE VISTA - Ui 21 WES TPO RT - - ;- Z J _ � j Z ; t- -Low-Medium 2 Medium : p CAMDEN —� -. - —ResiArntial j r' Residential 4 - 8 dulac -- -- -- — Ij8 14,ci� Q W ( ) — YALE M ,-- - - Q LA VINE Medium /,Medium _ Residential P.roject�Slte Residential IMed (8-14,d u a c ul.ac� Residential Low (14 -r24 dulac) I Residential (2 - 4 du/ac) ALBANY r Medium 'Hih � Low Medium - Residential Residential (•14 - 4 dOR) (4 - 8 dulac) LO MITA I LO MITA r Development Code Amendment RANCHO UC'.AMONGA DRC2014-00626 CALIFORNIA • The project is for single-family residential development in the Medium Residential District; • Currently, "basic" and "optional" standards are not provided in the Development Code for single-family residential development in the Medium Residential District; • These standards describe the requirements that apply to, for example, minimum lot area, minimum lot dimension , building setbacks, and lot coverage; r Development Code Amendment RANCHO „�;��,N�;�, DRC2014-00626 A(.IFORIVIA • The applicant, in coordination with the City has created a set of draft development standards for incorporation into the Development Code; • The applicant's proposed project is designed according to these standards; • These development standards will apply to all single- family residential projects that are proposed in the Medium Residential Districts in the City except within areas of the City governed by separate specific/community plans. moll Tentative Tract Map I.RA,NrHO SUBTT18912 UC.AMONGA �AL I l R IA • Subdivide the property into 45 lots; • The lots will be developed according to new standards that are the subject of Development Code Amendment D RC2014-00626; • Area of lots: - 41000S F - 10,500S F, average: -4,900S F; • Access will be via a new street that will connect directly to Ramona Street. This street will terminate in a cul-de-sac at the west side of the project site; Y t Tentative Tract Map RANCHO S U E3 T T 1 ?912 LTC'.AMONGA CALIFORNIA • For emergency purposes, a specialized driveway will be constructed at the end of the cul-de-sac that will connect to Archibald Avenue; • The specialized driveway will include landscaping and a walkway for direct pedestrian access to Archibald Avenue and the adjoining trail ; • The project also includes the construction of missing improvements in the Pacific Electric trail located parallel to the south perimeter of the project site. 1T A T1\ /E7 TM A nT A I /'1 A flr-i A r1 , T E N r-; I I v L_ v\�� 1 N U. 1 v li o Z IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, rs COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO.STATE OF CALIFORNIA. ��•rtlY�N aifY N1...�oY sal�r,�+nc® MAY.2014 9.36 ACRES GROSS 45 NUMBERED LOTS tr e rt, 5.07 ACRES NET 1 LETTEREO LOT APN NO:10MI81-W DEATAILED SITE PLAN xMr w,u� i 3EAISTINC5N40LE FM14Y RE 6106JT.AL(TOE.MNN), •�' - ' I+ 1 _I�lry I 1 .. {1 o•u III .. .. _.. I .. l!�1 • 1 Y�I 4! iJ -- � �-. 1 1' I 9 ."i:.n .rP..,� ...�., 1 rua� ,-r nrwt K■tn� +m`..a ._r , _ .as e:vi _ �-w.r■tom mavwtt�. {S - N 1,.11 # IW 0ty N i►% >. A4 11 -• i. •it f ti ~i_ �K.r� WI. ..tis>r M» Arra wr. w ii nr� tu■# nr% wa ti.y R.a Mf• At■#. 11.1# �� tv■i+ tour NMRfI fit•+� r. M ��- }i c 1 �^,�„ �u NIE - �,:. ;. Irrl■ _,:mss` . -'Sjti„3 �� i f' .{�1<r�r_' --- __ -,••� .r"'+� , _i.>'�" Wit'-:...Ir. a-.*�,���, it - _ .. t� t. �..ar__•1 — � -L - - w r. R+w w u .nr 1w w c At■r+' •'-.'r-■a•7w J �T. A1■Sw M ft MI■i. 5I■Y � M b f Kp•p ■ : � +� +- L■•w KM K 11/01 %Y a Ta f♦ ■f D 1 RM 111! L•%M� t f ■ 4 a 1 a L t � t1 7 f t 1 • 4 17 !■ 1 • �Iwaiw lam_ .V•.— �Ytly ` ..• — ' ld 1 . ;-;=M -.*0'-.*0' -�>m --'�.-:n:.�- '.�� .�_.i�SrlG a�S�111�t „'.�-'�" ;■ iF ua •� r :1• p✓ --- _ ..�.__..F•w.±=..�. �_. ...�or.�.. r _ _._ I � it. _ .� _ .� _rw.■�� - � -�i�Y rY _._-_ �_ ....- ^^�r..r��sia.w..• �i� iwI .. WAC Gk=PtND NPW MM `, 1- _ aria AfCA1C`M/M FYP,.E 'VL_ _ t I- • � - •• - iii .4. .... r�-.. - 1'. i North r Development Review RANCHO DRC2013-01083 U(;AMONGA CALIFORNIA • The applicant proposes to construct 45 one-story, single- family residences; • Four architectural themes that will incorporate a variety of materials and have `articulated' footprints and profiles, • Four distinct footprints and `reverse' footprints of each theme for a total of 6 footprints; • The floor area of the houses will be 2,566SF (Plan 1 ), 2,877SF (Plan 2), and 3, 163SF (Plan 3). -—---------------- It BaLb I'm WIL J 2526 SF TKI ---------- ----------- PLAN I 2526 SF 4 BDRM 1 3.5 BATH I TECH 2-BAY GARAGE L SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR PLAN I - FLOOR PLAN AZALEA Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILLIAM HV/MAIJ4^LCH SUBTT189121 DPc2M3-0-V APCWMIIITECTS INC. - -� -.-" Manning Homes DAM"U3 AM 5W i 1 t 1 i t i i t i 1 i 1 ElF 17 r I + ,��"•••.• �.• I Idrlxv.C�] �ij (11nuu rr � -CD [� a i Slaraw I 1 -. 2877 S ! C5 x 9,t� ------- _ ._ Lll � 17 ••� r i I _ WII � L � I �- 'L u Nrnh I .. ..--- ____: 1 PLAN 2 --r-- 2877 SF ! '; 4 BDRM 1 3.5 BATH I LOFT ! ' ! I i OPT BEDROOM 5 ! i 2-BAY GARAGE+STORAGE �._.----.-._-- ._ - _ ... - .. ..._ _.. -.- ._---- SECOND FLOOR FIRST -FLOOR ,FiciR am Tau Pt-02A PLAN 2 - FLOOR PLAN AZALEA ,.",.rte a Rancho Cucamonga,CA "— WILI I^M HI-.�rvinr HAL Cir SUBTT18912 pfK2013-00887 C"I 1 k c 1 S I N ' Manning Homes I Yr-201301W A2.1 4m m.ro.r . ,..`.yo t 2091ro I lun la lUY ... w 50? ntft-, -4- bin/pwS ("A Id, 'ALIh 111KH11 1 3093 SF 0 _7 J PLAN 3 3093 SF 4 BORM 1 4.5 BATH I LOFT I TECH OPT.BEDROOM 5 2-BAY GARAGE SECOND FLOOR FIRST FLOOR n�cwenti,u. — PLAN 3A — FLOOR PLAN AZALEA Rancho Cucamonga,CA UAM HEZMAL ALCH 3 AAP C H It F CII$"INC. SUBTT18912 Wam I lk MW Manning Homes DRCM13-01083 All "20W �------ ___ J RIGHT 3 ROOF PLAN SCALE: 1/8' • 1*-0• `' FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA TRADITIONAL 1 kwl- HAI CONCRkII,RM 141, II FASCIA: 2X6-MCAL FASCIA,2X6 BARGE BOARD GABLE IIORRWE ONIAL LAP SIDING LOWERED VCM -- WALL: SIUCC01HORILONIALSIU G-W HCORNERBOARDS W4NDOWTW STUCCO OVER RIGID FOAM-RHA PCRCMCORA WI, 5111 --- tFunn ACCLNI DkIAL: WOODIFIBE SEVRIS POSTS ATAIONSMC WOCOIFBER Ca/EA'POSES AT ENTRY,DECORATIVE E. COACI I UGIRS F"I DOOR ACCT N COLOR GARAGE DOOR. WM SECIIWL GARAGE DOOR GLASS LIES AND DECORA-K COACT I UGI PER nrVAW-*SW •,fM1 VENkkR BRICK WAASC01 HAST WI HHBCK CAP LEFT Omni 0=0 r N... Ia., REAR FRONT PLAN IA - TRADITIONAL AZALEA 8 1 1 12 Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH SUBTT18912aczola ARC H I.f E C TS.�INC. �� Manning Homes -00867A 1 ,3 W� Wgm20661 Aj"&2Ua -010w2ww .�_ twa I n ------------ Elm .4 r I �. ----------- RIGHT ROOF PLAN SPANISH ROOF: CONCRFTSIVFROOF FASCIA ZO WOOD FASCIA.BOARD.2X6 IWICAL FASCIA. 2X6 BARGE BOARD WRN RAFTERTAES BARGE 8D. 2X5 WOOD BW4 BD WALL: SILICCO WIDOW TUFA: SRXxOOVETIRFGDFOAMWINT" _ ACCENT MNVI . ACCENT CEWLS DECORATIVE WiUTERDTAIL ACCEIJ15. J� DECORATIVE SHUT'ER DETAIL PER 'Rol }� FIFVATIF SYI F, ■. FROM DOOR ACCENT COLOR PER ELEVARON STYLE GARAGE DOOR MEAL SEC'IONAL DEOORAM GARAGE DOOR AND COACF 1'HI FFR R FVATION SA F LEFT I 6 NMI TT REAR FRONT �m PLAN 1D - SPANISH AZALEA R E E 13Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH ARCH ITECTS INC. AuRuS Manning Homes SU Dac2m3-ocean A1 .6 203'56 1 18.20-4 DRC2O13-01083 ws X750 pAp, A....mcre°imnA*.mlmT =i :@ I I �- i I porrh to I RIGHT L------------------------- ROOF PLAN FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA M. I BUNGALOW I I I ROOF FLA'CONCRETE ROOF-LE � FASCIA 9%6 YMCAI FASCIA.9X6-VPICAI FASCWMBARG. ^- - - -� BOARD WRH OIJILOOKER AND KNEE BRACE GABLE: VERTICAL BOARD AND BA-9DING 'WAII SIUCCOfS1fl'K.1F SE)INGA'SHIC110CAIK)NS VITCOW IRIN SRICCO OVFR RKYO FOPX'I MA PFRFIFVA'K)NSIYIF 71.�■I'' ACCENT DEW: DECORAWE COACF LIGHTS PER ELEWIM SIYLE 'Y FRONT DOOR: ACCO:-COLOR,PER ELEVATION 5lU WLR-GLASSLITES I_I GAI7AGF DOOR NFW SFCIKV'M RaFANCR)GPRA6F1)EXIRWI'H F.IASS LRESAND DECORATNE COACH WF"PEA EIEVATIONSTYLE LEFT T. I I I REAR FRONT """'"a``"•� '"' PLAN 2B - BUNGALOW AZALEA 0 4 A 12 Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH �RC•101.�-DOBB� ARC H I T ECFS INC, SUBTT18912 20C 3.66 1 Aug�sl&274 Manning Homes DRCE01&O10B3 A2.4 raw AW.Nw` .Iv tm���X'^.o;m -- ---------------- ----- - ;► r I I I I - t•BTc6 _► I ❑ ❑ I -- --- a _ --- ----- RIGHT -- - ----- ROOF PLAN FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA SCALE 1/8'a l'-0' -- COTTAGE WOOF HA CONCRETE ROOF It k FASCIA. W-VPICAL FASCIA.?)*-MCAL FASCLA.2M BARGE _, y BOARD WMI GUTLOOKER AND KNEE BRACE GABLE: NORIZON'AI.SDING WIIF(PIN BASF WALL STUCCO WlDOWTRW STUCCOOVER RIGD FOAM-RRA PERILEVAIONSIYLE ACCI,NI OkW: DECORA NF.SHIIIIFIt5 PH7HEVAMNS':YLF. .. WOOD P07SHELF WITH KNEE BRACE. COACT I UGI ITS PER ELEVATION STYLE HKNI DOOR: ACM COIORWIIHGIA.S.IIIFS GAME DOOR NETALSECTKMDEOORAINE GARAGEDOCRAND COACII LIGIITPERELEVATIONSM VMFFR VANLFAC'I.RFD SIDI HAST WAINSCOT AMMI LEFT -IIIII1111111M L. a IP &44 L - ■ ■ i REAR FRONT PLAN 2C - COTTAGE AZALEA " e k 8 u Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH y� SUBTTl8912 DR0887 ARCH ITECTS INC C20130 2D-,66 I AuQ,BIB.BIfA Manning Homes DRC2013-01083 A2.5 —L- A` `e rtl&mml'v�9 ZA g i N m4 d ---- --- �JRIGHT -- � ROOF PLAN FLOOR PLAN ADDENDA TRADITIONAL _ r ROOF R.K CONCRETE ROOF'EE �'. FASM 2x6-fPICAL FASCIA.2x6 BARGE BOARD CARLF: HORVONALtAPSIIM:GIVI H 10LVFREDVENI UP ..._WALL: MCCOI HORIZONTAL SIDINa'AI-H CORNER BOARDS WNDON'TRB1 SR)CCO OVCR RIGS)FOA.V-RR., PER tIEVAIM S'YLE ACCENT DETAIL: DECCRA7JE SHUTTERS PER ELEVKION SIU. 'WOOC POS IOVCSP.'S[IECT LOCAIKJNCi � WOO[J/H H CWI,.Nl POSIS Al UKIRV.DLCORAIT* _ COACH LIGHTS �� n FROM DOOR: AOCCM COLOR PER❑EVATM SME CARAGI,DOOR NELAI%Cl",A],GARAGt Dl"NIH DFCORA PIF -- COACH LIGHT PER ELEVATION STYLE VI'NCTR: Mr VENEER BASE WAINSCOT A BRICK CAP LEFT N ■i REARFRONT tr•n,:, �<,..c�a,>t PLAN 3A - TRADITIONAL AZALEA o 4 e Tt Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH 6,i...—rl�" SUBTT18912 DRC 0',3�°�' AU Wnw, I T ,C, 5 � Manning Homes mDE?ILARAE0.fEMD 9AttAAW A4K6511 _ _�tl``� GBLage s �tYT. ___ s-fiar _ T i ■C. i -► O eaTRL a ------------ ------ - ' — RIGHT --------------------------L--------------- ROOF PLANFLOOR PLAN ADDENDA SCALE:1/8' •T-0' COTTAGE ■ �-■`/��' ■■ RCOF RA"CONCRETE ROOF'ILF .-L� • �7- FA`tl 2X5-•/PICAL FASCIA.2%5 BARGE BOARD WTTI I WttOO1ttR ' TT MD KNEE BRACE GABLE: HCRIZON AL SIDING WRF TRIV BASE WAIL STUCCO .■■p 'A'NITUW IRIV STUCCO OVER RIGID FOAM RBA PER EIEVA FON STYLE Y ACCENT DETAL DECORKIVE 9*MRS PEREIEVAION S"RE. Y WOOD POS IRF WIN KNEE BRACE. ,�. � ■ . ., COACH IIGHISPERR VAIKMSIYIE FRONT DOOR: ACCW COLOR WITH GLASS LITES �r u GARAGE DOOR VCTAL SCCMAL ENI ANCED GARAGE DOOR WTI I —_ DECORA'NE COACHIIGHIFWHEVAIDNS 4E VE�Hlh VAM.FACI•RRI STOAEVENEER BASE WAPECO"ACCEN" LEFT T �v REAR FRONT PLAN 3C — COTTAGE AZALEA ;a,1�" B E B 12 Rancho Cucamonga,CA WILLIAM HEZMALHALCH Icksu�rs9�2 oRC2013 ARC H ITECTS INC. oi - mU°M' 2T3'S5 1 kKI.18,20-4 Manning Homes DRC2013-MM3 A3.5 "" r-- wxlm will Minor Exception RANCHO DRC2014-00161 J',UCAMONGA Gnc.,Fow"In • The proposed project includes the construction of combination walls with a height of up to 8 feet; • The proposed walls will be located generally where there are grade differences that warrant retaining walls; • Most of the walls will be along common interior side property lines and the increased height of the walls will not be observable from public view. r will Tree Removal Permit R�V�H� DRC2013-00889 UC:AMUNGA _ CALIFORNIA • The proposed project includes the removal of numerous trees that are at various locations within the project site; • Replacement trees of 15-gallons in size will be required to be planted on a one-to-one basis; • The Eucalyptus windrow along the north side of the project site will be replaced with new trees of 24-inch box size. i -� Review Timeline RANCHO f' U(:AMON(;A �ALIFOItNIA • Pre-Application Workshop — August 14, 2013 • Initial Submittal (TTM ) — October 8 , 2013 • Initial Submittal ( DR) — December 9 , 2013 • Completeness Determination — March 6 , 2014 • Neighborhood Meeting #1 — April 8 , 2014 • Neighborhood Meeting #2 — April 29 , 2014 • Neighborhood Meeting #3 — May 29 , 2014 • Committee Reviews — June 3, 2014 • Planning Commission — August 13, 2014 4 LEIN 11�l�lIon - iW■ ��ll�� �•����J+4����.�'a��M���.A^i����'�`�'����'�'a�'����'w-lam!■lYi��'S�. �r 7 a • Site Plan (Overall) 3tE FAMILY RESIDaIAL(TO"AN) nr.�.e aaa lu ' -ill wL\ sw Orli 61—LI, Am I- op- to !1M J� }�* qAS 1G 1W 1 hill Ili Ks 30. I MIYI l - �y 5N Y. Am J 'r of ' 4 - rtr�'{,.. '�:��.';ys•''�� :�• v.l � ti`.r� °•���-� ,1_ �'._1 �r �r ;ri ' ,.++r�� .� ..t .+ti�r�' ., c�.X,st�. 1..�-,►i Int. 1Rwl�x.t. �17 'l y ±�'.G )VY'�}14`•, ;^!:'• �7T'. L• ..v .N.h` ,� _� >. 1C.+• � _ F� 1 Am !Mi 1 %" 1L - �7g�1 +, .'lam x •f-1 `._ o jetI Y 7' .. N Pun so I 1 t 1 �� 1!�� '11..1• 1A �. �� . RUl 'y'} 1181 +. 1� k - M' t1 0 w 1t n 11 iI r P a. 1 a 1 t 0 sr5 Y _M diL 1r1�1 aim ---"1�.`• �A iIL #! rl . L �{.�IN�S y' f .'.:� ' � 1. 45TH•' �1=�'�" �' ��`�J. . ux 04V FAWC 9MM fti.40 E11PIRE 1. t North r - i -}RANCHOEnvironmental Assessment CU(AMONGA CALIFORNLA, • Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, Staff prepared an Initial Study of the potential environmental effects of the project; • Based on the findings contained in that Initial Study, Staff determined that, with mitigation measures incorporated to address impacts to, for example, air quality, biological resources, water quality, and noise there is no substantial evidence that the project would have a significant effect on the environment; Environmental Assessment RANCHO U('.AMONGA (continued) CALIFORNIA • A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and public notice for comment and of the intent to adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration was provided ; • Staff did not receive any comments from the public or agencies such the South Coast Air Quality Management District and California Department of Fish and Wildlife during this review period in response to the Mitigated Negative Declaration . oil Correspondence ANCHO RC UC',AMONGA ALIFORNIA • This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper; • The property was posted ; • Notices were mailed to all property owners within a 660-foot radius of the project site; • Staff received a letter and an email in response to the public notification . f R Conclusion ANCHO C CAMONGA CALIFORNIA Staff Recommends Approval of the following by adoption of the attached Resolutions of Approval : • Tentative Tract Map SUBTT18912 • Development Review DRC2013-01083 • Minor Exception DRC2014-00161 0 Tree Removal Permit DRC2013-00889 F^ r 1 } Conclusion U(_;AMON(;A CALIFORNIA Staff Recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the resolutions recommending the City Council approve the following : • Zoning Map Amendment DRC2013-0887 • Development Code Amendment DRC2014-00626 8- iI Sf T CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2014-00678 By Steve Fowler August 13 , 2014 i .............. �City Of l RANCH L�. CUCAM C A. -.L I F O R 0101 r r F Business Plan • Hours of Operation: Maximum 7 a.m. to 2 a.m. • Generally: Sunday - Thursday 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. Friday & Saturday 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. • Entertainment Hours from previous approval: Monday — Friday 6 p.m. to 1 a.m. Saturday & Sunday 1 p.m. to 1 a.m. • Type of Entertainment: Live Bands Disc Jockey Karaoke Dancing---�- n u 0 Menu different than Corky's More like a Friday's or Chili's Restaurant a perations I I - GAGGLES Mehl Fingers Crisp Mahi-Mahl Fingers served with Waffle Fries & CAlpotk Ranch Dipping Sauce. Half Pound Pretzel Cheese Bites With Dark Al. Mustard Alch&Sea Salt - Aslan Beef Short Rib Blies With Sweet Thai Chili Glaze & Wasabi Cream All Sandwich ae male Esclustrety with W, _ Ali-Hatunl Metro Dell Meats. Grilled Liebe Piggy Sandwich • j Grilled Ham, Oven -Roasted Pork & Crisp Bacon served on a Buttered Roll s topped with Habanero Cheese and Roasted Garlic Aloll served with Frle Turkey Cranberry Baguette i Warm Artisan Baguette stuffed with Oven -Roasted Turkey & slathered with - I Cranberry Moll topped with Lettuce, Tomato & served with aside of Turkey Gravy. ' The CreBunt Ciub Wenn Croissant Bun filled with Oven- Roasted Turkey, All -Natural Horny Nam, Apple -Wood Smoked Bacon, Lettuce : i * a Sliced Tomato, Red Onion & our Oil -Vinegar Blend. itellen Artisan Baguette filled with AllNaturalPepperoni, Mortadella, Genoa Salami, Un{urod pastrami, Peppentanainl, Sliced Tomato, <� Red Onion, Provoksne cheese & our al -Vinegar Blend. Avocado Veggie Sandwich Crocked Pepper Bun stuffed with Roasted Peppers, Zucchinl, Baby Spinach & Avocado topped with Hone-Redlsh Chive Cheese& lathered with Herb Moll. THE GODFATHN Juicy Bacon wrapped Mea loaf topped with a Cheesy, Gooey Mac rrCheese served on Parmesan Grilled Foccada with Sliced Tomato & Caramelized Orion. The Pastrami Torts Soh Talent Roll topped with All -Natural Un -cured Pastraml, Swiss Cheese & Dark Ale Mustard Aloll. The Spicy Hammy Grilled Sweet All -Natural Honey Ham served In a Multi -Grain Baguette with Dark Ale Mustard Herb Mayo & Habanero Cheese. rt a is Crisp Tart Shell Rich Vanilla Bean Ice Cream 1 Spicy Cimarron Apples, hlpped Cream. I .ream, Candled Bion Ihlpped Cream sit. Bacon. ra . operations • Owner has managed Corky's Restaurant in the same center for several years with no calls of service. • Family Restaurant with a sports bar feel. • Security Plan and all conditions of approval will remain in effect with Entertainment Permit DRC2013-00519- Security Pia • 1 officer for each 75 patrons • Patrol inside and outside. • Security goal to have all patrons leave the establishment safely. • All out at closing • All out of parking area within 15 minutes after closing E ��'� RANCHt L . J CUCAIVIConciusion sM C A L I F O • Approve Conditional Use Permit for DRC2014-00678 I z W Q _ Q W O co J O O LL D. I ' IP & NAIL DOWRY 0.8' J, j (0.06' N % 0.24' E) rti+G TAG, / ACCEPTED -AS .SE C0R PAR. B / PER R. S 861' { o I 1 9j o -- NQ 6 0" 35 0 I ' 32 — " ' 6' O' BLDG #8 j f / ` {' I '•CABANA 1A al to -F'_ TYPEto 01 • { �� 10SPA —o BLDG. #3 BLDG. #2 6 BLDG. #1 1 Ir TYPE 1-b Poor w TYPEI-a }J -- TYPEIq • 11 I (• ._.• S8 rA \ to S8 --- I , .•� I B2 c it I - LEASINGiCLUSHOUSE to to teal Al i . I _ • I , ; 1 i '/ 1 • : L—:_—___L _�_ Ca47E1 _�_ b ___ Q47Ff ___—_—_ y Gn'Es / -- . c44taox " / 6'-0* BLDG. #6 Al— - , I 6 0. 9'-4- I 9'-4' TYPE TYPE III Al — Al 35' o' 32'-(' A2 •— `• I ; - 1 BLDG #5� t 82 �� i A Al Ill • :�'- I g1. _ 'At C1 i nBl-A1 At- - 91 B1- Al -B1L iI4 �� a 1G4tEt• ..... ..CJI. i....t..-. t ...... ..... ....... ...... ...... - • 1r'NTIAL 1, EXIT LY 7- l I� i _.. - BUILDING/UNIT MIX BLDG. TYPE QTY. 1 BDRM Al Al ! A2 61 2 BDRM 82 B3 3 BDRM TOTAL C7 UNIT iPC 1 TTA— --- 1 III / 3 STORY 1 6 4 9 2 3 24 10 2 I -a 14 STORY 1 4 6 16 6 4 36 16 3 I-0/4 STORY 1 4 6 14 _ 3 4 31 11 4 111/ 3 STORY 1 6 4 9 2 3 24 10 5 rV 13 STORY 1 21 14 24 2 0 61 25 6 II 13 STORY 1 6 0 3 4 0 13 9 A V 12 STORY 1 - 2 10 B V12STORY 1 - 2 2 10 @B -TOT - -7 34 'S I 19 4 :4 TOTALS 8 61 98 _4 193 101 42% 51% 1 7% 1 100% PARKING SUMMARY TOTAL REQUIRED PARKING SUMMARY TOTAL PROVIDED NORTH 0 40' 80' 120' WERf1XIA A-1 -,i hgD • /�+Y `° �{ 2614-101 JUNE 03. 2014 FOO TH/LL BL VD RANCHO CUCAMOIVGA, CA CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN FOOTHILL AND EAST, LLC ARCHI TEC TS ORANGE 02014AtONlecla 2016 E. 15 STREET, LOS ANGEL ES, CA 90021 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92866 (714) 639-9860 rk.. d.. vw w a .ev•4-.e o. ,,..e 1' W U W C-1) n•q 1�1 'I.M1 � � �e--t— i,tb;�Nl,' a s Q LLJ J Z Q O S U Q CILO W L 0 U U ft D4 W . An W U O I J J Q W Z Q J O 0 n � � VP . An W U O I J J Q W Z Q J O 0 'D fl C" i j f IV "'I f j f v 4- (0, 6 j J/ _6 cy 11 C4 "a" ram"', WWWWWW"unwasom mu"EMITIMIN10 4j i a — ------------- ----- --------------------------------------------- L _.�/L op f L -F BUILDINGIUNIT MIX N L _j <1:1E TJ L�___T__ __j__ Mount _4 Alt C) - — — — — — — — — — — — 10 7- 4 - — - — - — - — - — C_ Q C) CD I i of) I"j _�26' . ;1 1, 0$7 3� 51 A 15-0" SON RIM m'h ----------- Or All, f 6't -O' CABANA 0j) f-,-- 6)LO" SPA 10'-40 ji 9 '�o 08""IDI a 4 _6 C) C-4 ;_ , I - - — — ___� 1, 1,1�1� —, CY) PIP V 4-, Q0 "D 4 PARKING SUMMARY IF, TOTAL REQUIRED Li 0-IS511 25)-O)j _0" A'All '00 _j 81 1.5 122 KR 98 2.0 196 14 2.0 28 4 -d 193 N%*46 of RQ W 0 39 > GA LEE C) TE 3 GATE I If GA TE 2 RESIDENTIAL L EXIT 0 Y ff, // (0 _Z NJ NJ 0" 6�1 01) PARKING SUMMARY of 00, AV CAUBOX NJ x I U TOTAL PROVIDED e2E� 011 L --- .,o2 61 0 01 OF h 6'�O" 61-0$f 26% 101 I A \ �26'—O" -9)-411 9)-411- 3% 10 f Of L 24% 92 7 p 35 of Q 100% �2' 4— 12M of at C) ��Jgg gvg",i, I CD C* X, JAI I a V------- A 0- "1 IN A __W GA'rE 4 7 onswunno ONES swans Naumann " tr_ =-Z RESIDENTIA X EXI NORTH T ON61 C) j, 20'-8 20'—T 77 7 ------- W "T. _W W_ 14� W W �J If 0 0 x J W W W Z � V S __", z-- ___1_.__-1_1_,_ I — ENTRANCE .......... _411G C) ---- -------- --- --- P _4 - ----- A J k j JJ 4 _J i _L_ J 9 5,2 5 0, "'o, - ----- ------ / ej v jv_ - ------ I . .... 0 y- 0 N jilt ov ---------- V Z Z' T T T T -11 !Z_ 4-,u-"" . ...... -- ----- TT — ------- .......... 11111111 0 401 -8 -0 r 1201 1 40fOff V 9 511 -------- --- X-1 .. ..... . . .... . ---- — - -------- ---------- - 2C if 61 f 2014-101 JUNE 03,2014 < A', 4. FO 0 THIL L BL RANCHO CUCA CA CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN FOOTHILL AND EAST LLC ARCHI TS ORA NGE (D 2014 Architects Orange These plans are copyright protected. Under such protection unauthorized use is not permitted. 2016 E 15 S TREE T L OS A NGEL ES, CA 90021 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92866 (714) 639-9860 These plans sholl not be reproduced or used without written permission by Architects Orange. W 3 STORY 1 6 4 9 2 3 24 10 1-a 4 STORY 1 4 6 16 6 4 36 16 1-b 14 STORY 1 4 6 14 3 4 31 11 111/ 3 ST IRY 1 6 4 9 ra IV,/ 3 STORY 1 21 14 24 2 0 61 25 It 13 STORY 1 6 0 3 4 - 0 13 9 V 2 STORY 2 2 10 - V 2 STORY 2 2 10 - 47 1 34 75 19 1 4 14 101 MINA" 81 8 98 14 100% 42% 61% 7% 4-, Q0 "D 4 PARKING SUMMARY IF, TOTAL REQUIRED Li 0-IS511 25)-O)j _0" A'All '00 _j 81 1.5 122 KR 98 2.0 196 14 2.0 28 4 -d 193 N%*46 of RQ W 0 39 > GA LEE C) TE 3 GATE I If GA TE 2 RESIDENTIAL L EXIT 0 Y ff, // (0 _Z NJ NJ 0" 6�1 01) PARKING SUMMARY of 00, AV CAUBOX NJ x I U TOTAL PROVIDED e2E� 011 L --- .,o2 61 0 01 OF h 6'�O" 61-0$f 26% 101 I A \ �26'—O" -9)-411 9)-411- 3% 10 f Of L 24% 92 7 p 35 of Q 100% �2' 4— 12M of at C) ��Jgg gvg",i, I CD C* X, JAI I a V------- A 0- "1 IN A __W GA'rE 4 7 onswunno ONES swans Naumann " tr_ =-Z RESIDENTIA X EXI NORTH T ON61 C) j, 20'-8 20'—T 77 7 ------- W "T. _W W_ 14� W W �J If 0 0 x J W W W Z � V S __", z-- ___1_.__-1_1_,_ I — ENTRANCE .......... _411G C) ---- -------- --- --- P _4 - ----- A J k j JJ 4 _J i _L_ J 9 5,2 5 0, "'o, - ----- ------ / ej v jv_ - ------ I . .... 0 y- 0 N jilt ov ---------- V Z Z' T T T T -11 !Z_ 4-,u-"" . ...... -- ----- TT — ------- .......... 11111111 0 401 -8 -0 r 1201 1 40fOff V 9 511 -------- --- X-1 .. ..... . . .... . ---- — - -------- ---------- - 2C if 61 f 2014-101 JUNE 03,2014 < A', 4. FO 0 THIL L BL RANCHO CUCA CA CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN FOOTHILL AND EAST LLC ARCHI TS ORA NGE (D 2014 Architects Orange These plans are copyright protected. Under such protection unauthorized use is not permitted. 2016 E 15 S TREE T L OS A NGEL ES, CA 90021 144 NORTH ORANGE ST., ORANGE, CALIFORNIA 92866 (714) 639-9860 These plans sholl not be reproduced or used without written permission by Architects Orange.