The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2015-06-10-Agenda Packet-PC-HPC THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE REGULAR MEETINGS OF P,1NCHO CUCA-MONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 10, 2015 - 7:00 PM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center COUNCIL CHAMBERS 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California F17� I. CALL To ORDER Pledge of Allegiance ® Roll Call Chairman Wimberly_ Vice Chairman Oaxaca Munoz_ Howdyshell _ Fletcher rl II. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The Historic Preservation Commission or the Planning Commission may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual or less, as deemed necessary by the Chair, depending upon the number of individuals desiring to speak. All communications are to be addressed directly to the Historic Preservation Commission or Planning Commission, not to the members of the audience. This is a professional business meeting and courtesy and decorum are expected. Please refrain from any debate between audience and speaker, making loud noises, or engaging in any activity which might be disruptive to the decorum of the meeting. III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION PCH HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA JUNE 10, 2015 Page 2 A. Consideration to adopt minutes dated May 27, 2015 IV. SCHEDULED MATTERS/PLANNING 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. PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015-00114, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015-00040, ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2015-00115, AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2015-00118 — LEWIS OPERATING CORP: An opportunity for the Planning Commission to receive public testimony pertaining to the environmental issues to be addressed in an Environmental Impact Report(EIR)for a proposal to amend the IASP Subarea 18 (Empire Lakes) Specific Plan to establish a mixed use development at the Empire Lakes Golf Course property located north of 41,h Street,west of Milliken Avenue,east of Cleveland Avenue, and south of 8th Street and the Metrolink rail line. V.. COMMISSION BUSINESS/HISTORIC PRESERVATION AND PLANNING COMMISSION C. INTER-AGENCY UPDATES D. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS VI. ADJOURNMENT 1, Lois J. Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee,hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 4, 2015, 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. AHISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA R JUNE 10, 2015 MAMMA Page 3 INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC TO ADDRESS THE PLANNING COMMISSION The Planning Commission encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak,given the length of the agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under"Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of$2,533 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. O VicinityMap Historic Preservationand PlanningCommission Meeting JUNE 10, 2015 C R I I 1 I I I {Y ___ •�__ x__0.0._-. I O C 1 E �! i CL 1 CL i FT o 19th St Base Line ' Base Line Church : Church Foothill , Foothill N � o Arrow C E 1 Arrow A. °' J mey z 6 C i I 8th �° W C7 6th H C 6th w ID 4th Q = _ 4th �t Meeting Location: City Hall/Council Chamber. 10500 Civic Center Driv- Item A: Approval of Regular Meeting Minutes dated May 27, 2015 Item B: Public Scoping—Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project(Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project) THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA THE MiNUTES OF RANCHO CUCAMMONGA THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY 27, 2015 0 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 i Roll Call Chairman Wimberly_X Vice Chairman Oaxaca X Munoz X Howdyshell X Fletcher X Additional Staff Present: Jeff Bloom, DCM Economic/Community Development;Donald Granger, Senior Planner, Steven Flower, Assistant City Attorney;Rebecca Fuller,Administrative Secretary; Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer,Jerry Dyer, Principal Civil Engineer;Lois Schrader, Planning Commission Secretary;Mike Smith, Associate Planner; Tabe van der Zwaag, Associate Planner; Nikki Cavasos, Assistant Planner 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_ None Item A-1 t HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 0=0Ncn MAY 27, 2015 oNPage 2 III. CONSENT CALENDAR/HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION A. Consideration of minutes dated May 13, 2015 B. Consideration of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for Fiscal Year 2015/2016 Moved by Fletcher, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 4-0-1(Munoz abstain) to adopt the meeting minutes of May 13, 2015 Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Oaxaca carried 5-0 to find the Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 2015116 to be in conformance with the General Plan as modified. IV. SCHEDULED MATTERS/PLANNING COMMISSION C. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2012-00057-SSRB GROUP, INC.-A 6-month progress report reviewing compliance with Conditional Use Permit DRC2012-00057 for the operation of a full service restaurant and bar with outdoor dining located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue within the Specialty Commercial (SC) Zoning District at 8916 Foothill Boulevard, Suite K1 -APN: 0208-101-23. D. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT DRC2012-00058-SSRB GROUP, INC. -A 6-month progress report reviewing compliance of Entertainment Permit DRC2012-00058 that currently provides live entertainment at a full service restaurant and bar with outdoor dining located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue within the Specialty Commercial(SG)Zoning District at 8916 Foothill Boulevard, Suite K1 -APN: 0208-101-23. E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT(MODIFICATION)DRC2014-00774-SSRB GROUP, INC. - A 6-month progress report reviewing compliance with Conditional Use Permit(Modification) DRC2014-00774 for the increase in the hours-of-operation in order to open earlier for an existing restaurant and bar located at the northeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue within the Specialty Commercial (SC) Zoning District at 8916 Foothill Boulevard, Suite K1 -APN: 0208-101-23. Tabe van der Zwaag,Associate Planner gave a brief PowerPoint presentation(copy on file). The Chairman directed the Secretary to receive and file the report. i Item A-2 PONGA HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES MAY 27, 2015 Page 3 1F V. PUBLIC HEARINGSTLANNING 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. F. TIME EXTENSION DRC2015-00244—6TH & HERMOSA JP/DF, LLC-A request to extend the duration of an existing entitlement approval by an additional one(1)year for an industrial warehouse/office project comprised of two(2)buildings with a combined floor area of about 100,000 square feet on a parcel of about 212,000 square feet (4.87 acres) in the General Industrial(GI)District located at 9212 Hermosa Avenue; APN: 0209-211-41. Related files: Development Review DRC2007-00696, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM18872, and Time Extension DRC2013-00326. On May 14, 2008 The Planning Commission determined that the project was categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City's CEQA Guidelines pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines • Section 15315 Minor Land Divisions and Section 15332 In-Fill Development Projects. Per Section 15162, no further environmental review is required as there are no changes to the project. i Mike Smith, Associate Planner gave a brief report and PowerPoint presentation (copy on file). Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing. Hearing and seeing no comment, closed the public hearing. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Fletcher, carried 5-0 to adopt Resolution 15-39 approving the Time Extension request. G. ENTERTAINMENT PERMIT MODIFICATION DRC2015-00278 — 909 PUB & GRILL - A request to modify an existing entertainment permit, currently comprised of karaoke, live bands, and dancing, for an existing restaurant/bar of about 5,300 square feet in the Industrial Park(IP)District, Industrial Commercial Overlay District(ICOD), located at 11849 Foothill Boulevard, Unit A; APN: 0229-012-22. Related files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00673, Entertainment Permit DRC2013-00563, and Conditional Use Permit Modification DRC2015-00279. This action is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 — Existing Facilities H. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT MODIFICATION DRC2015-00279—909 PUB & GRILL- A • request to modify the operating hours of an existing restaurant/bar of about 5,300 square feet in the Industrial Park(IP)District, Industrial Commercial Overlay District(ICOD), located at 11849 Foothill Boulevard, Unit A; APN: 0229-012-22. Related files: Conditional Use Permit DRC2011-00673 and Entertainment Permit DRC2013-00563, and Entertainment Permit Modification DRC2015-00278. This action is categorically exempt from the California Item A-3 AW. a HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CjtjCH0 MAY 27, 2015 Page 4 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 - Existing Facilities. Mike Smith, Associate Planner presented the staff report. Commissioner Howdyshell asked if the menu is being changed to serve breakfast considering the request to open at 10:00 AM. Mr. Smith said he is unaware of a menu change and would defer to the applicant. In response to Commissioner Fletcher, Mr. Smith explained that staff believes a "blanket" . type of entertainment permit is not in the City's best interest, that some types have greater impact than others and it also gives guidance to staff to determine if a business owner is operating within the parameters of their permit in terms of compliance. Chairman Wimberly noted there is not a condition requiring a 6-month review. Mr. Smith said we do not always require that and based on what they are proposing, they may not need a 6-month review. He said the applicant has been very cooperative although we asked them to wait a year before applying for this permit. He said the Commission has the authority to add the condition if they prefer. Commissioner Fletcher noted that we can ask for a review at any time if problems occur at the business. Vice Chairman Oaxaca said the Sheriff's Department is active and checks on these businesses on occasion. Leon Fregoso, stated he is the applicant. He noted he owns several companies, some are in Rancho Cucamonga. He said if games occur early in the morning, they may serve breakfast Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no comment, closed the public hearing. Commissioner Munoz said the applicant worked with City for a year and had no problem events; he offered his support. Commissioner Howdyshell also offered support and said sometimes businesses must find another way to expand. She said she is looking for them to be profitable. Commissioner Fletcher offered support. He said it is not unusual to have these hours to help generate revenue. Item A-4 .r HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES RANCHO MAY 27, 2015 CUCAMONGA Page 5 Vice Chairman Oaxaca said it is a reasonable request. Chairman Wimberly said we are watching and hope you are successful. Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Munoz, carried 5-0 to adopt Resolutions 15-40 and 15- 41 approving the Entertainment Permit and Conditional Use Permit. I. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2014-01048 - RGA OFFICE OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN: A proposal to construct an industrial building of about 161,000 square feet on a parcel of about 322,000 square feet(7.4 acres) in the General Industrial(GI) District located on the east side of the future alignment of Utica Avenue between 6th Street and 7th Street; APN: 0209-411-36. Staff has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration. Mike Smith, Associate Planner gave the staff report and PowerPoint presentation(copy on file). He noted two revisions to the conditions of approval. He noted Planning Condition • #25 re: block walls has been removed as it does not apply to this project. Additionally, condition#30 re:trash enclosure has been revised to be consistent with what is an industrial area. He said the amended conditions have been placed before the Commissioners(copy on file). John Atwell of Oakmont Industrial Group, said Utica will be completed and they are paying for half the cost of the improvements and Coca Cola will pick up the other half. Chairman Wimberly opened the public hearing and seeing and hearing no comment, closed the public hearing. Commissioner Munoz said it is a good, well designed project, appropriate for the area and they will be completing the street. He said he is in favor. Commissioner Howdyshell said it was a good report, and she believes it will be a nice project once completed. Commissioner Oaxaca said it is a good project for the area. Moved by Munoz, seconded by Oaxaca, carried 5-0 to adopt Resolution 15-42 approving the Development Review with the amended conditions and the Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impacts. • i VI. COMMISSION BUSINESSIHISTORIC PRESERVATION AND I PLANNING COMMISSION Item A-5 b ; HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES PQWCH�0 MAY 279 2015 Page 6 J. INTER-AGENCY UPDATES None K. COMMISSION ANNOUNCEMENTS Commissioner Howdyshell announced a wine tasting fundraiser being conducted by Route 66 IECA this Saturday, May 30 at the Magic Lamp from 3-6 PM. She said the cost is$30 for appetizers wine tasting. She also announced they are having a `Buy a Brick"campaign whereby bricks can be purchased for $150 and can be personalized. This too is a fundraiser for the historic gas station. Additionally she announced her retirement/resignation from the Commission effective August 26. She noted her phenomenal experience of many years of volunteer work in the City on various boards and commissions. Her fellow Commissioners expressed their deep felt thanks and wished her well on her impending retirement. VII. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission immediately adjourned to the Rains Room for Pre- Application Review DRC2015-00155—Marc Homes, LLC at 7:45 PM 1,Lois J. Schrader,Planning Commission Secretary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,or designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on May 21, 2015, 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 Item A-6 r HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION AND PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES CR HOMAY 279 2015 ONGA Page 7 from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or disagreement from the audience. The public may address the Planning Commission on any agenda item. To address the Planning Commission, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name for the record and speak into the microphone. After speaking, please sign in on the clipboard located next to the speaker's podium. It is important to list your name, address and the agenda item letter your comments refer to. Comments are generally limited to 5 minutes per individual. If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under"Public Comments." There is opportunity to speak under this section prior to the end of the agenda. Any handouts for the Planning Commission should be given to the Planning Commission Secretary for distribution to the Commissioners. A copy of any such materials should also be provided to the Secretary to be used for the official public record. All requests for items to be placed on a Planning Commission agenda must be in writing. Requests for scheduling agenda items will be at the discretion of the Commission and the Planning Director. ® AVAILABILITY OF STAFF REPORTS Copies of the staff reports or other documentation to each agenda item are on file in the offices of the Planning Department, City Hall, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730. These documents are available for public inspections during regular business hours, Monday through Thursday, 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., except for legal City holidays. APPEALS Any interested party who disagrees with the City Planning Commission decision may appeal the Commission's decision to the City Council within 10 calendar days. Any appeal filed must be directed to the City Clerk's Office and must be accompanied by a fee of$2,533 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. I • Item A-7 1' STAFF REPORT ® PLANNING DEPAR"I'\IFNT RANCHO C;UCAMONGA DATE: June 10, 2015 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Candyce Burnett, Planning Director BY: Mike Smith, Associate Planner SUBJECT: PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015-00114, SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015-00040, ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2015-00115, AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2015-00118 — LEWIS OPERATING CORP.: An opportunity for the Planning Commission to receive public testimony pertaining to the environmental issues to be addressed in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for a proposal to amend the [ASP Subarea 18 (Empire Lakes) Specific Plan to establish a mixed use development at the Empire Lakes Golf Course property located north of 4th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, east of Cleveland Avenue, and south of 8th Street and the Metrolink rail line. • RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission accept public testimony pertaining to the environmental issues to be addressed in the Environmental Impact Report that is being prepared for General Plan Amendment DRC2015-00114, Specific Plan Amendment DRC2015-00040, Zoning Map Amendment DRC2015-00115, and Development Agreement DRC2015-00118. PURPOSE: In accordance with the applicable requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Rancho Cucamonga is the Lead Agency for this project, and therefore responsible for the review and consideration of the proposed project as well as addressing potential environmental impacts that may be associated with the project. An Initial Study (Exhibit C) was prepared by the applicant's environmental consultant, BonTerra Psomas, as an initial step prior to the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The EIR is required in order to ensure that the potential environmental impacts of the project are fully evaluated and analyzed, and, if necessary, the applicable mitigations measures are implemented. In compliance with the EIR preparation process as outlined in CEQA, BonTerra Psomas, in consultation with staff from the Planning Department, prepared a Notice of Preparation (NOP) (Exhibit A). The NOP was circulated on April 27, 2015 to public agencies that have discretionary approval power over the project, i.e. "Responsible Agencies" and Native American Governments. Also, the NOP was made available for review at the Archibald and Biane Libraries and on the City's website. The NOP serves as public notification that an EIR is being prepared and requests comment and input from responsible agencies and other interested parties regarding environmental issues to be. • addressed in the document. In addition to the NOP, CEQA recommends conducting a scoping meeting for the purpose of identifying the range of potential significant impacts that should be analyzed within the scope of the Draft EIR. All environmental documents are subject to a peer Item B-1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT r, LEWIS OPERATING CORP. June 10, 2015 Page 2 review by PlaceWorks, an independent, environmental consultant. PlaceWorks was contracted by the City to do the peer review following an evaluation of potential consultants that was conducted earlier this year. The Professional Services Agreement (PSA) between the City and PlaceWorks was approved and executed by the City Council on May 20, 2015. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: The proposed project is to amend the Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Subarea 18 Specific Plan (hereafter referred to as the "Empire Lakes Specific Plan") to establish a mixed use development (Exhibit D) on a property of 160 acres that is currently a golf course - the Empire Lakes Golf Course. The proposed project consists of a specific plan amendment that would allow for the "redevelopment" of the golf course into a mixed use development comprised of a combination of high density residential, commercial, and office uses within close proximity to transit services and local regional activity centers. The project site, identified as Planning Area 1 (PA1) in the proposal, is proposed to have between 2,500 dwelling units (minimum) to 4,000 dwelling units (maximum). Open space would be included in PA1. Vehicular and non-vehicular circulation and utility infrastructure would be constructed, as necessary, to serve the proposed uses. The project site is being developed with the intent of maximizing the transit-oriented opportunities enabled by the existing east-west Metrolink rail line that parallels the north perimeter of the project site, and a Metrolink station located to the northeast of the project site. Similarly, the project will be designed to be compatible with the multi-family apartment complexes that border the project site to the east, and be complementary to the industrial office development located to the west, and, to the south, a large commercial development in the City of Ontario. The project site is currently designated as "Planning Area 1A" and "Planning Area 113" within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan, and "Open Space" in the City's General Plan. Based on available information, anticipated initial approvals that would be required from the City to implement the proposed project may include, but are not limited to, adoption of the proposed Specific Plan Amendment; approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from "Open Space" to "Mixed Use" and revise the associated General Plan language, maps and tables resulting from the land use change from Open Space to Mixed Use, and approval of a Zoning Amendment to update text related to the mixed use zone. A. Surrounding Land Use and Zoning (relative to the Empire Lakes Specific Plan): North - Industrial Logistics and Manufacturing Buildings; Minimum Impact/Heavy Industrial (MI/HI) District South - Commercial Center; Ontario Center Specific Plan (2254-SP) (in the City of Ontario) East - Industrial Offices/Logistics Buildings, a Commercial Center, and Hotels; General Industrial (GI) District, Industrial Park (IP) District, and Industrial Park (IP) District, (Industrial Commercial Overlay District (ICOD)) West - Industrial Offices/Logistics Buildings and Vacant Land; General Industrial (GI) District and Industrial Park (IP) District Item B-2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT LEWIS OPERATING CORP. June 10, 2015 Page 3 • B. General Plan Designations: North - Heavy Industrial South - Mixed Use — Ontario Mills (in the City of Ontario) East - General Industrial and Industrial Park West - General Industrial and Industrial Park ADVERTISING/CORRESPONDENCE: The notice for this scoping meeting appeared in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper as a large, 1/811 page notice on May 26, 2015 and notices were mailed to the owners of all properties located within 1,000 feet of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan boundary. The Notice of Preparation and Initial Study Part 2 were circulated to the attached list of CEQA agencies (Exhibit E) for the required review and comment period. Attached is correspondence (Exhibit F) received in response to the Notice of Preparation that was submitted by several "Responsible Agencies" and two Native American Tribal Government entities. The correspondences discusses the various recommendations and methodologies for areas of study related to the formulation of the Environmental Impact Report. PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE: Staff has also received e-mails and written correspondence from several individuals expressing an interest in the proposed project. The correspondence (Exhibit G) discusses concern regarding potential environmental impacts relating to transportation/traffic and land use (specifically the loss of the golf course). Respectfully submitted, Candyce rnett Planning Director CB/MS/Is Attachments: Exhibit A — Notice of Preparation (NOP) Exhibit B — Letter from the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit (acknowledging receipt of the NOP) Exhibit C — Initial Study (IS) Part 2 prepared by Bonterra Psomas (without Appendices) Exhibit D — Conceptual Development Plan Exhibit E — Distribution Lists for the Notice of Preparation Exhibit F — Correspondence (received from Responsible Agencies and Native American Tribal Government entities) Exhibit G — Correspondence (received from the public) Item B-3 IR�NC E En Notice of Preparation and Scoping Meeting �,Ec.AMOc:.a April 27, 2015 To: Reviewing Agencies, Organizations, and Interested Parties Subject: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report and Public Scoping Meeting for the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project (Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project) From: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Contact: Mr. Michael Smith, Associate Planner Pursuant to Section 21165 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15050 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, the City of Rancho Cucamonga will be the lead agency for an environmental impact report (EIR) that will be prepared to address potential impacts associated with the project identified below. The purpose of this notice is (1) to serve as a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR pursuant to the Section 15082 of the State CEQA Guidelines, (2) to advise and solicit comments and suggestions regarding the scope and content of the EIR to be prepared for the proposed project, and (3) to serve as a notice for the public scoping meeting. • We need to know your agency's views regarding the scope and content of the environmental information which is germane to your agency's statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project. The project description, location, and potential environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. An electronic copy of the Initial Study is attached. Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date and should be received not later than 30 days after the date of this notice. However, a scoping meeting will be held on June 10, 2015 and your response will be accepted until that date. Project Title: Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project (also referred to as the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project) Project Location —City: Rancho Cucamonga Project Location — County: San Bernardino The project site is located north of 41h Street, west of Milliken Avenue, east of Cleveland Avenue, and south of 81h Street and the Metrolink rail line in the City of Rancho Cucamonga in San Bernardino County. The City of Rancho Cucamonga's southern boundary with the City of Ontario is formed by 41h Street. The project site is currently developed with the Empire Lakes Golf Course (11015 611, Street, Rancho Cucamonga). Refer to Exhibit 1 in the Initial Study for the local and regional vicinity. • Project Description: The proposed project involves an amendment to the IASP Sub-Area 18 (Empire Lakes) Specific Plan to establish a mixed use development on the existing Empire Lakes Golf Course property(new Planning Area [PA] 1). The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would EXHIBIT A Item B-4 allow for high density and medium-high density residential, mixed use, open space, and transit- oriented land uses all within close proximity to transit services and local regional activity centers. The number of residential dwelling units in PA 1 would range from a minimum of 2,500 units to a maximum of up to 4,000 units. Additionally, a maximum of 220,000 square feet (sf) of non- residential uses would be allowed in PA 1. Vehicular and non-vehicular circulation and utility infrastructure would be installed, as necessary, to serve the proposed uses. Based on available information, anticipated initial approvals required from the City to implement the proposed project may include, but are not limited to, adoption of the proposed [ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment; approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from "Open Space"to "Mixed Use"; and, approval of a Zoning Amendment to update text related to the Mixed Use zone. Approval of Parcel Maps(s) and a Development Agreement. may also be considered. Potential Environmental Effects: The attached Initial Study indicates that there may be significant adverse environmental impacts associated with this project, for the following topical areas:Aesthetics and Visual, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation and Traffic, and Utilities and Service Systems. These topics will be addressed in the EIR. In addition, the EIR will also describe and evaluate project alternatives that may reduce or avoid any identified significant adverse impacts of the proposed project. Responding to this Notice: Pursuant to Section 15082 of the State CEQA Guidelines, responsible and trustee agencies and other interested parties, including members of the public, must submit any comments in response to this notice no later than 30 days after receipt. Comments and suggestions should, at a minimum, (1) identify the significant environmental issues, reasonable alternatives, and mitigation measures that should be explored in the EIR; (2) whether the responding agency will be a responsible or trustee agency for the proposed project; and (3) any related issues raised by organizations and/or interested parties other than potential responsible or trustee agencies, including interested or affected members of the public. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency.The NOP and accompanying Initial Study are available for a 30-day public review period beginning April 27, 2015 and ending May 26, 2015, but the scoping meeting will occur on June 10, 2015 and your response will be accepted up until that date. Copies of the document are available for review at the following locations: Public Information and Services Counter City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 (909) 477-2700 Archibald Library 7368 Archibald Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 477-2720 Biane Library 12505 Cultural Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 (909) 477-2720 2 Item B-5 And can be accessed online at: http://www.cityofrc.us/cityhall/planninq/current projects/default.asp ® in the folder titled "Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project". All comments and responses to this notice should be submitted in writing to Mr. Michael Smith, Associate Planner, at the address noted above. The City will also accept responses to this notice submitted via email received through the close of business on May 26, 2015. Email responses to this notice may be sent to Michael.Smith@cityofrc.us. For additional information or any questions regarding the proposed project, please contact Michael Smith at (909) 477-2750 ext. 4317 or at the aforementioned email. Notice of Scoping Meeting: The proposed project is considered a project of statewide, regional, or area-wide significance. A scoping meeting will be held by the ity at the Planning Commission meeting on June 10,2015 at 7:00 PM at the Rancho Cucamon ity Council Chambers, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730. UNK, Date Signature 3 Item B-6 STATE OF CALIFORNIA Governor's Office of Plannin,, and Research Stave Glearinzhouse and Planning Unit OF1.11-700�p • Edmund G. Brown Jr. lamer.Al a Govern G- Director Notice of Preparation CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 28, 2015 MAY 0 7 2015 To: Reviexiing Agencies RECEIVED - PLANNING Re: Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan([ASP) Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment SCH- 2015041083 Attached for your review and comment is the Notice of Preparation (NOP) for the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan(IASP) Sub-Area l8 Specific Plan Amendment draft Environmental Impact Report(EIR). Responsible agencies must transmit their comments on the scope and content of the NOP, focusing on specific information related to their own statutory responsibility. within 30 days of receipt of the NOP from the Lead Agency. This is a courtesy notice provided by the State Clearinghouse with a reminder for you to comment in a timely manner. We encourage other agencies to also respond to this notice and express their concerns early in the environmental review process. • Please direct}'our comments to: Michael Smith City of Rancho Cucamonga 105000 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga,CA 91730 with a copy to the State Clearinghouse in the Office of Planning and Research. Please refer to the SCH number noted above in all correspondence concerning this project. If you have any questions about the environmental document review process, please call the State Clearinghouse at (916)445-0613. ` Sincere Scott Moran Director, State Clearinahouse Attachments cc: Lead Agency • 1400 TENTH_TFEF P.o. BOX 3o-,_ AL- I On\LA 95812-30=t TEL (916? 443-06:3 FX. 916)323-3018 , wwcc.GDLG1.2Gc EXHIBIT B Item B-7 Document Details Report , State Clearinghouse Data Base SCH# 2015041083 Project Title Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Lead Agency Rancho Cucamonga, City of Type NOP Notice of Preparation Description The proposed project involves an amendment to the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan to establish a mixed use development on the existing Empire Lakes Golf Course property(new Planning Area 1), which is adjacent to the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station. The amendment would allow residential development within the new PA1 to range from a minimum of 2,500 units to a maximum of up to 4,000 units, along with a maximum of 220,000 sf of non-residential uses. Multi-modal transportation, parking and recreational facilities and infrastructure to serve the proposed development would be provided. Lead Agency Contact Name Michael Smith Agency City of Rancho Cucamonga Phone (909)477-2750 x4317 Fax email Address 105000 Civic Center Drive City Rancho Cucamonga State CA Zip 91730 Project Location County San Bernardino City Rancho Cucamonga Region Cross Streets 4th Street and 6th Street with Cleveland Avenue Lat/Long 34' 52.01" N/ 117` 33' 51.8"W Parcel No. 209-272-20&210-082-41,-49, and-52 Township 1S Range 7W Section 13 Base SBB&M Proximity to: Highways 1-15, 1-10 Airports Ontario Railways Metrolink Rail Line Waterways Schools Ontario Center Land Use Golf Course/Empire Lakes Specific Plan/Open Space Project Issues Aesthetic/Visual-, Agricultural Land; Air Quality: Archaeologic-Historic; Biological Resources; Flood Plain/Flooding; Forest Land/Fire Hazard; Geologic/Seismic; Noise; Public Services; Recreation/Parks: Schools/Universities; Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading; Solid Waste; Toxic/Hazardous; Traffic/Circulation;Vegetation; Water Quality; Water Supply; Landuse Reviewing Resources Agency;Cal Fire;Department of Parks and Recreation; Department of Water Resources; Agencies Department of Fish and Wildlife, Region 6; Department of Housing and Community Development: Office of Emergency Services, California; Native American Heritage Commission; Public Utilities Commission; Caltrans, Division of Aeronautics: California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 8;Air Resources Board; Department of Toxic Substances Control, Regional Water Quality Control Board. Region 8 Date Received 04/28/2015 Start of Review 04/28/2015 End of Review 05/27/2015 Note: Blanks in data fields result frolbeMaNteignt information provided by lead agency. NOP Distri in List County: SCH# 20 IS 018 0 8 ..................... esources AuerU Fish&Wildlife Region 1E OES(Office of Emergency Caltrans, District 8 Regional Water Quality Control Resources Agency Laurie Harnsbeigei Services) Mark Roberts BoardffR _WqLCB) Nadell Gayoti Li Fish&Wildlife Region 2 Dennis Cashillo LJ Caltrans,District 9 Ll Dept.of Boating& Jeff Drungesen Gayle Rosander ❑ RWQCB I Waterways Native American Heritage Cathleen Hudson Nicole Wong ❑ Fish&Wildlife Region 3 Comm. L3 Caltrans, District 10 North Coast Region(1) LiCalifornia Coastal Charles Armor Debbie headway Toni Dumas U RWQCB 2 Commission Ll Fish&Wildlife Region 4 WIl1 Public Utilities Ll Caltrans,District 11 Environmental Document Elizabeth A. Fuchs Julie Vance Commission Jacob Armstrong Coordinator J Colorado River Board LJ Fish&Wildlife Region 5 Leo Wong LJ Caltrans, District 12 Sari Francisco Bay Region(2) Lisa Johansen Leslie Newton-Reed V Santa Monica Bay Maureen El Harake U RWQCB3 Habitat Conservation Restoration Central Coast Region(3) Del-it.of Conservation Ploglain Guangyu Wang Elizabeth Carpenter Cal EPA LJ RWQCB 4 Fish&Wildlife Region 6 State Lands Commission Teresa Rodgers LJ Califoriiia Energy 1-iffany Ellis Jennifer Deleorig Los Angeles Region(4) Commission Habitat Conservation Air Resources Board Eric Knight Program LJ Tahoe Regional Planning LJ RWQCB 5S Agency(TRPAques) All Other Projects Cathi Slaniiiiski Central Valley Region(5) m Cal Fire U Fish&Wildlife Rewon 6 I/M Cherry Jac Dan Fosler I fpidi Sickler ❑LJ RWQCB 5F 111yo/mono, I labital Cal State Transportation LJ Transportation Projects Central Valley Region(5) ❑ Central Valley Flood Conseivation Program �(, QalS_FA_'_____ Nesarnani KalandiyUr Fresno Branch Office Protection Board ndUstrial/Energy Projects (D fatties Herota Dept.of Fish&Wildlife M Caltrans-Division of MikeTollstrup LJ RWQCB 5R 3 George Isaac Aeronautics Central Valley Region(5) Cp Office of Historic Marine Region Philip Crimmins LJ State Water Resources Control Redding Branch Office I Preservation Ron Parsons Other DepartiEgn!s LJ Caltraiis—Plaiming Board LJ RWQCB 6 LRegional Programs Unit I-IQ LD-IGR Lationtan Region(6) Dept of Parks&Recreation Division of Financial Assistance Environmental Stewardship LJ Food&Agriculture Terri Pencovic LJ RWQCB 6V Section Sandra Schubeit ❑in Ll State Water Resources Control Dept.of Food and UN California Highway Patrol Board Lationtan Region(6) LlCalifornia Departmew of Agriculture Suzann Ikeuchi Jeffeiy Weith Victotville Branch Office Resources, Recyclim Office of Special Projects RWQCB7 Recovery & LJ Depart.of General Division of Drinking Water Colorado River Basin Re roil(7) Sue O'Leaf y Services Dept..-.of Transportation Ll State Water Resources Control Public School Construction Board RWQCB 0 LJ S.F. Bay Conservation& L) Caltrans,District I Student intern,401 Water Quality Santa Aria Re ion 8 Dev't.Comm. L3 Dept.of General Services Certification Unit g ( ) Steve McAdam Anna Gaibeff Rex Jackman Division of Water Quality ❑ RWQCB9 Environmental Services ❑ Caltrans,District 2 San Diego Region(9) 12 Dept.of Water Section Marcelino Gonzalez Ll State Water Resouces Control Resources Board D Resources Agency Ll elta Stewardship ❑ Caltrans, District 3 Phil Cradet Nadell Gayou Council Eric Federicks--Sou(h Division of Water Rights Kevan Sarnsam Susan Zanchi-North go FiDept.of Toxic Substances Ll Other Fish end Game Housing&Conon. Dev. Ll Caltrans, District 4 Control L3 Depart.of Fish&Wildlife Housing Coordinator Erik Alm CEQA Tracking Center Scott Flint Housing Policy Division ❑ Caltrans,District 5 LJ Department of Pesticide EnvironFriental Services Independent Regulation Division _ Larry Newland CEQA Coordinator LJ Fish&Wildlife Region 1 Commissions boards L3 Caltrans, District 6 LJ o_ Donald Koch LJ Delta Protectlori Comnilsslori Michael Navarro Conservancy Michael Machado Ll Caltrans, District 7 Dianna Watson Last Updated 10/13/2014 Initial Study Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Sub-Area 18 Empire Lakes Specific Plan Amendment • Lead Agency: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 April 2015 EXHIBIT C Item B-10 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project TABLE OF CONTENTS Section page Section1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Purpose and Scope................................................................................1-1 1.2 Findings of this Initial Study....................................................................1-1 1.3 Contact Person.......................................................................................1-2 Section 2.0 Project Description ..........................................................................................2-1 2.1 Project Site Location and Setting............................................................2-1 2.2 Project Background ................................................................................2-1 2.3 Project Description..................................................................................2-2 2.4 Anticipated Discretionary Approvals.......................................................2-3 2.5 Documents Incorporated by Reference..................................................2-4 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED...................................................2-5 DETERMINATION.....................................................................................................................2-5 Section3.0 Initial Study.......................................................................................................3-1 3.1 Environmental Checklist Form................................ ............................3-1 1. Aesthetics...............................................................................................3-3 2. Agriculture and Forestry Resources.......................................................3-4 3. Air Quality...............................................................................................3-6 4. Biological Resources..............................................................................3-8 5. Cultural Resources...............................................................................3-11 6. Geology and Soils.................................................................................3-14 7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions.................................................................3-17 8. Hazards/Hazardous Materials ..............................................................3-18 9. Hydrology and Water Quality................................................................3-21 10. Land Use and Planning ........................................................................3-24 11. Mineral Resources................................................................................3-26 12. Noise ....................................................................................................3-27 13. Population and Housing........................................................................3-29 14. Public Services.....................................................................................3-30 15. Recreation ............................................................................................3-31 16. Transportation/Traffic............................................................................3-32 17. Utilities and Service Systems ...............................................................3-34 18. Mandatory Findings of Significance......................................................3-36 Section4.0 References........................................................................................................4-1 i Initial Study Item B-11 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project ® EXHIBITS Exhibit Follows Page 1 Regional and Local Vicinity............................................................................................2-1 2 Planning Area 1..............................................................................................................2-1 3 Conceptual Development Plan by Placetype.................................................................2-2 APPENDICES Appendix A Geotechnical Investigation B Phase I Environmental Site Assessment • • ii Initial Study Item B-12 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project SECTION 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, California Public Resources Code, Sections 21000, et seq.) and the Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA (State CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq.), this Initial Study(IS) has been prepared for the proposed project, which includes an amendment to the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Sub-Area 18 (also referred to as Empire Lakes) Specific Plan (Specific Plan Amendment), and associated applications for a General Plan Amendment, Zoning Amendment, and parcel map(s), as further described in Section 2.4, Anticipated Discretionary Approvals, of this IS. Information in this IS has been used to determine whether implementation of the proposed project would result in potentially significant environmental impacts that would require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This IS has evaluated each of the issue areas contained in the checklist provided in Section 3.0 of this document. If an IS prepared for a proposed project determines that no significant effects on the environment would occur or that potentially significant impacts can be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of specified mitigation measures, the Lead Agency can prepare a Negative Declaration (ND) or a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) pursuant to the State CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations, Sections 15070-15075). An ND or MND is a statement by the Lead Agency attesting that a project would produce less than significant impacts or that potentially significant impacts can be reduced to less than significant levels with mitigation. If an IS prepared for a proposed project determines it may produce significant effects on the environment,an Environmental Impact Report(EIR)shall be prepared.This further environmental review is required to address the potentially significant environmental effects of the project and to provide mitigation where necessary and feasible. Based on the results of this IS, preparation of an EIR is required. As further discussed in Section 2.2, Project Background, the proposed project site is within the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan area. The IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan was adopted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga July 1994. The environmental impacts resulting from implementation of allowed development under the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan have been evaluated in the Rancho Cucamonga /ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (Specific Plan EIR) (State Clearinghouse No. 93102055) certified by the City of Rancho Cucamonga in July 1994. Two Addenda were subsequently prepared in February 2001 and July 2003 to address amendments to the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan to allow multi-family residential within the Specific Plan area. Further, the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and certified the Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Final Program Environmental Impact Report (2010 General Plan Update EIR) on May 19, 2010. These documents are incorporated by reference (refer to Section 2.4 of this IS). Pursuant to Section 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Rancho Cucamonga is the Lead Agency for the project. The Lead Agency is the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project that may have a significant effect upon the environment. The City of Rancho Cucamonga, as Lead Agency, has the authority for project approval and certification of the accompanying environmental documentation. 1.2 FINDINGS OF THIS INITIAL STUDY This IS is based on an Environmental Checklist Form(Form), as suggested in Section 15063(d)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines. The Form is found in Section 3.1 of this Initial Study. It contains a Initial Study Item B-13 • Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project series of questions about the proposed project for each of the listed environmental topics. The • Form is used to evaluate whether or not there are any potentially significant environmental effects associated with implementation of the proposed project. The explanation for each answer is included in Section 3.1. The Form is used to review the potential environmental effects of the proposed project for each of the following areas: • Aesthetics • Land Use and Planning • Agricultural and Forestry Resources • Mineral Resources • Air Quality • Noise • Biological Resources • Population and Housing • Cultural Resources • Public Services • Geology and Soils • Recreation • Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Transportation and Traffic • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Utilities and Service Systems • Hydrology and Water Quality • Mandatory Findings of Significance As identified through the analysis presented in this IS, the proposed project would have no impacts or less than significant impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources, and mineral resources. • Further analysis for the following environmental topics is required in the forthcoming Draft EIR due to the potential for significant impacts: • Aesthetics • Land Use and Planning • Air Quality • Noise • Biological Resources • Population and Housing • Cultural Resources • Public Services • Geology and Soils • Recreation • Greenhouse Gas Emissions • Transportation and Traffic • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Utilities and Service Systems • Hydrology and Water Quality 1.3 CONTACT PERSON The Lead Agency for the proposed project is the City of Rancho Cucamonga.Any questions about the preparation of the IS, its assumptions, or its conclusions should be referred to the following: Mr. Michael Smith, Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 477-2750, ext. 4317 Michael.Smith@cityofrc.us 1-2 initial Study Item B-14 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project SECTION 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 PROJECT SITE LOCATION AND SETTING The project site is located north of 41h Street, west of Milliken Avenue, east of Cleveland Avenue, and south of 81h Street and the Metrolink rail line in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, in San Bernardino County. The City of Rancho Cucamonga's southern boundary with the City of Ontario is formed by 411 Street. Exhibit 1 depicts the regional location and local vicinity of the project site. The approximately 160.4-acre project site is located within the Industrial Area Specific Plan(IASP) Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan area and consolidates IASP Sub-Area 18 Planning Areas 1A, 1B and a portion of Planning Area III and Planning Area IV in a single Planning Area 1 (PA1) (refer to Exhibit 2). The project site is zoned as IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan (SP-EL). The project site is designated in the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan as Open Space and in the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan as Golf Course. As shown on Exhibit 1, the project site is currently developed with the 18-hole Empire Lakes Golf Course, which is bisected by 61h Street. South of 6th Street, development on the project site includes a portion of the public golf course, a clubhouse, a driving range, and a parking lot..North of 61h Street, development includes a portion of the golf course and a maintenance facility that serves the golf course. Utility infrastructure consisting primarily of water lines is located throughout the project site, and an east-west trending Metropolitan Water District water transmission line traverses the north portion of the property. The elevations on site range from 1,030 above mean sea level (msl)to 1,120 feet above msl with local drainage directed to the south through the use of fairways with berms and/or flow paths along their margins. Soils on and adjacent to the project site consist of Tujunga Loamy Sand and Delhi Fine Sand. Non-structural fill soils up to eight feet in thickness cover the project site. As further discussed in the Biological Resources section of this Initial Study, ornamental landscaping, ruderal/disturbed vegetation, and artificial ponds occur within the golf course. Wildlife adapted to a high degree of human presence and development is present on the project site and primarily includes avian species. No natural plant communities exist on or near the project site, and there is no suitable habitat to support the Delhi Sands flower-loving fly or any other special status plant or wildlife species..No drainage features or isolated wetland features were observed that would be considered jurisdictional by the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers(USACE),the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), or the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station is immediately adjacent to and east of the northern portion of the project site. Other surrounding development is characterized by residential apartment communities to the east; industrial and office uses to the west, north, and northeast; and vacant land and commercial/retail uses in the City of Ontario to the south (including the Ontario Mills shopping center to the southeast). It should also be noted that the project site is located within the LA/Ontario Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) Area of Influence (refer to the discussion provided in Section 8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this Initial Study). 2.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND The City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted the IASP in August 1981. The IASP included approximately 5,000 acres and was divided into 3 zones and 19 subareas. Each subarea represented specific land use characteristics and development constraints. The IASP established specific standards and guidelines for future development of the City's industrial base. 2-1 Initial Study Item B-15 •4 I. 210,5 Ir Visit RP i' .� � 6ily Rancho 6uwmonga 10 Et of o L u r 7w no; k • 1 • t �� ..� n�aY fir) - �. VA 10 too, law Metre fink$tailor { Planning 11 ra \ArX `� 3 j# Y2� aG, I 1-I PSatinin� Arta 1B Plaunin,g Yfai�ning {. Arra XT Are )X y SB at. 19 ac. I � Sixth Street ��+ 'r i p�us S -M PU"Ing VIC. Area VM 28 ac. 2 ac. 6Pilon Planning . 'sf , 2 � iG ace Asea V m I 29 x Hing �" " PSanning u 4 11 29 ac. �Fourth Street PP SourceWilliam Hezmalhalch Architects.irc Planning Area 1 Exhibit 2 IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment P S O M A S . .. .V R Prolecs LEW-[ . Item B-17 - --- - Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • In June 1994, the City Council adopted the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan. This Specific Plan amended the IASP to create a new planning Sub-Area, referred to as Sub-Area 18. The purpose of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan is to provide for a broader mix of land uses than was originally permitted within the 1981 IASP. The Specific Plan was expanded to include such uses as recreational, hotel/conference center, retail, restaurant, and entertainment, as well as office, research and development, and light industrial uses. These uses were intended to surround and complement the then proposed 18-hole Empire Lakes Golf Course, which ultimately was constructed in 1995-1996. Subsequent to 1994,the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan has been amended. In November 2000, the City approved an amendment to the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan to permit multi-family residential uses as an additionally permitted use in the mixed use Planning Area IX. In May 2001, the Council approved an amendment to permit multi-family residential uses as an additionally permitted use in Planning Area VI. In September 2002, the Council approved an amendment to permit market rate senior housing in Planning Area VII as an additionally permitted use. In June 2003, the Council approved an amendment to the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan to also permit multi-family residential uses as an additionally permitted use in Mixed-Use Planning Area VII. In 2012, Section 5.3.2 of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan was amended by Ordinance No. 854. This amendment added language to the Specific Plan to address and require consistency with the LA/Ontario International Land Use Compatibility Plan(LUCP). Building height limits consistent with the LUCP were required for future development, as added into Section 5.3.2 of the Specific Plan. 2.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project involves an amendment to the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan to establish • a mixed use development on the existing Empire Lakes Golf Course property (new PA1). All maps, development standards, and guidelines related to PA1 are provided in a proposed new section of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan (Section 7). The proposed Specific Plan Amendment sets forth the Community Vision, Urban Design Standards, Architectural Guidelines, and Landscape Design for PA1. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment establishes the comprehensive development plan for PA1 to ensure cohesive development with adequate infrastructure, open space, parks, and public facilities. It also serves as a tool for implementing the preferred development strategies within PA1 including high-density and medium-high density residential, mixed use, open space, and transit-oriented land uses all within close proximity to transit services and local regional activity centers. The conceptual development plan for PA1 is provided in Exhibit 3. The conceptual development plan strategically locates a range of Placetypes' to encourage variety within the built environment. Six proposed Placetype designations have been established within PA1 consistent with the guiding principles to create a vibrant built environment that integrates residential and destination services in a mixed use community. The Placetype designations are: Transit, Mixed Use, Urban Neighborhood, Core Living, Village Neighborhood, and Recreation. The proposed residential density range that would be allowed within PA1 for each Placetype is identified on Exhibit 3. The actual number of dwelling units to be developed in each area would be determined during future entitlements processes; however, it is expected that the number of residential dwelling units within PA1 would range from a minimum of 2,500 units to a maximum of up to 4,000 units.The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would also allow for a maximum of 220,000 square feet (sf) of non- • ' Placetypes integrate development principles, built form guidelines, and design criteria to create holistic people- centric places instead of using traditional land use-centric regulations. 2-2 Initial Study Item B-18 Metrolink Red Line ..,.Pocket Park Metrolink N 2 - Station N1 UN N-11- CL MU /o v: N4 The Vine CL N-5 N-10• UN MU J.1'::atNs yM:dix �i a3oc N-12 REC ---- N 6 N-9 CL CL s s.w L The Vine c- n. Nl7 N-11 VN = VN North — 6cn Screec 5-13 5.22 5-21 5-20 South CL RFC REC CL Pocket L Park VN VN 5-15 VN S19 VN 3-16 5-16 -- The Vine VN 9 y x x 5-18 VN m amen Placa!¢a _ LS-47 7 _ � rCCPt1CGC IW41 c_recm:r lREC, 3 1 SOL,— :. IIIan'Hezmarnalch Architects. nc 2015 Conceptual Development Plan by Placetype Exhibit 3 IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment PSOMAS 2•+.1 JAL R.Rolsns LEW KEM Ca., Item B-19 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • residential uses. Recreation/open space areas and infrastructure to serve the proposed uses would also be provided. Development within PA1 would comply with all Federal Aviation Administration Guidelines. The maximum building height in the northern portion of PA1 (north of 6111 Street)would be 70-feet and the maximum building height in the southern portion of PA1 would be 60-feet. Within the Placetypes, transitional spaces and pathways would connect enclaves and promote pedestrian circulation. A Mixed Use Overlay designation would allow for flexible development at key locations. The Mixed Use Overlay represents locations where commercial or mixed use, horizontal or vertical, development could be located, based on market conditions, to converge with primarily residential neighborhoods in unique configurations. To maintain flexibility for responding to changing community needs and market conditions over the build-out, parcels may be converted from one Placetype to another(density transfer). Where density transfers between parcels and Placetype conversions occur, in no case would development exceed the maximum development potential established in the Specific Plan. The proposed circulation concept emphasizes connectivity (vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle) emanating from the Metrolink station and major circulation corridors. Primary vehicular access to PA1 is provided from 7th Street, 61h Street, and 41h Street. Internal circulation would be provided via a network of public and/or private residential collector roadways and local streets designed with on-street parking, street frontages and shaded pedestrian links and open spaces. A continuous connection from 411 Street to the Metrolink Station, via the proposed "Parkway", the undercrossing at 61h Street, and the open space feature along the Parkway (referred to as the I'Vine") allows seamless pedestrian and bicycle connections without crossing a major road. Sustainability is an integral design feature of PA1 with intensification of urban infill development • adjacent to a transit station, resulting in reduced vehicle miles traveled. Other sustainable features which would be implemented as part of the project include, but are not limited to, use of recycled water for landscaping, storm water management, and energy efficiency. The proposed project would also include the installation of on-site storm drain, water quality, water, sewer, electricity, natural gas, and telecommunications infrastructure systems to serve the proposed land uses. The on-site utility infrastructure would connect to existing utilities in the vicinity of the project site or new utility lines that would be installed in the roadways adjacent to the project site. It is expected that construction of the proposed project would be initiated in 2016. The project would be phased based on market demands, but it is expected that development would be complete by 2024. Construction activities would be initiated in the area south of 6th Street followed by the area north of 6th Street. The northern and southern areas would be graded separately; however, there may be overlap in the timing of building construction. 2.4 ANTICIPATED DISCRETIONARY APPROVALS The City of Rancho Cucamonga, as the Lead Agency, is responsible for preparing the EIR and will review and consider the EIR in its decision-making process. The EIR will serve as the primary environmental document for all future entitlements associated with implementing the proposed project, including all discretionary approvals requested or required to implement the project. Initial actions to be considered by the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the proposed project may include, but not be limited to: Certification of the EIR with the determination that the EIR has been prepared in compliance with the requirements of CEQA. • Adoption of the proposed IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment. 2-3 Initial Study Item B-20 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • Approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from "Open Space" to "Mixed Use". • Approval of a Zoning Amendment to update text related to the Mixed Use zone; includes text revisions to Section 17.36.020, Table 17.36.020-1 and Section 17.114.020. It should be noted that approval of Parcel Maps(s), and a Development Agreement executed between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the project applicant may also be considered. Subsequent approvals (which would require separate processing through the City of Rancho Cucamonga)would include, but may not be limited to demolition permits,grading permits, building permits, street and storm drain improvement plans, and encroachment permits. Approvals and permits that may be required by other agencies include: • Cucamonga Valley Water District. Approval of water and sewer improvement plans. • Metropolitan Water District. Encroachment and right-of-way permits for the transmission main that traverses east-west through the northern portion of the project site. • City of Ontario. Master Plan of Storm Drains, Fourth Street Storm Drain Hydraulics Study, and Street Improvement Plans for 41h Street. 2.5 DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE The following reports and/or studies are applicable to development of the project site and are hereby incorporated by reference. • Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Final Program Environmental Impact Report(SCH No. 2000061027) certified May 2010. • Rancho Cucamonga General Plan adopted May 19, 2010 (Housing Chapter adopted November 3, 2010) • /ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan approved in 1994 (revised through 2012). • Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 93102055) approved in July 1994. These reports/studies are available for review at: Public Information and Services Counter City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 (909) 477-2700 Hours: Monday—Thursday: 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM. 2-4 Initial Study Item B-21 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is "Potentially Significant" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages: ® Aesthetic/Visual ❑ Agricultural Resources ® Air Quality ® Biological Resources ® Cultural Resources ® Geology/Soils ® Greenhouse Gas Emissions® Hazards & Hazardous ® HydrologyNVater Quality Materials ® Land Use/Planning ❑ Mineral Resources ® Noise ® Population/Housing ® Public Services ® Recreation ® Transportation/Traffic ® 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, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION would be prepared. • ❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there would 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 would be prepared. ® I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ❑ 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation mea u tha further is requiret are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing d. � [Zt/f�' Signature of Lead Agency Representative Date • AW Sri1 f14 Ory (f (FACua cc'rw��E- Printed name Agency 9 y 2-5 Initial Study Item B-22 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project This page intentionally left blank 2-6 Initial Study Item B-23 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • SECTION 3.0 INITIAL STUDY 3.1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM This section contains the Environmental Checklist Form (Form) for the proposed project. The Form is marked with findings as to the environmental effects of the project. An "X" in column 1 requires preparation of additional environmental analysis in the form of an EIR. This analysis has been undertaken, pursuant to the provisions of CEQA, to provide the City of Rancho Cucamonga with the factual basis for determining, based on the information available, the form of environmental documentation the project warrants. The basis for each of the findings listed in the attached Form is explained in the Explanation of Checklist Responses following the checklist. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Project Title Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Lead Agency Name and City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Department, 10500 Civic Center Drive Address Rancho Cucamonga, California, 91730 Contact Person and Mr. Michael Smith Phone Number (909)477-2750, ext. 4317 Project Location The project site is currently occupied by the Empire Lakes Golf Course and is located between 4th Street and 8 1 Street, west of Milliken Avenue and east of Cleveland Avenue in the City of Rancho Cucamonga in San Bernardino County. • Project Sponsor's Name SC Rancho Development Corp., 1156 North Mountain Avenue, Upland, and Address California, 91786 General Plan Open Space Designation Zoning IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan (SP-EL) Description of Project The proposed project involves an amendment to the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan to establish a mixed use development on the existing Empire Lakes Golf Course property(new PA1).The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would allow for high density, and medium-high density residential, mixed use, open space, and transit-oriented land uses all within close proximity to transit services and local regional activity centers. The number of residential dwelling units within PA1 would range from a minimum of 2,500 units to a maximum of up to 4,000 units.Additionally, a maximum of 220,000 square feet(sf)of non-residential uses would be allowed within the Specific Plan area. Vehicular and non-vehicular circulation would be provided within PA1. Utility infrastructure would be installed, as necessary to serve the proposed uses. 3-1 Initial Study Item B-24 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project Surrounding Land Uses and Setting General Plan2oning Boundary Existing Land Use Designation Northern Heavy Industrial/Minimum Railroad and Industrial Impact Heavy Industrial (MIHI) Eastern Mixed Use/IASP Sub-Area 18 Residential, Office, and Specific Plan (SP-EL) Transit Mixed Use, General Industrial/ Western IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Office and Industrial Plan (SP-EL) City of Ontario Southern Mixed Use (Ontario Undeveloped Center)/SP (Specific Plan) Other public agencies . Cucamonga Valley Water District. Approval of water and sewer whose approval is improvement plans. required • Metropolitan Water District. Encroachment and right-of-way permits for the transmission main that traverses east-west through the northern portion of the project site. • City of Ontario.Approval of Master Plan of Storm Drains, Fourth Street Storm Drain Hydraulics Study, and street improvement plans for 4th Street. 3-2 Initial Study Item B-25 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • Less Than Potentially Significant Less Than No 1. AESTHETICS Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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 ❑ ❑ El 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? Explanation of Checklist Answers 1a. Less Than Significant Impact. As identified in the 2010 General Plan Update EIR, The City sits at the southern base of the San Gabriel Mountains at the eastern end of the range. The San Bernardino Mountains are just east of the San Gabriel Mountains, divided by the Cajon Pass. Views of the San Gabriel and San Bernardino Mountains are visible from the project site and provide a scenic backdrop for the area. According to Figure LU-6 of the Managing Land Use, Community Design, and Historic Resources Element of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, a portion of 61h Street is designated • as a view corridor intended to preserve views of the San Gabriel Mountains. The City recognizes other scenic resources, including remaining stands of eucalyptus windrows, scattered vineyards and orchards, and natural vegetation in flood-control channels and utility corridors; however, none of these resources occur on the project site. The Draft EIR will evaluate the project to determine if it would have an adverse effect on a scenic vista. 1b. No Impact. According to the California Scenic Highway Mapping System, there are no State scenic highways or highways eligible for Scenic highway designation in or near the City (Caltrans 2011). Further, the project site is not visible from any designated scenic highways. Thus, no impacts on State scenic highways would occur. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 1c. Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment would allow for redevelopment of the project site as a mixed-use development. The visual character of the project site, which currently exists as an 18-hole golf course with related amenities, would be altered. The Draft EIR will evaluate the project to determine if the proposed mixed-use development would substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the project site and its surroundings and result in significant environmental impacts. 1d. Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is currently subject to nighttime lighting associated with security lighting from the existing golf course development as well as surrounding residential, office, and industrial uses; light standards along surrounding roadways; and light from motor vehicles traveling along these roadways. ® The proposed project would introduce additional new lighting sources associated with the proposed development. The potential for the project to result in light and glare impacts will be further analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3-3 Initial Study Item B-26 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project Less Than 2. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY Potentially Significant Less Than RESOURCES Significant With Significant No Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and ❑ ❑ ❑ Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ❑ ❑ ❑ Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest.land(as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources ❑ ❑ ❑ Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land ❑ ❑ ❑ to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion ❑ ❑ ❑ of Farmland,to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Explanation of Checklist Answers 2a. No Impact. Based on review of the 2010 Department of Conservation Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP 2010), the project site is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land. Adjacent areas are designated Urban and Built-Up Land or Other Land. These categories are not considered "Farmland" under CEQA. Further, there are no on-going farmland or agricultural operations on the project site or immediately adjacent areas. Therefore, the project would not result in the conversion of agricultural land to non-agricultural uses, either directly and indirectly. No impact would occur related to this issue and no mitigation is required. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft Elk. 2b. No Impact. As identified in the City's General Plan, there are no agricultural zones identified by the City for the project site or any of the surrounding properties. The project site's zoning designation is Empire Lakes Specific Plan (SP-EL), which implements the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan,with an underlying General Plan land use designation of"Open Space". Neither the General Plan nor the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan envision future use of the project site as agricultural lands. Because the project site and surrounding areas are not zoned for agricultural uses, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural uses. Also, the project site is not covered under a Williamson Act Contract; therefore, implementation of the project would not conflict with any Williamson Act Contract. No impacts related to this issue would occur with implementation of the proposed project and no mitigation is required. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3-4 initial Study Item B-27 Rancho Cucamonga 1ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • 2c-2d. No Impact. As identified in the 2010 General Plan Update EIR, there are no existing forest lands, nor is there zoning for forest lands or timberland in the City, including the project site. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing forest zoning; cause rezoning of forest land; or result in the loss or conversion of forest lands to non-forest uses. Therefore, no impacts associated with this issue would occur and no mitigation is required. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 2e. No Impact. Due to the lack of existing farmland, forest lands, or areas zoned for agriculture, or timberlands on the project site or in the immediately surrounding areas, development of the project site would not involve 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. The nearest designated farmland and active agricultural operations is located approximately 0.25 mile west of the project site. Components of the project, including construction and operation, would be limited to the project site and would not impact existing off-site agricultural operations. No impact would occur and no further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. • • 3-5 Initial Study Item B-28 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speck Plan Amendment Project Less Than 3. AIR QUALITY Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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 in non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air ® ❑ ❑ ❑ quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ® ❑ ❑ ❑ concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number ❑ ❑ ® ❑ of people? Explanation of Checklist Answers 3a. Potentially Significant Impact. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is the agency principally responsible for comprehensive air pollution control in the South Coast Air Basin (SoCAB) in which the project site is located. The SCAQMD develops rules and regulations; establishes permitting requirements for stationary sources; inspects emissions sources; and enforces such measures, when necessary. The SCAQMD is directly responsible for reducing emissions from stationary (area and point), mobile, and indirect sources. It has responded to this requirement by preparing a sequence of Air Quality Management Plans(AQMPs).The SCAQMD's current AQMP (adopted in December 2012) is based on the Southern Califomia Association of Government's (SCAG's) population projections that are based on City and County General Plan land use designations. The two principal criteria for conformance to an AQMP are (1) whether the project would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, cause or contribute to new violations,or delay timely attainment of air quality standards and (2)whether the project would exceed the assumptions in the AQMP. The project was not assumed in the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan; therefore the project has the potential to obstruct implementation of the AQMP. This issue will be analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3b. Potentially Significant Impact. A project may have a significant impact where project-related emissions would exceed federal, State, or regional standards or thresholds, or where project-related emissions would substantially contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation. During the construction period, air pollutants would be emitted by off-road and on-road construction equipment and worker vehicles, and fugitive dust would be generated during earth moving and grading on site. During operation, air pollutants would be emitted by area and mobile sources. The potential for the proposed project to violate any air quality standards or contribute substantially 3-6 Initial Study Item B-29 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • to an existing or projected air quality violation will be analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3c. Potentially Significant Impact. The SoCAB is currently a nonattainment area for ozone (03), respirable particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less(PM10), and fine particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5). The proposed project and cumulative development, including development associated with buildout of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, may result in a potential cumulatively significant increase in 03 precursor, PM10, or PM2.5 emissions during construction and/or operation. This issue will be analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3d. Potentially Significant Impact. As previously discussed in Section 2.1, Project Location, the project site is located adjacent to residential land uses, which are considered to be sensitive receptors. Therefore, construction and operation of the proposed project have the potential to emit pollutants in concentrations that are potentially significant to sensitive receptors. Additionally, proposed residential uses would be located in proximity to industrial uses to the north and west of the project site. The type of industrial use and distance from the project site may pose a potential health risk to sensitive receptors from exposure to diesel exhaust emissions or other pollutants. This issue will be analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3e. Less Than Significant Impact. Odors would be emitted during construction and operation of the proposed project. Construction activities associated with the proposed project would have the potential to use equipment and perform activities that would generate odors. Potential construction odors include diesel equipment exhaust, • roofing, painting, and paving. These odors would be temporary and would dissipate rapidly from the source with an increase in distance. Therefore, the impacts would be short-term, would not affect a substantial number of people, and would be less than significant. During operation of the proposed project, some odors associated with residential uses would be expected to occur, such as from cooking and gardening. Similarly, common odors associated with mixed-use and commercial land uses would be expected to occur, such as from restaurants. However, these types of odors are not generally considered objectionable. Potential odors from the project site would be no different than in surroundings development and would not be considered significant. Furthermore, according to the SCAQMD's CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor complaints typically include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding (SCAQMD 1993). The proposed Specific Plan Amendment does not allow any such SCAQMD-identified uses; therefore, it would not produce objectionable odors. The proposed project is not anticipated to result in the generation of objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people, and there would be a less than significant impact. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. • 3-7 Initial Study Item B-30 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project Less Than 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would the project a) Have a substantial adverse effect,either directly or through habitat modification, 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 any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Department of Fish and Game or U.S. 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? Explanation of Checklist Answers The information presented in this section is based on the Draft Habitat Assessment for the Empire Lakes Golf Course Project Located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California (Habitat Assessment) prepared by RBF Consulting in September 2014 (RBF 2014). The following vegetation types and other areas occur in the survey area: landscaped, ruderal/disturbed, artificial ponds, and developed. Landscaped areas comprise a majority of the project site and include areas that are routinely maintained such as golf course fairways, greens, a driving range, and ornamental landscaping. Ruderal/disturbed areas occur along the margins between the fairways and greens. These areas are composed of compacted soils with early successional and non-native plant species. Four artificial ponds are located on the project site. The ponds were constructed in conjunction with the Empire Lakes Golf Course and are routinely maintained.The ponds do not contain any hydrophytic vegetation. Developed areas on the project site consist of parking lots, maintenance roads, golf cart paths, and structures associated with the Empire Lakes Golf Course(i.e., a clubhouse, restrooms,and maintenance buildings). Native plant communities no longer occur on the project site. g-g Initial Study Item B-31 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • The majority of the wildlife observed during the habitat assessment consisted of avian species. Mammalian sign and species observed during the survey. Based on the habitats present, the project site is not expected to support an extensive variety of reptilian species. No fish or amphibians were observed during the habitat assessment; however, non-native/exotic fish species could occur within the artificial ponds as introduced species. The artificial ponds have the potential to support a limited number of amphibian species. Sensitive amphibian species are not expected to occur within the artificial ponds due to the lack of native vegetation; continual on-site disturbances and surrounding development; and isolation from a natural waterways that support native amphibian populations. As further discussed under Threshold 4a below,the project site does not include habitat to support sensitive plant or wildlife species. 4a. Potentially Significant Impact. According to the draft Habitat Assessment, 8 sensitive plant species and 11 sensitive wildlife species are known to occur in the project area. Under existing conditions, the project site and surrounding properties do not support native plant communities, nor do they provide suitable habitat for sensitive plant or wildlife species. The majority of the project site has been developed and/or has been heavily disturbed by existing development and no longer supports native soils or naturally occurring habitats. No California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) sensitive habitats were identified as occurring within the project area. Based on habitat requirements for specific species and availability and quality of habitats needed by each sensitive plant or wildlife species, the project site does not provide suitable habitat that would support any of these special status plant or wildlife species. • While it not expected that the project would result in significant to special status plant or wildlife species, this issue will be further analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 0-4c. Potentially Significant Impact. During the habitat assessment, no drainage features or isolated wetland features were observed within the project site that would be considered jurisdictional by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), or CDFW. As discussed previously, four artificial ponds are located on the project site. The ponds do not occur in a natural drainage course and have no upstream or downstream connectivity to jurisdictional waters. Therefore, it is not expected that the proposed project would result in impacts to USACE, RWQCB, or CDFW jurisdictional areas, or impact riparian habitat or wetlands. Further, no sensitive plant communities were identified as having the potential to occur in the project area, and the project site and surrounding areas are not located within federally designated Critical Habitat. While it not expected that the project would result in a significant impact to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community, this issue will be further analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 4d. Potentially Significant Impact. The project site does not provide any connectivity between natural open space areas. Additionally, and as noted in the 2010 General Plan Update EIR, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, does not contain known native wildlife nursery sites. On-site development and surrounding land uses have removed the natural plant communities that once occurred on and in the vicinity of the project site. As a result, the project site does not possess or provide a corridor that would facilitate the moment of wildlife throughout the area. Therefore, it is not expected that the proposed project would disrupt or have any adverse effects to migratory corridors or linkages that may occur in the general vicinity of the project site. However, this issue • will be further analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3-9 Initial Study Item B-32 Rancho Cucamonga 1ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project 4e. Potentially Significant Impact. Chapter 17.80, Tree Preservation, of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, provides for the protection and expansion of eucalyptus windrows in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Section 17.16.080, Tree Removal Permit, of the Rancho Cucamonga Development Code outlines the review process and requirements for the removal of heritage trees that are considered to be a community resource. There are heritage trees, as defined in the City's Development Code, on the project site. Although impacts associated with tree removal are expected to be less than significant with adherence to City's requirements, potential impacts will be further analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 4f. No Impact. The City of Rancho Cucamonga, and specifically the project site, is not located within an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan; Natural Communities Conservation Plan; or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan area. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with the provisions of an adopted plan. No impact would occur. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3-10 Initial Study Item B-33 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project ® Less Than 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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 ® ❑ El Elan archaeological resource pursuant to§15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ® El ❑ El or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Explanation of Checklist Answers 5a. No Impact. On February 11, 2015, BonTerra Psomas staff conducted a records search/literature review at the Archaeological Information Center (AIC) at the San Bernardino County Museum in San Bernardino County, California. The AIC maintains a large collection of U.S. Geological Survey(USGS) 7.5-minute quadrangle maps, site records, and technical studies pertaining to cultural resources in San Bernardino • County. The AIC is the designated branch of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), which is the primary source for obtaining and reviewing records and literature regarding cultural resources for a specific project. Additional resources available at the AIC include Archaeological Determinations of Eligibility, USGS 15-minute historic plat maps, and the Historic Property Data File (HPDF) maintained by the California Office of Historic Preservation. The HPDF contains listings for the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) and/or National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Historical Landmarks, and California Points of Historical Interest. For projects located on federal lands, various federal agencies maintain records in addition to those at the CHRIS locations. The AIC provided a USGS Guasti 7.5-minute quadrangle with accompanying overlays that depict the locations of recorded historic properties and recorded historic and prehistoric archaeological sites. Another set of overlays depict the location and boundaries for cultural resource technical studies. Following a review of the AIC topographic maps and overlays, it was determined that there are no historic properties recorded on the project site and that only four are within its one-mile radius. The first is the Burlington Northern and Santa Fee (BNSF) Railway, now a part of the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railway (ATSF) that runs east-west along the north side of 81h Avenue. Three historic residences are recorded at the intersection of 8th Street and Haven Avenue. None of these resources are in the project site. Also, the review indicates that there have been 17 cultural resource studies conducted within a 1-mile radius of the project area, but only 2 included some portion of the project • site; a third project was immediately adjacent to the project site within or next to paved roads abutting the site.Those three projects consisted of an architectural survey report (White 1994) for a Metrolink project in Rancho Cucamonga. That project appears to 3-11 Initial Study Item B-34 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project have included a very small portion of the proposed project site. The second was a very small survey for a communications project (Wlodarski 2010), not located in the project site. The third project, which may have included a portion of the Empire Lakes project site, was an archaeological survey conducted in 2004 by Hogan and Tang. The focus of the surrey was at least two sections of water pipe: one along Milliken Avenue on the southeast corner of Section 13 and the other along Cleveland Avenue on the northwest boundary of the project. None of these projects resulted in the recordation of any historic properties on or adjacent to the project site. According to the Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, the project site has historically been used as a vineyard prior to development of the Empire Lakes Golf Course. The project site is currently fully developed with uses related to the golf course. The south portion of the Empire Lakes Golf Course consists of seven golf holes with three ponds, practice facilities, and clubhouse/restaurant/cart barn building. The north portion of the Empire Lakes Golf Course consists of eleven golf holes a pond and the maintenance facility. The maintenance facility consists of three buildings. The golf course and associated uses were constructed in 1995-1996. The California Office of Historic Preservation recommends recording resources that are at least 45 years old and formally evaluating those that have reached 50 years of age; therefore, the on-site structures, which are 20 years old or less, would not warrant recordation or evaluation. Figure LU-8, Historic Resources, of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan's does not identify historic resources on the project site; however, consistent with the literature search, the BNSF railway is identified as a Historic Transportation Route north of the project site. No historical resources are present or would be impacted by project implementation. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 5b. Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed previously, the project site and surrounding area have historically been used as a vineyard; however, the project site and surrounding areas were previously disturbed during grading and construction activities associated with development of the Empire Lakes Golf Course and adjacent uses. Construction activities for the proposed project would involve grading and excavation activities in soils that would have the potential to encounter previously undiscovered historic or archaeological resources. Potential impacts to historic and archaeological resources will be further analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 5c. Potentially Significant Impact.According to the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan's Resource Conservation Element, soils and geologic formations within the City, including the project site, have a low potential to contain significant paleontological resources. However, similar to archaeological resources, there is a potential that ground-disturbing activities associated with construction would encounter previously undiscovered paleontological resources. Potential impacts to paleontological resources will be further analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 5d. Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed previously, the project site has been historically used as a vineyard prior to development of the Empire Lakes Golf Course. Therefore, the project site is not expected to contain human remains, including those interred outside formal cemeteries. However, there is a potential that ground- disturbing activities associated with construction would encounter previously undiscovered human remains. Should this occur, all activities in the vicinity of the remains shall cease and the contractor shall notify the County Coroner immediately 3-12 Initial Study Item B-35 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project ® pursuant to Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code and Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code. Although impacts associated with this issue are expected to be less than significant with adherence to applicable State requirements, potential impacts related to disturbing human remains will be further analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. • 3-13 Initial Study Item B-36 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project Less Than 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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 onsite or offsite 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 waste water disposal systems ❑ ❑ ❑ where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Explanation of Checklist Answers Information presented in this section is derived primarily from the Geotechnical Feasibility Study Proposed Mixed-Use Commercial and Residential Development Empire Lakes Golf Course Property Rancho Cucamonga, California (Geotechnical Investigation) prepared for the proposed project by LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. and dated March 23, 2015 (LOR 2015). The Geotechnical Investigation is provided in its entirety in Appendix A of this Initial Study. The Geotechnical Investigation includes an aerial photograph analysis; a review of previous reports; geologic field reconnaissance; development of geotechnical recommendations; and preparation of the geotechnical report. 6a(i). No Impact. No active or potentially active faults are known to exist at the project site. Additionally, the project site is not within a current State of California Earthquake Fault Zone. As shown on Figure PS-2, Fault Hazards, of the Rancho Cucamonga General 3-14 Initial Study Item B-37 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • Plan's Public Health and Safety Element, the project site is located outside both existing and proposed Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Zones. Several known faults are located in the vicinity; the Red Hill Fault, located approximately four miles north of the project site, is the closest known active fault. Additionally, the Cucamonga Fault is located approximately 5.5 miles north at the base of the San Gabriel Mountains; the San Jacinto Fault is located approximately 12 miles to the northeast; and the San Bernardino segment of the San Andreas fault zone is located approximately 15 miles to the northeast. Based on historical seismicity of the project site and surrounding region, the site would be subject to moderate to large seismic events; however, the lack of active faults on the project site would preclude impacts related to surface fault rupture, and no mitigation is required. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 6a(ii). Potentially Significant Impact. According to the Geotechnical Investigation and as discussed above under Threshold 6a(i), the project site is located in proximity to the Cucamonga and San Jacinto faults and the San Bernardino segment of the San Andreas fault zone. The historic seismicity of the site entails numerous small to medium magnitude earthquake events occurring around the project site, primarily associated with the presence of the San Jacinto Fault. Therefore, proposed uses at the project site may be subject to moderate to large seismic events, resulting in strong seismic ground shaking. Although impacts associated with this issue are expected to be less than significant with adherence to applicable local, regional, and/or State requirements, potential impacts related to this issue will be further analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. • 6a(iii). Less Than Significant. Liquefaction may occur during strong ground shaking events in areas with loose, geologically young, granular sediments where the groundwater depth is less than 50 feet. In the project area,groundwater depths are 350 feet or more below the ground surface; therefore, the potential for liquefaction is low. Additionally, according to Figure PS-3 of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, the project site is located in an area that is not subject to liquefaction. Figure PS-3 also identifies other geotechnical hazards and identifies that the project site, along with the majority of the City, has the potential for regional seismic settlement. According to the site specific Geotechnical Investigation, settlement generally occurs within areas of loose, granular soils with relatively low density. The project site is underlain by relatively dense, alluvial materials; therefore, the potential for settlement is considered low (LOR 2015). There would be less than significant impacts related to liquefaction and other ground failure. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the Draft EIR. 6a(iv). No Impact. The Geotechnical Investigation concludes that there would be no impacts related to landslides due to the low relief of the site and surrounding region (LOR 2015). No large, exposed, loose or unrooted boulders are present above the site. Additionally, Figure PS-3 of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan indicates that the project area is not located in an area that is susceptible to seismically induced landslides. There would be no impacts related to landslides. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the Draft EIR. 6b. Potentially Significant Impact. According to Exhibit 4.7-4 of the 2010 General Plan Update EIR, the project site is located within a soil erosion hazard area, where • underlying soils have a moderate to high erosion hazard and soil blowing hazard. Grading and excavation activities for construction may lead to localized erosion, as 3-15 Initial Study Item B-38 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project wind and water carry loose soils off site. Although impacts associated with this issue are expected to be less than significant with adherence to applicable local, regional, and State requirements,this issue will be further analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 6c. Potentially Significant Impact. As noted previously, the project site is relatively flat and the potential for mass movement failures such as landslides, rockfalls, or debris flows is low. Additionally, ground settlement generally occurs within areas of loose, granular soils with relatively low density. Because the site is underlain by relatively dense, alluvial materials, the potential for settlement is also considered low. However, this issue will be further analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 6d. Potentially Significant Impact.According to the Geotechnical Investigation prepared pursuant to SC 4.7-9 of the 2010 General Plan Update EIR,the project site is underlain by materials with very low expansion potential, as determined in accordance with Uniform Building Code (Standard 18-2). No specific remediation or construction recommendations are anticipated; however, the Geotechnical Investigation identifies the need for additional evaluation of on-site soils and imported soils. Although impacts associated with this issue are expected to be less than significant with adherence to applicable local, regional, and State requirements, potential impacts will be analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 6e. No Impact. The proposed project shall connect to existing sewer facilities; therefore, septic tanks or an alternative wastewater disposal system would not be permitted or utilized.The proposed project would also connect to existing sewer lines and treatment facilities, and there would be no impact. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR.. 3-16 Initial Study Item B-39 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project ® Less Than 7. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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? Explanation of Checklist Answers 7a-7b. Potentially Significant Impact. During construction of the proposed project, equipment and vehicles would be used that would generate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Operation of the proposed project would have the potential to increase GHG emissions with an increase in traffic; increased demand for water and energy; and the generation of solid waste and wastewater. The potential for the proposed project to generate GHG emissions during construction and operation, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment will be analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. Furthermore, the EIR will include an evaluation of the • proposed project's consistency with applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. • 3-17 initial Study Item B-40 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project Less Than 8. HAZARDSMAZARDOUS MATERIALS Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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 one- ❑ ❑ ❑ quarter-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 two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project ® ❑ ❑ ❑ result in a safety hazard or 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? Explanation of Checklist Answers 8a. Potentially Significant Impact. Construction activities associated with the proposed project would involve the use of chemical substances (e.g., solvents, paints, fuel for equipment) and other potentially hazardous materials. These materials are common with typical construction activities and do not pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment. As discussed previously, the project proposes development of residential uses with some mixed-use office and commercial development and limited transit uses. The nature of the proposed land uses is not expected to involve the use, handling, or storage of hazardous wastes. Standard household and cleaning products common to all urban development that are labeled hazardous (e.g., solvents and commercial cleansers, petroleum products), pesticides, fertilizers, and other landscape 3-18 Initial Study Item B-41 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • maintenance materials may be used on site. Although impacts associated with this issue are expected to be less than significant with adherence to applicable local, regional, and/or State requirements, potential impacts related to the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials will be analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 8b. Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed previously, the project site is currently developed as the 18-hole Empire Lakes Golf Course. Prior to development as a golf course in 1995, the project site existed as a vineyard with associated structures, including a small residence and barn. The potential for past and current uses to 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 will be analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 8c. No Impact. Several schools are located in the vicinity of the project site, including University of Redlands located approximately 0.50 mile west of the project site; Brandman University located 0.51 mile to the south; Cambridge College located 0.60 mile to the northwest; Ontario Center School located 0.83 mile to the southwest; and Rancho Cucamonga Middle School located 1.04 miles northwest of the project site. None of these schools are located within '/4 mile of the project site. Additionally, as noted above, the proposed land uses would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste. There would be no impact related to emissions of hazardous materials within '/4 mile of a school. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 8d. No Impact. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Limited Site • Characterization Empire Lakes Golf Course 11015 Sixth St. and 9097 Cleveland Ave. Rancho Cucamonga San Bernardino County, California (Phase I ESA) was prepared for the proposed project by LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. (February 26, 2014) (LOR 2014), and is provided in Appendix B. Based on a review of regulatory agency records conducted as part of the Phase I ESA, several listings of hazardous materials sites were identified within a one-mile radius of the project site; however, none of the listings would pose an adverse environmental impact to the project site. The project site is not included on and, as a result, would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 8e. Potentially Significant Impact. There is no airport in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The nearest airport to the City is the LA/Ontario International Airport, located approximately 1.2 miles south of the City's southern boundary. According to the LA/Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ONT LUCP) (Ontario 2011), the southern section of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located within the airport influence area of the LA/Ontario International Airport. The ONT LUCP identifies the Airport Influence Area as areas around the LA/Ontario International Airport where current or future airport-related safety, noise, airspace protection or overflight factors may affect land uses or impose restrictions on land uses. The designated Safety Zones includes areas surrounding the runways where land use restrictions have been established to protect the safety of the public from potential aircraft accidents. The site is located outside these Safety Zones. The Noise Impact Zones are areas where future 2030 aircraft and airport operations are projected to lead to noise levels of 60 dB CNEL or higher. Noise criteria have been developed for these zones, identifying the acceptability of specific land uses and interior noise level 3-19 Initial Study Item B-42 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project requirements within each noise impact zone. The project site is located outside the Noise Impact Zones. The project's proposed heights are the following: northern portion of PA1 (north of 6th Street) is 70 feet and the southern portion (between 4th Street and 6th Street) of PA1 is 60 ft. The area between 4th Street and 6th Street (southern area of PA1) is within the High Terrain Zone of the ONT ALUCP (Map 2-4). Dedication of an aviation easement is required for development within PA1 that is within the High Terrain Zone in accordance with Airspace Protection Policy A2b and Special Compatibility Policy SP1 a of the ONT ALUCP(pages 2-28; 2-33; Map 2-5). The entire area of PA1 is within the Airport Influence Area (AIA) and a Real Estate Transaction Disclosure is required in accordance with Overflight Policy 02 (page 2-32; Map 2-5). Section 5.3.2 of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan requires compliance with the ONT ALUCP. This issue will be further analyzed in the Draft EIR. 8f. No Impact. The proposed project is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip and would not expose people to excessive noise levels. The nearest private airport is the Cable Airport, located approximately 6.7 miles northwest of the project site in the City of Upland. The RPZ for this airport does not extend into the City. Aircraft operations at this airport and other activities at this airport would not be adversely affected by development associated with the proposed project. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 8g. Less Than Significant Impact. In 2009, the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted the Rancho Cucamonga Emergency Operations Plan,which addresses the City's planned response to extraordinary emergency situations (Rancho Cucamonga 2009). This document incorporates principles of both the Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) and the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and provides an overview of operational concepts; details components of the City's emergency management organization; and delegates responsibilities and authorities for plan implementation. This City is currently updating the Emergency Operations Plan; however, the proposed project does not include any uses that would impede or interfere with implementation of this plan. Additionally, in January 2013, the City released the City of Rancho Cucamonga Local Hazard Mitigation Plan to assess natural and manmade hazards with the potential to impact the City and its inhabitants and to establish measures to mitigate or reduce future losses associated with these hazards (Rancho Cucamonga 2013). The Local Hazard Mitigation Plan was adopted by the City in 2014. As discussed above, the project would not exacerbate existing hazardous conditions, nor would it expose people or structures to areas of known natural or manmade hazards. Therefore, the project would not interfere with implementation of the plan. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the Draft EIR. 8h. No Impact. As shown on Figure PS-1 of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, the project site is located outside all designated fire hazard areas. The project site is largely surrounded by development, with no wildland areas in the immediate vicinity. The nearest designated fire hazard areas are located approximately three miles north of the project site. Therefore, the project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk associated with wildland fires. No impacts would result and no mitigation is required. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3-20 Initial Study Item B-43 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • Less Than 9. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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 onsite or offsite? 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 onsite or offsite? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the • capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage ❑ ❑ ❑ systems or provide substantial additional sources of pollutant 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 which ❑ 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? lit Inundation by seiche, tsunami,or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ Explanation of Checklist Answers 9a, 9f. Potentially Significant Impact. In 2002, the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) issued a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) Storm Water Permit and Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) (Order No. R8-2002-0012) under the Clean Water Act(CWA) and the Porter-Cologne Act for discharges of storm water runoff, snowmelt runoff, surface runoff, and drainage within • the Upper Santa Ana River Watershed in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. This permit expired on April 27, 2007, and was administratively extended. On January 3-21 Initial Study Item B-44 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project 29, 2010, the RWQCB adopted Order No. R8-2010-0036 (NPDES No. CAS618036), which renewed the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit for San Bernardino County (SWRCB 2014). This permit expired on January 29, 2015. On August 1, 2014, the San Bernardino County Flood Control District submitted a Report of Waste Discharge(ROWD)on behalf of San Bernardino County and 16 incorporated cities within San Bernardino County, which serves as the permit renewal for the MS4 permit. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is within the jurisdiction of the Santa Ana RWQCB and is subject to the waste discharge requirements of the MS4 Permit for San Bernardino County (Order No. R8-2010-0036, NPDES No. CAS618036). The County and Cities in the County are co=permittees under the MS4 permit, and have legal authority to enforce the terms of the permit in their jurisdictions. The Draft EIR will describe current water quality conditions and will provide an analysis of potential short-term and long-term water quality impacts associated with the proposed uses. The Draft EIR will also address compliance with existing water quality regulations and appropriate mitigation will be identified as necessary. 9b. Less Than Significant Impact. Potable water service is provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga by the Cucamonga Valley Water District(CVWD),with the largest amount of water supply coming from the Chino Groundwater Basin. According to Figure RC-3 of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, the project site is not in a recharge basin. Although implementation of the proposed project would reduce the pervious areas available for potential natural recharge (due to the construction of the residential and other mixed use buildings, parking areas, roadway improvements, and sidewalks),the area of the project site is relatively small (160.4 acres) in relation to the total size of the Chino Groundwater Basin, and the project site's only source of water is from direct precipitation, providing little opportunity to recharge under existing conditions. The proposed project would not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. This impact would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 9c-9e. Potentially Significant Impact. Existing water bodies on the project site are limited to artificial ponds associated with the golf course.There are no drainage courses within the project site; therefore, the proposed project would not alter the course of a stream or river. However, as previously discussed, development of the proposed project would result in the conversion of on-site permeable surfaces to impermeable surfaces, which would alter the current drainage pattern of the project site. By increasing the amount of impervious surfaces on the site, more surface runoff would be generated and the rate and volume of runoff could increase.The project would include installation of a storm drain system that is of sufficient size to accommodate runoff from the project site. Although impacts associated with this issue are expected to be less than significant with adherence to applicable local, regional, and State requirements, potential impacts related to alterations in the site drainage patterns will be analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3-22 Initial Study Item B-45 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • 9g-9h. No Impact. As shown on Figure PS-5 of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, the project site is located in a minimum flood hazard area, which is outside the 0.2 percent annual chance of flood hazard area. Additionally, the project site does not contain any drainages or large water bodies that would pose a flood hazard. Therefore, the project would not place housing or structures within a 100-year flood hazard area or in areas that would redirect flood flows. No impacts would result and no mitigation is required. No further analysis of these thresholds will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 9i. No Impact. As noted above, the project site is located outside the 0.2 percent annual change of flood hazard area. As shown on Figure PS-6 of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, the project site is located outside all identified dam inundation areas. Therefore, the project would not expose people of 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. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 9j. No Impact. According to the Geotechnical Investigation prepared for the proposed project and included in Appendix A, there is no potential for the project site to be affected by a seiche or tsunami (earthquake generated wave) due to the absence of any large open bodies of water near the site. The small, on-site ponds could produce waves as a result of a large, nearby earthquake; however the impacts would be minor and would not represent a significant impact (LOR 2014). No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3-23 Initial Study Item B-46 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project Less Than 10. LAND USE AND PLANNING Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the 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? Explanation of Checklist Answers 10a. No Impact. As discussed in Section 2, Project Description, of this Initial Study, the project site is currently developed as the Empire Lakes Golf Course. Adjacent areas are developed with land uses unrelated to the golf course, including residential communities to the east; office and transit-related uses to the northeast; transit and industrial uses to the north; a variety of industrial and office uses to the west; vacant, undeveloped parcels and office uses to the south; and commercial and retail uses, including Ontario Mills, to the southwest. As part of the proposed project, mixed use residential and retail uses and transit uses would be constructed at the project site. Because the surrounding developments exist independent of each other and independent of the existing golf course development, implementation of the proposed project would not physically divide an established community. No impact would occur and no further analysis of this issue will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 10b. Potentially Significant Impact. This section is divided into discussions of Local Planning Programs and Regional Planning Programs. Local Planning Programs All activities undertaken by a planning agency must be consistent with the goals and policies of the agency's general plan. The Rancho Cucamonga General Plan's Managing Land Use, Community Design and Historic Resources Element, as adopted in 2010, plays a central planning role in correlating all City land use issues, goals, and objectives into one set of development policies. The project site is located within the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan in the City of Rancho Cucamonga and is zoned as Empire Lakes Specific Plan (SP-EL). The proposed project involves the construction and operation of a residential development with some mixed-use residential and commercial areas and limited transit development. A requested action of the proposed project is an amendment to the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan, which currently identifies the site as Golf Course. Additionally, the project site is designated in the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan as Open Space and would require an amendment to the General Plan. The proposed project's consistency with General Plan goals and policies, the City's Development Code, and the provisions of the IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan will be addressed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3-24 Initial Study Item B-47 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • The project's consistency with the LA/Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan is discussed in the Hazards and Hazardous Materials and Noise sections of this Initial Study. Regional Planning Programs With respect to regional planning, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for six counties: Riverside, Los Angeles, Orange, San Bernardino, Ventura, and Imperial. As the designated MPO, the federal government mandates SCAG to research and draw up plans for transportation, growth management, hazardous waste management, and air quality. Additionally, SCAG reviews EIRs for projects of regional significance for consistency with regional plans (SCAG 2014). According to Section 15206(b) of the State CEQA Guidelines, a project of statewide, regional, or areawide significance may include 500 or more residential dwelling units. The proposed project is located on an approximate 160.4-acre site and includes development of up to 4,000 residential dwelling units and 220,000 sf of non-residential uses; therefore, it is regionally significant. The policies and strategies of SCAG's regional planning programs, including the 2012 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Community Strategy (RTP/SCS) (adopted in April 2012), are applicable to the proposed project. An analysis of the proposed project's consistency with relevant SCAG and other regional planning programs will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 10c. No Impact. As previously discussed in the Biological Resources section of this Initial • Study, the project site is not within an HCP or NCCP; therefore, no further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3-25 Initial Study Item B-48 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project Less Than 11. MINERAL RESOURCES Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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? Explanation of Checklist Answers 11a-11b. No Impact. Figure 4.11-1, Mineral Land Classification, of the Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update EIR shows that the proposed project site is located within Mineral Resource Zone 3 (MRZ-3), as classified by the State Mining and Geology Board (SMGB). MRZ-3 is classified as an area where the available geologic information indicates that mineral deposits exist or are likely to exist; however, the significance of the deposit is undetermined. However, Figure RC-2, Regionally Significant Aggregate Resources, of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan shows that the project site is not located in an aggregate resource area. Accordingly, no impact to availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site would occur. No impacts are anticipated. No further analysis of these thresholds will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3-26 Initial Study Item B-49 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • Less Than 12. NOISE Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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 ® ❑ ❑ ❑ groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in ® ❑ ❑ ❑ the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing ® ❑ ❑ ❑ without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two 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? Explanation of Checklist Answers 12a. Potentially Significant Impact. Established noise standards applicable to the proposed project are included in the following regulatory documents: the Public Health and Safety Element of the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan and Section 17.66.050 of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Proposed land uses would be exposed to noise from adjacent roadways; the railroad lines along the northern boundary of the project site; and stationary sources associated with surrounding land uses. This threshold will be evaluated in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 12b. Potentially Significant Impact. Construction activities can result in varying degrees of ground vibration, depending on the equipment and methods used, distance to the affected structures, and soil type. Groundbourne vibration generated by construction is usually highest during rock blasting, pile driving, soil compacting, and demolition- related activities. Vibration impacts are also dependent on the presence of sensitive receptors in the area. Residential uses are located immediately east of the project site and may be subject to vibration impacts during construction of the proposed project. This threshold will be analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 12c. Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project could result in a permanent increase in ambient noise levels from an increase in traffic on local roads and on-site uses. Therefore, this threshold will be analyzed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. • 12d. Potentially Significant Impact. Development of the proposed project may result in temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels in the project area due to 3-27 Initial Study Item B-50 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project construction activities and may potentially result in significant short-term noise impacts during construction. Therefore, this threshold will be addressed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 12e. Less than Significant Impact. According to the LA/Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ONT LUCP), adopted in April 2011, the 60 decibel (dB) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL)contour developed from forecasts of future operations in 2030 would not lie within the City of Rancho Cucamonga (Ontario 2011). The ONT ALUCP states that Rancho Cucamonga is not an affected jurisdiction for noise. Therefore, the proposed project is not anticipated to be exposed to excessive noise levels, and there would be a less than significant impact. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 12f. No Impact. The proposed project is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip and would not expose people to excessive noise levels. The nearest private airport is the Cable Airport, located approximately 6.7 miles northwest of the project site in the City of Upland. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3-28 Initial Study Item B-51 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 -- Specific Plan Amendment Project • Less Than 13. POPULATION AND HOUSING Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and ® ❑ ❑ E]businesses) or indirectly (for example, through the extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing ❑ ❑ ❑ elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ❑ El Elconstruction of replacement housing elsewhere? Explanation of Checklist Answers 13a. Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project involves the development of a mix of residential and commercial uses and would directly increase the population and employment in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Additionally, the project would create short-term (construction-related) jobs. This threshold will be addressed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 13b-13c. No Impact.The proposed project site is currently developed as a golf course and does not include any residential uses. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in the removal of existing housing; would not require the construction of replacement housing; and would not displace any existing residents. No impact related to displacement of existing housing or substantial numbers of people would occur and no further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the forthcoming Draft EIR. • 3-29 Initial Study Item B-52 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project Less Than 14. PUBLIC SERVICES Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would the project: a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically altered government 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: Fire protection? ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Police protection? ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Schools? ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Parks? ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Other public facilities? ® ❑ ❑ ❑ Explanation of Checklist Answers 14a. Potentially Significant Impact. Fire protection services for the project site are provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District; park and library services are provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga; police protection services are provided by the County of San Bernardino Sheriffs Department; and school services are provided by the Cucamonga School District for elementary and middle schools and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District for secondary public education. Implementation of the proposed project would involve construction of new residential uses resulting in an increase in the City's population and an increase in the demand for these public services. The project's potential impacts to public services.related to the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities and including impacts to service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives will be addressed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3-30 Initial Study Item B-53 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Speciric Plan Amendment Project Less Than 15. RECREATION Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would/does the project: a) Would the project 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? Explanation of Checklist Answers 15a-15b. Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed in previously in Section 2, Project Description, the proposed project would include open space and recreation areas. Implementation of the proposed project would involve construction of new residential uses resulting in an increase in the City's population and increase in the demand for these recreational facilities. The proposed project's anticipated demand for new or expanded recreational facilities will be evaluated. These thresholds will be addressed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 3-31 Initial Study Item B-54 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project Less Than 16.TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system,taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non- ® ❑ ❑ ❑ motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths,and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other ® ❑ ❑ ❑ standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns,including either an increase in traffic levels or change in location that results ❑ ❑ ® ❑ in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or ® ❑ ❑ ❑ incompatible uses(e.g.,farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ® ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or ® ❑ ❑ ❑ otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? Explanation of Checklist Answers 16a. Potentially Significant Impact.The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would allow for the development of a minimum of 2,500 and a maximum of up to 4,000 residential dwelling units as well as up to 220,000 sf of non-residential uses. These land uses would result in additional traffic generation beyond existing and forecasted conditions. The estimated trip generation, and potential project-specific short-term construction- related and long-term operational traffic-related impacts (including but not limited to intersections, streets, and freeways) will be analyzed in a project-specific Traffic Impact Assessment(TIA) and will be addressed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. The TIA will also identify feasible mitigation measures for significantly impacted facilities, and will identify impacts for which there are no feasible mitigation measures, as appropriate. The Draft EIR and TIA will be transmitted to agencies with jurisdiction over intersections, streets and freeways within the traffic study area, including the City of Ontario and the California Department of Transportation. Non-vehicular modes of transportation—including pedestrian and bicycle paths and mass transit—are discussed under Threshold 16f, below. 3-32 Initial Study Item B-55 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • 16b. Potentially Significant Impact. The San Bernardino County Congestion Management Program (CMP) is the applicable CMP for the proposed project and is developed and adopted by the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG). The CMP includes level of service(LOS)standards forfreeway segments in the project study area. The potential for proposed project traffic to exceed the established standards in the CMP will be addressed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 16c. Less Than Significant Impact. The anticipated increase in population and employment generated by the uses that would be allowed by the proposed Specific Plan Amendment would not be of a magnitude that would impact air traffic volumes. Further, the project would not include any uses that would change air traffic patterns. No substantial safety risks would result from the proposed project and no mitigation is required. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the Draft EIR. 16d. Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed in Section 2, Project Description, and shown on Exhibit 3, an internal circulation system of public and/or private facilities would be constructed as part of the project within the boundaries of the project site. The design of roadways must provide adequate sight distance and traffic-control measures. This provision is normally realized through roadway design to facilitate roadway traffic flows. Public roadway improvements in and around the project site would be designed and constructed to satisfy applicable City requirements for street widths, corner radii, and intersection control. This threshold will be addressed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 16e. Potentially Significant Impact. As discussed in the 2010 General Plan Update EIR, • the City of Rancho Cucamonga has a developed roadway network that provides emergency access and evacuation routes to existing development. Interstate (1) 210 Freeway runs east-west through the City and 1-15 runs along its eastern edge. 1-10 is located south of the City and runs in an east-west direction through the region. 1-15 is located approximately 0.85 mile east of the project site, and 1-10 is located approximately 0.65 mile south of the project site. These freeways provide areawide evacuation routes, with major north-south and east-west roadways in the City connecting to the freeways and adjacent cities. The project site is located along two major divided arterial roadways: 41h Street and 6th Street. Direct access to 1-15 and I- 10 is provided by 4th Street. The potential for the project to impact these regional emergency access routes will be addressed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. Construction activities on public rights-of-way may temporarily block traffic and access near the construction zone. Therefore, there is a potential to create an impact related to emergency response and access in the vicinity of the project site during construction. This threshold will be addressed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 16f. Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project would promote a variety of alternate modes of transportation, including access to bus systems, the Metrolink, bicycle paths, and pedestrian walkways. The Draft EIR will provide an evaluation of the project's impacts to public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities, and will describe proposed project features which address the convergence of at-grade vehicular and non-vehicular facilities. 3-33 Initial Study Item B-56 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project Less Than 17. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated 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 inadequate 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 0 ❑ ® ❑ regulations related to solid waste? Explanation of Checklist Answers 17a. Less Than Significant Impact. The Cucamonga Valley Water District(CVWD)would provide sanitary sewer service to the proposed project.The Santa Ana RWQCB is the applicable Regional Quality Control Board for the City of Rancho Cucamonga and administers the City's MS4/NPDES permit.Waste Discharge Requirements are issued by the Santa Ana RWQCB under the provisions of the California Water Code(Division 7 Water Quality, Article 4 Waste Discharge Requirements). These requirements regulate the discharge of wastes that are not made to surface waters but which may impact the region's water quality by affecting underlying groundwater basins. New development within the City would be required to comply with all applicable wastewater discharge requirements of the NPDES program, as enforced by the Santa Ana RWQCB (Santa Ana RWQCB 2014, 2010). Therefore, implementation of the project would not result in an exceedance of wastewater treatment requirements and would be less than significant. This threshold will not be analyzed further in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 17b. Potentially Significant Impact. The CVWD would provide water and wastewater treatment service for the proposed project. The proposed project would involve the installation of on-site water and sewer lines to connect to existing utility infrastructure. The water and sewer lines required to serve the proposed project and the ability of the 3-34 Initial Study Item B-57 Rancho Cucamonga/ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project • planned facilities to accommodate the proposed project will be addressed in forthcoming Draft EIR. Potential construction-related environmental impacts from installation of the infrastructure will also be addressed in the respective sections of the forthcoming Draft EIR (e.g., air quality and noise). 17c. Potentially Significant Impact. The amount and rate of storm water runoff from the currently undeveloped project site would be altered with the implementation of proposed uses. The proposed project would require construction of a new on-site storm water drainage system to accommodate the additional runoff associated with the increase of impervious surfaces within the project site. This threshold will be addressed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 17d. Potentially Significant Impact. The project site is located within the CVWD service area, which would supply water to the proposed project. In compliance with Sections 10910-10915 of the California Water Code(commonly referred to as "Senate Bill [SB] 610" according to the enacting legislation), a Water Supply Assessment(WSA)will be prepared for the proposed project to assess the impact of proposed development on existing and projected water supplies. This threshold will be addressed in the forthcoming Draft EIR. 17e. Potentially Significant Impact.Wastewater generated by the proposed project would be treated at one of four wastewater treatment facilities owned and operated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA). The Draft EIR will determine the proposed project's anticipated wastewater flow and will evaluate potential impacts to the existing wastewater treatment facilities. This threshold will be addressed in the forthcoming • Draft EIR. 17f. Potentially Significant Impact. The City of Rancho Cucamonga contracts with Burrtec Waste Industries for commercial and residential waste collection. Solid waste is then disposed of at one of five regional landfills owned and operated by the County of San Bernardino Solid Waste Management Division (SWMD). The Draft EIR will calculate the proposed project's anticipated solid waste stream and will evaluate impacts related to landfill capacity. This threshold will be addressed in the Draft EIR. 17g. Less Than Significant Impact. Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding solid waste generation, transport, and disposal are intended to decrease solid waste generation through mandatory reductions in solid waste quantities (e.g., through recycling and composting of green waste) and the safe and efficient transport of solid waste. The proposed project would be required to coordinate with Burrtec Waste Industries to develop a collection program for recyclables (e.g., paper, plastics, glass and aluminum) in accordance with local and State programs, including the California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Act of 1991. Additionally, the proposed project would be required to comply with applicable practices enacted by the City under the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939) and any other applicable local, State, and federal solid waste management regulations.AB 939 requires all counties to prepare a County Integrated Waste Management Plan. In summary, the proposed project would comply with all regulatory requirements regarding solid waste. No further analysis of this threshold will be provided in the Draft EIR. • 3-35 initial Study Item B-58 Rancho Cucamonga 1ASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project Less Than 18. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Less Than No Significant With Significant Impact Impact Mitigation Impact Incorporated Does the project: 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 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 which would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,either directly or indirectly? Explanation of Checklist Answers 18a. Potentially Significant Impact. The project site does not provide suitable habitat that would support any of special status plant or wildlife species and no sensitive natural communities occur in the survey area. Additionally, compliance with the requirements set forth in the MBTA and the California Fish and Game Code would ensure that impacts related to nesting birds would be less than significant. There is the potential that ground-disturbing activities associated with construction would encounter previously undiscovered cultural resources. Potential impacts to biological resources and cultural resources will be addressed in the forthcoming Draft EIR and mitigation measures will be identified, as necessary. 18b. Potentially Significant Impact. The proposed project would involve the redevelopment of the project site with a mix of residential, commercial, and transit uses. The project site is surrounded by development, which consists of residential, commercial, industrial,office, and transit uses. Implementation of the proposed project would contribute to existing traffic, noise, and air quality impacts. These impacts are potentially significant and will be analyzed in the Draft EIR. In addition, the Draft EIR will examine cumulative impacts of concurrent development projects occurring in the project area. 18c. Potentially Significant Impact. Construction and operation of the proposed project could have the potential to generate significant adverse impacts on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The Draft EIR will provide analysis of the potential impacts with respect to aesthetics, air quality, cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, population and housing, public services, recreation, transportation and circulation, and utilities and service systems. 3-36 Initial Study Item B-59 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project SECTION 4.0 REFERENCES BonTerra Consulting. 2000a (August). Addendum to Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Final EIR (SCH No. 9310255). Costa Mdsa, CA: BonTerra Consulting. 2000b (September). Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Planning Area IX Specific Plan Amendment. Costa Mesa, CA: BonTerra Consulting. California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP). 2010. San Bernardino County Important Farmland 2010. Sacramento, CA: FMMP. California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2011 (Septemeber 7, last udated). California Scenic Highway Svstem (San Bernardino County). Sacramento, CA: Caltrans. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/scenic_highways/index.htm Hogan, Michael and Bai Tang. 2004.Addendum to Historical/Archaeological Resources Survey: Fourth St. Recycled Water Pipeline' in and Near the Cities of Ontario & Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County. Manuscript No. SB-04139 on file at the San Bernardino Archaeological Information Center. LOR Geotechnical Group, Inc. 2015(March). Geotechnical Feasibility Study Proposed Mixed Use Commercial and Residential Development Empire Lakes Golf Course Property Rancho Cucamonga, California. Riverside, CA: LOR. 2014 (February). Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Limited Site • Characterization Empire Lakes Golf Course 11015 Sixth St. and 9097 Cleveland Ave. Rancho Cucamonga San Bernardino County, California. Riverside, CA: LOR. Ontario, City of. 2011 (April, adopted). LA/Ontario International Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Ontario, CA: the City. Rancho Cucamonga, City of.2013(January). City of Rancho Cucamonga Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA. http://www.cityofrc.us/documents/CityofRanchoCuca monga H M PF I NALDRAFT2013.pdf 2010a (February). Rancho Cucamonga 2010 General Plan Update Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. Rancho Cucamonga, CA: the City. 2010b (May). Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. Rancho Cucamonga, CA: the City. 2009. Rancho Cucamonga Emergency Operations Plan. Rancho Cucamonga, CA: the City. http://www.cityofrc.us/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobiD=7824 1994a (July, as revised through 2003). IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan. Rancho Cucamonga, CA: the City. 1994b (July). Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report(State Clearinghouse No. 93102055). Rancho Cucamonga, CA: the City. 2012. Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code. Tallahassee, FL: Municipal Code • Corporation for the City. https://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientld=16570& state ld=5&stateName=California. 4-1 Initial Study Item B-60 Rancho Cucamonga IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project RBF Consulting. 2014 (February). Draft Habitat Assessment for the Empire Lakes Golf Course Project Located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California. Ontario, CA: RBF. Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). 2014 (September, access date). San Bernardino County Municipal NPDES Storm Water Permit. Riverside, CA: Santa Ana RWQCB. www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/water_issues/programs/stormwater/san_ bernardino_permit.shtml 2010(February).Waste Water Discharge Requirements for the County of San Bernardino and Unincorporated Cities of San Bernardino and Unincorporated Cities of San Bernardino County, Order No. R8-2010-0036. NPDES No. CAS618036. Areawide Urban Storm Water Runoff. Riverside, CA: RWQCB. hftp://www.waterboards.ca.gov/santaana/board_decisions/adopted_orders/orders/2010 10_036_SBC_MS4_Permit_01_29_10.pdf San Bernardino, County of. 2007 (March). San Bernardino County Land Use Plan General Plan Open Space Element Map. San Bernardino, CA: the County. http://cros.sbcounty.gov/portals/5/Planning/zoningoverlaymaps/openspacecounty wide.pdf Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). 2014 (September, access date). About SCAG. Los Angeles, CA: SCAG. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2014. San Bernardino County Municipal NPDES Storm Water Permit. Sacramento, CA: SWRCB. http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/sa ntaana/water_issues/programs/stormwater/san—bernar dino_permit_supporting_documents.shtml White, Laura S. 1994.Historic Architectural Survey Report for the Proposed Metrolink Project, City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County. Manuscript No. SB-02918 on file at the San Bernardino Archaeological Information Center. Wlodarski,Robert J.2010. Cultural Resources Record Search and Archaeological Survey Results for the Proposed Royal Street Communications, California, LLC. Site LA2242B (Cucamonga Water District) Located at 9111 Cleveland Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California 91730. Manuscript No. SB-06910 on file at the San Bernardino Archaeological Information Center. 4-2 Initial Study Item B-61 Metrolink Red Line -- Pocket Park N-3 Metrolink Na j Station N-1 i UN N-11 CL MU 3s 6,1u - N 4 N-q I The Vine CL N-5 N-10' UN MU G d,.,. N-12 REQ N Li -9 P1 CL Cl Q S� s - — The Vine L 3 13, m NN-8 m VN L VN •.r 04- North iocNorth OG!:oo!'eeL 5-13 S-22 521 5-20 South - CL REC REC CI- ° 3 Pocket Y 5-14 L' Park VN 5.15 „ VN w� Sig vN ,x 9flx s 1 ; The Vine VN 5-18 VN - wve 4u4x Placere�:Legere fl!x ironst IT, - _ � %hxoc js_i„_. 5-17 MU �� Rer rzc�ar.taE""� 4c,SCre, Conceptual Development Plan by Placetype Exhibit 3 IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment EXHIBIT D P S ° M A 5 +- RP-ecs�EN�LENE.,].: rvlS ea ^, ,.=. Item B-62 STATE 4E-CAUFORNIA Edmund-G..Brown, overnor------- Jr„....... NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION 1550 Harbor Blvd.,ROOM 100 West SACRAMENTO,CA 96691 • (916)37.%-3710 Fax(916)373-5471 March 10, 2015 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MAR 16 2015 Michael Smith City of Rancho Cucamon(Ta 10500 Civic Cener Drive RECEIVED - PLIJANNING Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE: Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment. San Bernardino County. Dear Mr. Smith, Government Code §65352.3 requires local governments to consult with California Native American tribes identified by the Native American Heritai;e Commission (NAHC) for the purpose of protecting, and/or mitigating impacts to 'cultural places in creating or Zt7 amending general plans, including specific plans. Attached is a consultation list of tribes with traditional lands or cultural places located within the boundaries of the above project. • As a part of consultation.. the NAHC recommends that local governments conduct record searches throu,-,h the NAIIC and California Historic Resources Information Svstern (CIIRIS) to determine if any cultural places are located within the area(s) affected by the proposed action. A Sacred Lanzis File search was completed and no sites were found. Local governments should be aware that records maintained by the NAHC and CHRIS are not exhaustive. and a negative response to these searches does not preclude the existence of a cultural place. A tribe may be the only source of information regarding the existence of a cultural place. Z� If%-,ou receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from tribes, please notify me. With your assistance we are able to assure that our consultation list contains current information. If you have any questions, please contact me at my email address:. KatN-.Sanchez:2inahc.ca.L,oN-. Sincerely. Katy Sanchez Associate Government Pro-ram Analyst • cc: State Clearinghouse EXHIBIT E Item B-63 Native American Tribal Government Consultation List San Bernardino County March 6, 2015 Sar -inuel Band of Mission Indians Gabrieleno Band of Mission Indians - Kizi Nation -yni i Ialbuena, Chairwoman Andrew Salas, Chairperson !_6569 Community Center Serrano P.O. Box 393 -lighland CA 92346 Covina CA 91723 909) 864-8933 gabtielenoindians@yahoo.com Gabrielino (626) 926-4131 'an Fernando Band of Mission Indians Gabrielino /Tongva Nation lohn Valenzuela, Chairperson Sam Dunlap, Cultural Resources Director 1.0. Box 221838 Fernandeno P.O. Box 86908 Gabrielino Tongva Jewhall 1 CA 91322 Tataviam Los Angeles , CA 90086 sen2u@hotmail.com Serrano samduniap@earthlink.net 661) 753-9833 Office Vanyume (909) 262-9351 760) 885-0955 Cell Kitanemuk 3abrieleno/Tongva San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians knthony Morales, Chairperson 1.0. Box 693 Gabrielino Tongva )an Gabriel CA 91778 iTTribalcouncil @aol.com 626) 483-3564 Cell Jlorongo Band of Mission Indians 3obert Martin, Chairperson 12700 Pumarra Rroad Cahuilla 3anning CA 92220 Serrano 951 ) 849-8807 ;951 ) 755-5200 Serrano Nation of Mission Indians 3oldie Walker, Chairwoman '.O. Box 343 Serrano 'atton CA 92369 (909) 528-9027 (909) 528-9032 This 10--`is current only as of the date of this document. Distrt. ,,Ion of this list does not relieve any person of statutory responsibility as defined in Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code,Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code and Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. This list is applicable only for consultation with Native American tribes under Government Code Section 65352.3 and 65362.4. et seq. Item B-64 Di A N i. X' V N IF X 1 NEDY, "'I U.I.AM_S -Pei TIDn CITY CSF RANCHO CL.TCAN4.0NGA CUCAIWO- NGA March 23, 2015 CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT #- .7, Morongo Band of Mission Indians Robert Martin, Chairperson 12700 Pumarra Road Banning, CA 92220 Dear Chairman Martin: SUBJECT: TRIBAL CONSULTATION REQUEST FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015- 00114 The City of Rancho Cucamonga is processing an application for a General Plan Amendment as described below. The purpose of this notice is to determine whether your tribe desires consultation regarding the proposed amendments. Native Americans are important to the planning process. PROJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015-00114 - LEWIS OPERATING CORP.: A request to amend the General Plan to change the land use designation (from Open Space to Mixed Use) of a property of about 160 acres located north of 4th Street, south of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railway, west of Milliken Avenue. and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues that is currently developed with the Empire Lakes Golf Course in conjunction with a proposed redevelopment of the property for a mixed use, high density residential/commercial project- APN- 0209-272-20 and 0210-082-41, -49, and -52. RELATED PROJECTS/APPLICATIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015-00040 - LEWIS OPERATING CORP.: A request to amend the Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Subarea 18 Specific Plan to delete the Empire Golf Course and insert text that will describe the design and technical standards/guidelines for a proposed mixed use, high density residential/commercial development on a property of about 160 acres located north of 4th Street, south of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railway, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues.,- APN: 0209-272-20 and 0210-082-41, -49, and -52. LENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENT DRC2015-00115 - LEWIS _ OPERATING CORP.: A request to amend the Zoning Map to change the zoning designation (from Open Space to Mixed Use) of a property of about 160 acres located north of 4th Street, south of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railway, west of Milliken Avenue. and east of Utica/Cleveland Avenues that is currently developed with the Empire Lakes Golf Course in conjunction with a proposed redevelopment of the property for a mixed use, high density residential/commercial project-, APN- 0209-272-20 and 0210-082-41, -49, and -52. • [THE SUBMITTAL OF ADDITIONAL APPLICATIONS IS PENDING] Item B-65 TRIBAL NOTIFICATION LETTER GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015-00114 March 23, 2015 Page 2 PROJECT APPLICANT CONTACT PERSON: Lewis Operating Corp. Attn: Bryan Goodman 1156 N. Mountain Avenue PO Box 670 Upland, CA 91786 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project, as submitted by the applicant (and subject to change as the project description is finalized), involves an amendment to the City's General Plan in order to establish a mixed use, high density residential/commercial development on a property of 160 acres that is currently developed with the Empire Lakes Golf Course. The proposed amendments would allow for about 225,000 square feet of non-residential uses and about 4,000 dwelling units within the project area. It is expected by the applicant that construction of the proposed project would be initiated in 2016. The project would be phased based on market demands, but it is expected that development would be complete by 2023. Construction activities would be initiated in the area south of 6th Street followed by the area north of 6th Street. The northern and southern areas would be graded separately; however, there may be overlap in the timing of building construction. The City is interested in receiving input from your community regarding any concerns related to the proposed Amendment. Please inform us of any areas of cultural significance in the project area that we should take into account. This letter may be followed shortly by a telephone call to discuss any issues/comments that you may have. The City requests to receive your comments by June 23, 2015. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me at (909) 477-2750 x4317 or in writing at the address below. Sincerely, PLANNI EPARTMENT Mike Smith Associate Planner MS/Is Attachments: Vicinity Map/Aerial Photo of the Project Site Conceptual Land Use Plan Item B-66 •�I"x �'T i �'Q I r-s! `� .; a ! . ��1�. r � '.. Rancho Cucamonga Rialto '` ocation J y H: 715 s (� Al i � • . .. '. CS �.j, 111 G -11rV � � f ir�' i`f'♦�r(� Z�. � Ra 4s �f�■�.a _l ,1 - _4'lIR � %�fi f�• •.•- fi 31 • or :. •n;�r• P..:�IL !' f.? ! - r e�i• ni'4�� w ,cr`��e 1 rC G%It'�f IF ••rr! r� soft ji;igr 11111, y+ .'tel_. ctjl r_1 fes. _ I - - , l.ifC;; �= pi lrEE♦` •�•, +�� i• � fV .1"ill �110all jig alic '� r, �PI i - • t_ i' �_ it City off R^ancho,Cucamonga - - al '�. • �c ~m 9 s ��1ll1t� 1 Y-- I.1�: • �. � u.-hA �j * i n� • I .' a� r I-i�Fi.ie .n e.•a .Y�1. t .� a�,yy�• . • F i � ,e rl 1 �� E 77. Ja SUR '4121 JIM, • Metrolink Red Lint Pocket Park Metrolink Station N-2 N-1 UN N-11 CL MU le Js.iuhc 3630 dubc aeo< I 3 c N-4 --- � The Vine CIL N_5 N-10' m-sSm LIN MU 14.<nd�_ N9b d�4�. },y b3- N-12 3ncN 12 REC / �-- i N-6 \\� N-9 CL CL �BJS d✓ac ) µ3S duFx aB vc / SYvc I The Vine s m N-7 N-8 m VN VN �a m da,� is Ma asa 64. North - - -��- --I1 - - - - 5-13 15-22 I $;^21 S-20 South CL REC REC CL Ib35dui1c I ..IB.}S du/a YSac Pocke S-14 --- Park VN S_15 j is a&el VN S-19 1t ar a< 1s2.mea % VN a3vt ia.m na BOvc The Vine S-16 9d usa dwz j d fozac l S-18 3 VN <m d..x Ploceeype Legend Transic(T) 3 - Mixed Use(MU) 8 S--1 j� 1.,41:. Urban Neighborhood(UN) �amdwac ) Core Livmg(CL) aea c Village Neighborhood(VN) S Recreation(REC) o � 4th Streec g Source:William Hezmalhalch ArchiteCIS.Inc.2015 c Conceptual Land Use Plan Exhibit 2 IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment _ a T�oruci� „ Ar PsoMAS Y1030L 15 JAZ)R:Wroiecm,LEVP,3LEW000300\Graphlrs\WSA4x2_CanceplLantlUsePlan.pdf FirstName LastNanle JobTitle Company_ 'Address-I Address2 Cit State PostalCode Steven L. blower Richards, Watson& 355 South Grand Lott Angeles CA 90071-3101 Gershon Avenue,40"' -- -- _ Floor Clerk of-the Countv of*San 385 North San CA 92415 Board of Bernardino Arrowhead, 2nd Bernardino - Supervisors Floor _ Cucamonga Valley 10440 Ashford Rancho -- CA 91730-3057 -_ Water District Street _ _ Cucamonga M _ EAIL 3ANTAAti1 Calilbmia Reg. Water Santa Ana Region 3737 Main Riverside CA 92501 -- nkuS.CA.(:o Quality Control Board Street, Suite 118 _ 500 _ Planning Southern California Gas 1981 Lugoma (SC9031) - - Redlands CA 92374 - - Supervisor Co. _ Avenue Local South Coast Air Quality 21865 East _ -- - Diamond Bar CA 91765-4182 Government - Management District Copley Drive CEQA Program Supervisor Jennifer Shaw Regius f:dison local Public- 7951 Redwood Fontana CA 92336 _ Manager Affitirs _ Avenue Caren Cadavona Southern California 2244 Walnut - Rosemead CA 91770 3 Edison Company Grove Ave, Quad 00 Third Partv 4C:472A rn Environmental Review r. Ryan Shaw Inland Empire Utilities -To.—Box 9020 Chino I-fills CA 91709 Agency Kim — _Bray Verizon— P.U. Box 725 --- Chino CA 91708 _ Department of Development 464 W. Fourth San CA 92401-1400 "1'ransportation Review, MS 722 _ Street Bernardino Daniel Kopulsky. Forecasting/IGR-CF..QA Department of' 464 West San CA 92401-1400 office Review Transportation Fourth Street, Bernardino Chief 6th Floor; MS 722 Karin Cleary- — U.S. Fish&Wildlite 777 F'.. Tahquitz Palm Springs CA 92262 Rose Service Canyon Way, Suite 208 .left'_ -Brandt California Department of 3602 Inland - Ontario CA 91764 Dish and Wildlife Empire Boulevard, Suite _ C--)20 Chief'Mike Costello Rancho Cucamonga Fire 10500 Civic Rancho CA 91730 Protection District Center Drive — Cucamonga Revised on: 4/7/15 FirstNTeL�,aName Job,ritle Com any Addressl Address2 Cit State PostalCode Steven er Richards, Watson& 355 South Grand Los Angeles CA 90071-3101 Gershon Avenue,40'x' FloorCaptaint San Bernardino Rancho Cucamonga 10510 Civic Rancho CA 91730 Danielle County.Sheriff Substation Center Drive Cucamonga Native American 915 Capitol Mall, Sacramento CA 959-14 Heritage Commission Room 299 Department of Forestry 1416 Ninth Street P.O. Box Sacramento CA 94244-2460 944246 California Energy 1516 Ninth Street, Sacramento CA 95914 Commission MS-15 Division of P.O. Box 942732 Sacramento CA 94234-7320 Environmental Health_ Caltrans- Planning P.O. Box 942974 Sacramento CA 94274-0001 Caltrans- Division of P.O. Box 942974 Sacramento CA 94274-0001 _ Aeronautics _ Department of Health Public Water 7.14 P Street Sacramento CA 95914 Services Supply Branch X Division of Water P.O. Box 100 Sacramento CA 95914 W Quality v Division of Water Rights 901 P Street Sacramento CA 95914 0 Division of Clean Water P.O. Box 944212 Sacramento CA 94244-2120 Programs State Water Resources P.O. Box 100 Sacramento CA 95912-0100 Control Board _ California Long Range Planning Planning and 2555 First Sacramento CA 9591:9 Highway Patrol Section Analysis Division Avenue Department of General 400 P Street, Suite Sacramento CA 95914 Services _ 5100 Office of Environmental 1001 I Street Sacramento CA 95914 Health Hazard Assess. Department ot'Pesticide 1220 N. Street Sacramento CA 95814 Regulation Department of Water 1416 Ninth Street, Sacramento CA 95914 Resources Room 449 Department of Toxic P.O. Box 906 Sacramento CA 95812-0806 Substances Control California Integrated ]0(11 I Street P.O. Box 4025 Sacramento CA 95912-4025 Revised on: 4/7/15 FirstName LastName Job'I'itle _Company Addressl Address2 Cites-- State PostalCude Steven I.. Flower Richards, Watson& 355 South Grand - ----- Los Angeles CA 90071-3101 Gershon Avenue,40"' Floor Captain Boldt San Bernardino Rancho Cucamonga 10510 Civic --- - Rancho CA 91730 Danielle County Sheriff Substation Center DriveCucanron�a Native American 915 Capitol Mall, Sacramento CA 95814 -- --- Ileritage Commission Room 288 Department of Forestry 1416 Ninth Street P.O. Box Sacramento CA 94244-2460 --- -- -- _ _ 944246 - Calitornia Energy --- 1516 Ninth Street, Sacramento CA -95814 Commission MS-15 Division of P.0. Box 942732 Sacramento CA 94234-7320 - _ I:nvironmcntal l-lealth -. - _-- - --_ Caltrans- Planning P.O. Box 94_2874 -- - Sacramento_ CA 94274_-0001 _ Caltrans- Division of'- -I'.O. Box 942874- --- Sacramento CA 94274-0001 Aeronautics Department oi'l-lealth Public Water 714 P Street Sacramento CA 95814 Services Supply Branch Division of Water P.O. Box 100 Sacramento CA 95814 - -- -- -_ Quality Division of Water Rights 901 P Street Sacramento - CA - 95814 -- - Division of Clean Water P.O. Box 944212 -- Sacramento CA 94244-2120 -- - Programs _ State Water Resources P.O. Box 100 Sacramento CA 95812-0100 Control Board _ Calitirrnia Lung Range Planning Planning and 2555 First Sacramento CA 95818 - - - Highway Patrol Section _ Analysis Division Avenue _ Department of General 400 P Street, Suite -- Sacramento CA 95814 —'- - Services 51 UU Office of Lnvironmental 1001 1 Street Sacramento CA 95814 Health Hazard Assess. - -- Department of'l'esticide 1220 N. Street Sacramento CA 95814 - ---_ Regulation _ Department of Water - 1416 Ninth Street, Sacramento CA - 95814 -- Resources Room 449 - - - Department ol'Toxic P.O. 130x 806 Sacramento CA 95812-0806 Substances Control Calilbrnia Integrated IUUI I Street P.O. Box 4025 Sacramento CA 95812-4025 Revised on: 4/7/15 FirstName LastName JobTitle Company Addressl Address2 city State PostalCode Steven L. Flower Richards, Watson& 355 South Grand Los Angeles CA 90071-3101 Gershon Avenue,400' Flour —..--- --- Waste Management - - ---- Board Air Resources Board 1001 l Street Sacramento CA 95814 - - Registration of 555 Capitol Mall, Sacramento CA 958:14 Environmental Assessors Suite 235 & Arbitration Panel Office of Environmental 555 Capitol Mall, Sacramento CA 95814 _ Information Suite 2.35 _ California Environmental 1001 I Street P.U. Box 2815 Sacramento CA 95812-2815 Protection Agency State Lands Commission 100 Howe Sacramento CA 95825 Avenue, Suite — — Reclamation Board 1416 Ninth Street, Sacramento CA 958.14 Room 706 Public Utilities 505 Van Ness San Francisco CA 94102 _ Commission Avenue Department of Parks& 11.0. Box 942896 Sacramento CA 94296-0001 I _ Recreation Office of Historic P.U. Box 942896 Sacramento CA 94296-0001 Preservation Mr. Jett lwack Community City of Upland 460 North Euclid Upland CA 91786 Development Avenue Director _ Department of Division ol'Mines 801 K Street Sacramento CA 95814 Conservation_ &Geology Mr. Davis Water Quality Metropolitan Water 700 North La Verne CA 91750 Marshall Lab Manager District Moreno Avenue State Clearinghouse 1400 10th Street, Sacramento CA 95814 _ Room 121 Mr. Don Director of --C'ity of Fontana 8353 Sierra Fontana CA 92335 Community Avenue Development Williams City Planner City of Ontario 303 East 13 Street Ontario CA 91764 Director of San Bernardino County 385 NorthSan _ CA 92415-0 182 Revised on: 4/7/1:5 FIrstName LastName -- JobTitle Company _Address( Address2 _ City State 1'ostalCodc Steven L. Plower Richards, Watson A 355 South Grand Lott Angeles CA 90071-3101 Gershon Avenue.40°i ----..-- - _ 1-loor _ Planning Planning Department Arrowhead Bernardino -- _ Avenue ?ric Roth Southern California 818 West 7th Los Angeles CA 90017 _ Asso_ of'Governments oGovernments Street, 12th Floor Steven Smith Director of Sen t3emardino Co. 1 170 West 3rd San CA 92410-1715 Comprehensive Associated Governments Street, 2nd Floor Bernardino -- Planning Kimberly Metrolink One Gatewav Los Angeles CA 90012 — - Plaza 121" FI. Director of Chaffey Joint Union `'1 1 West 51h Ontario CA 91761 Business Fligh School District Street Services Shawn — Judson Superintendent Ftiwanda School District 6061 East Avenue I-tiwanda CA 91739 Superintendent Cucamonga School 8776 Archibald Rancho CA 91730 District Avenue Cucamonga Superintendent Alta Luma School 9390 Base Line Rancho CA 91701 —. .-- -- District Road, _Cucam_unga Superintendent Central School District 10601 Church — -- Rancho CA 91730 Street, Suite 112 Cucamonga I enry D. Shannon, Superintendent, Chafley Community--- 5885 Haven Rancho CA 91737 _ Ph. D. President --- College District - Avenue— -- Cucamonga Ken _— Miller San Bernardino County 825 East 3rd - -- - San - C'A --- 92415-0835 Flood Control District Street Bernardino California Geological — 801 K Street Mail Stop 12-30 Sacramento CA 95814 — --- --- — —__Survey Burrtec 9890 Cherry — ---.---- Fontana C'A---- 92-335 - -—...-....- -- Avenue _...__ Charter - -- 10768 Foothill — -- Rancho CA 91730 ---- -.— Blvd., H170 Cucamonga Revised on: 4/7/15 South Coast CITY OF RANCHO C-VA MAk Air Quality Management District MAY 0 4 2015 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178 (909) 396-2000 + www.agmd.gov gEIVE � _ago April ')0. - 1 Michael Smith Cite of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 1000 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonua. CA 91730 ?notice of Preparation of a CEQA Document for the Rancho Cucarnonea Industrial Area SI)ecific Plan (IASP) Sub-area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Prosect The South Coast Air Quality klanaoement District(SCAQMD)staff appreciates the opportunit% to comment on the above-mentioned document. The SCAQ1%1D staff s comments are recommendations regarding'the analysis of potential air qualit} impacts from the proposed project that should be included in the draft CEQA document. Please send the SCAQMD a cope of the CEQA document upon its completion. Note that copies of the Draft EIR that are submitted to the State Clearinghouse are not forwarded to the SCAQMD. Please for«ard a coPy of the Draft EIR directly to SCAQMD at the address in our letterhead. In addition, please send with the draft EIR all appendices or technical documents related to the air quality-and greenhouse gas analyses and electronic versions of all air quality modeling and health risk assessment files. These include original emission calculation spreadsheets and modeling files(not Adobe PDE files). Without all files and supporting air quality documentation,the SCAQMD will be unable to complete its review of the air quality analysis in a timely manner. Any delays in providing all supporting air quality documentation will require additional time for review beyond the end of the comment period. • Air®anality Analysis The SCAQMD adopted its California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) Air Quality Handbook in 1993 to assist other public agencies \,%ith the preparation of air quality analyses. The SCAQMD recommends that the Lead Aaenc% use this Handbook as guidance when preparing its air quality analysis. Copies of the Handbook are available from the SCAQMD's Subscription Services Department b, callin-(909) 396-3720. More recent ��tiidance developed since this Handbook was published is also available on SCAQ%. ID's website here: http://www.ggmd.gov/home/regulations/cea/air- guality-analysis-handbook/cega-air-quality-handbook(1993). SCAQN-ID staff also recommends that the lead aaencv use the CalEEMod land use emissions software. This soft%kare has recentl% been updated to incorporate up-to-date state and locally approved emission factors and methodoloLTies for estimating pollutant emissions from typical land use development. CalEEMod is the only soft,kare model maintained by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Az_soci_-t;-_n(CAPCOA) and replaces the ro,% outdated LRB1 \•1I1; "I'his model is available free of aha-^ ��- at: www.caleemod.com. The Lead AgencN should identify any potential ad%erse air qualit-, impacts that could occur from all phases of the project and all air pollutant sources related to the project. Air quality impacts from both construction (including demolition. if am) and operations should be calculated. Construction-related air quality impacts typically include. but are not limited to. emissions from the use of heavy-duty equipment from _radin-. earth-loading/unloading. paying. architectural coatings. off=road mobile sources(e.g.. heavy-duty construction equipment) and on-road mobile sources (e.�gy.. construction worker vehicle trips. material transport trips). Operation-related air qua, impacts ma% include. but are not limited to. emissions from stationary sources (e.g., boilers). area sources (e.g.. soh and coatin�_s). and vehicular trips(e.or.. on-and off-road tailpipe emissions and entrained dust). Air qualit\ impacts from indirect sources. that is. sources that generate or attract vehicular trips should be included in the analysis. The SCAQMD has also developed both regional and localized si�`nificance thresholds. The SCAQMD staff requests that the lead agency quantify criteria pollutant emissions and compare the results to the recommended regional significance thresholds found here: httn://www.aamd.gov/docs/default-source/ceoa/handbook/scagmd-air-nuality-siertificance- thresholds.pdf?sfvrsn=2. In addition to analyzing re�_ional air quality impacts. the SC AQ.NID staff recommends calculating localized air gtialit, impact; and comparin��the results to localized significance thresholds(LSTs). I-ST's can EXHIBIT F Item B-74 Michael Smith April 30. 201 be used in addition to the recommended regional si�aniticance thresholds as a second indication of air quality impacts when preparing a CEQA document. Therefore. when preparing the air quality analysis for the proposed project. it is recommended that the lead agency perform a localized analysis by either using the LSTs developed by the SCAQNID or performing:dispersion modeling;as necessary. Guidance for performing a localized air quality analysis can be found at: http//www agmd gov/home/regulations/cega/air-quality-analysis-handbook/localized significance thresholds. In the event that the proposed project generates or attracts vehicular trips. especially heave-duty diesel-fueled vehicles. it is recommended that the lead agency perform a mobile source health risk assessment. Guidance for performing a mobile source health risk assessment (�Heulth RiskAssess+nent ('unrer Riskfi•o+n_tfnhile Source Diesel Idling Emissions for CEO_l.iir Qualit Ana1Ysi.s")can be found at: http://www.ggmd.gov/home/regulations/cega/air- quality-analysis-handbook/mobile-source-toxics-analysis. An analysis of all toxic air contaminant impacts due to the use of equipment potentially generating such air pollutants should also be included. In addition. guidance on siting incompatible land uses(such as placing homes near freeways)can be found in the California Air Resources Board's.-lir Quality and Lund Use Hunclhook:A (70mmunin-Perspective. which can be found at the following internet address: http://www.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.t)df. CARB's Land Use Handbook is a general reference guide for evaluatinar and reducing air pollution impacts associated with ne%% projects that go through the land use decision-making process. Mitigation Measures in the event that the project generates significant adverse air quality impacts. CEQA requires that all feasible mitigation measures that go beyond what is required by lau be utilized during project construction and operation to minimize or eliminate these impacts. Pursuant to state CEQA Guidelines §15126.4 (a)(1)(D).any impacts resulting from mitigation measures must also be discussed. Several resources are available to assist the Lead Agency with identiNing possible mitiszation measures for the project. including: • Chapter 11 of the SCAQMD CE0.4.-I it Quality Hunclhook • SCAQMD's CEQA web pages at: http://www.agmd.gov/home/regulations/cgga/air-quality-analvsis- handbook/mitigation-measures-and-control-efficiencies. • CAPCO.A's Quantifi•ing Greenhouse Gus_Mitigation Measures available here: http://www.capgoa.org/MM-content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Ouantification-Report-9-14-Final pdf. •. SCAQMD's Rule 403 —FuLgitive Dust. and the Implementation Handbook for controlling construction-related emissions • Other measures to reduce air quality impacts from land use projects can be found in the SCAQMD's Guidance Document for Addressing;Air Quality Issues in General Plans and Local Planning. This document can be found at the follo%tina Internet address: http://www.agmd.aov/docs/default-source/planning/air-quality_ gui dance/compl ete-guidance-doc ument.pdf?s fvrsn=4. Data Sources SCAQMD rules and relevant air quality reports and data are available by calling the SCAQMD's Public Information Center at(909) 396-2039. 'Much of the information available through the Public Information Center is also available via the SCAQMD's Nyebpage (http://www.ggmdgo_v). The SCAQMD staff is available to work with the Lead Agency to ensure that project emissions are accurately evaluated and mitigated k%here feasible. If you have any questions regarding this letter. please contact me at Jwongl(a�agmd.gov or call me at(909) 396-31 76. Sincerely. P°9970" Jillian Wong. Ph.D. Program Supervisor Planning. Rule Development& Area Sources SBC 150428-07 Control Number Item B-75 STATE OF CALIFORNLA—CAL[FORti[A STATE TR.\NSPORTAI'10,AGENCY_ EDMUND G.BROWti Jr Govemor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 80 PLANNING(MS 722) 464 WEST 4'h STREET,6`h Floor AN BERNARDINO,CA 92401-1400 Serious drought HONE (909)383-4557 Help save water.' AX (909)383-5936 TTY (909)383-6300 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA www.dot.ca.gov/dist8 May 4, 2015 MAY 0 7 2015 Michael Smith RECEIVED - PIANNING City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Initial Study for the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project (Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project) Dear Mr. Smith: The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has received an Initial Study for the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Sub-Area 1.8 Specific Plan Amendment Project (Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project). The project site is located north of 4th Street, west of Milliken Avenue, east of Cleveland Avenue, and south of 8th Street in the City of Rancho Cucamonga in San • Bernardino County. The project proposes Specific Plan Amendment to construct high density and medium-high density residential, mixed use, open space, and transit oriented land uses, which will include 2,500 units to a maximum of up to 4,000 units in addition to 220,000 square feet of non- residential uses. Our areas of concern, pertaining to State facilities, include transportation/traffic issues in which the initial study identifies as having potentially significant impacts. Due to these potentially significant impacts on Interstate 10 (1-10) and Interstate 15 (I-15), we recommend the following to be analyzed in the preceding DEIR: • Caltrans endeavors that any direct and cumulative impacts to the State highway system be eliminated or reduced to a level of insignificance pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) standards. Although the project is under the jurisdiction of the City of Rancho Cucamonga due to the Project's potential impact to State facilities it is also subject to the policies and regulations that govern the SHS. To accurately evaluate the extent of potential impacts to the operational characteristics of the existing highway, a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) should be prepared for review. • The TIS is necessary to determine this proposed project's near-term and long-term impacts to the State facilities — existing and proposed — and to propose appropriate mitigation measures. The study should use as a guideline the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, which is located at the following website: • httn://www.dot.ca.eo_ v/hgLop/offices/ocp/isr cega files/tisguide.pdf. Minimum contents of the TIS are listed in Appendix "A" of the TIS guide. 'Provide a safe.sustainable. integrated and efficient transportation sYstem to enhance California's economy and liability' Item B-76 Mr. Smith May 4, 2015 Page 2 • All state facilities, including intersections, impacted by the Project area, which include I-10 and I-15, should be analyzed in the TIS. Where applicable, such as signalized intersections and ramp interchanges, a synchro analysis, merge/diverge analysis, and a queuing analysis is recommended. Traffic Analysis Scenarios should clearly be exhibited as exiting, existing + project, existing + project + ambient growth, and existing + project + ambient growth + cumulative. The data used in the TIS should not be more than 2 years old. • The geographic area examined in the TIS should include as a minimum all regionally significant arterial system segments and intersections, including State highway facilities where the project will add over 100 peak houi trips. State highway facilities that are experiencing noticeable delays should be analyzed in the scope of the TIS for projects that add 50 to 100 peak hour trips. • Mitigation measures to State facilities should be included in the TIS. Mitigation identified in the TIS, subsequent environmental documents, and mitigation monitoring reports, should be coordinated with Caltrans to identify and implement the appropriate mitigation, as well as the appropriate timing of the mitigation. Mitigation improvements should be compatible with Caltrans concepts. • The lead agency should monitor impacts to ensure that roadway segments and intersections remain at an acceptable Level of Service (LOS). Should the LOS reach unacceptable levels, the lead agency should delay the issuance of building permits for any project until the appropriate impact mitigation is implemented. Clearly indicate LOS with and without improvements. Proposed improvements should be exhibited in preliminary drawings that indicate the LOS with improvements. • Submit two hard copies of all TIS, three CDS of the TIS including the appendices, and an electronic Synchro Analysis file (if applicable). • This shall be based on the SCAG 2012 RTP Model. Thank you for providing us this opportunity to review the Initial Study for the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project (Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project) and for your consideration of these and future comments. These recommendations are preliminary and summarize our review of materials provided for our evaluation. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Adrineh Melkonian (909) 806-3928. Sincerely, MARK ROBERTS Office Chief Intergovernmental Review, Community and Regional Planning 'Provide a safe.sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation.system to enhance California's economy and livability' Item B-77 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA May 21. 2015 • MAY 2 1 2015 Michael Smith Associate Planner RECEIVED - PLANNING ('.its of RanchonchoCucamonga 10500 Civic ('enter Drive Rancho Cuc:amon�^a. CA 91730 Subject: Notice of Preparation of rivironnlental Impact Report (FIR) - Vnipire bakes :Specific Plan Project Dear Nlr. Snaith. Thank }ou for the making available the Notice of Preparation of I:IR and Scoping for the Empire fakes Specific Plan Project. As a resident of'Rancho C.ucanwnga and treyuent golfer at Empire Lakes, I have heard discussions at the course since sunlrner 201 I regarding a change to the land use at Empire Lakes. It was very llelpfill to review the intonllation in the Notice and Initial 5tudv. F.nlplre. Lakes course is an exceptional, well-maintained facility used by Bolters and families tronl the local conlnitlnity. surrounding southern California areas, and visitors from out-ol-state. It would seem that keeping an existing high-quality golf worse in a prime southern California location and city like Rancho Cucamonga would he a high priority. In any event, please refer to my •lay 20`x° letter to the Southern California Golt"Association. attached here as copy to the city. l lie l.)urposc of the SCCA letter • Is to inform the golf co nlnlunity of the Notice of Preparation posted on the city's web site. and to cncourage them to participate in the public revicvv and comment process. C ornrnCnt on the Notice of Pre aration Initial Study item No. 15. a) - Is removal ol.'thc golfcourse considered an impact'? Ifso. could a dlSCllS91011 of the type of impact and mitigation be included in the FIR? f appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study. and look fonvard to next steps in the process. And. thanks again to you and all the city staff for your tune and effort to make Rancho a great place to live. Respect f.uIf-`"Yours. Mori Rheiner 1 1030 De Anza Drive Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91 730 Attachment Cop} to: Mr. Kevin Ileanev. 1)(.'(J!\ • Item B-78 825 East Third Street,San Bernardino,CA 92415-083-51 Phone:909.387.8109 Fax:909.387.7876 SAN BERNARDINO I Department of Public Wks Gerry Newco pnorDirec !' c ` Environmental& Construction • Flood Control COUNTY Operations o Solid Waste Nlanagentent Sun-eyor i Transportation May 26, 2015 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MAY 16 1015 File: 10(ENV}4.01 Michael Smith, Associate Planner RECEIVED City of Ranch Cucamonga PLANNING Michael.SmithCcDcityofrc.us RE: CEQA NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN SUB-AREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Mr. Smith: Thank you for giving the San Bernardino County Department of Public Works the opportunity to comment on the above-referenced project. We received this request on April 27, 2015 and pursuant to our review, the following comments are provided: Traffic Division (Eloy Ruvalcaba, PWE Ill, 909-387-1869): 1. When the Traffic Impact Analysis becomes available, please submit it to the traffic Division for review and comment. Environmental Mana-gement Division (Brandy Wood Ecological Resource Specialist 909-387- 7931) 1. The draining of Red Hill Park lake, also within the City of Rancho Cucamonga, has revealed artificial lakes can provide habitat for a variety of species. In particular, the Red Hill Park Lame produced over 500 individuals of turtles, fish, frogs and other aquatic invertebrates. As the proposed project has not only one lake, but several, it would be prudent to conduct biological surveys and include the loss of this habitat within the biological assessment. While the document indicates a habitat assessment was conducted, it did not involve a focused survey of the lake population. 2. We have several concerns regarding the Initial Study, section 4d. "The project site does not provide any connecting between natural open space areas. Additionally, and as noted in the 2010 General Plan Update EIR, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, does not contain known wildlife nursery sites. Therefore, it is not expected that the proposed project would disrupt or have any adverse effects to migratory corridors or linkages that may occur in the general vicinity of the project site." We respectfully disagree with the statement above. The State of California is experiencing a severe drought, waterfowl and other migratory bird species use these lakes as resting stops as i Item B-79 M. Smith, City of Rancho Cucamonga CECIA Comments—NOP for Industrial area Specific Plan Sub-Area 18 Rancho Cucamonga May 26, 2015 Page 2 of 2 ® they continue along their migratory corridor. These lakes could provide an important s over site for migrating birds and the elimination of these resources is not analyzed in this document.Additionally, the document denies in Section 4d that the area contains known wildlife nursery sites, however this is very doubtful when considering nesting ducks and other waterfowl. Furthermore, golf courses are known favorite nesting sites for western bluebirds, American robins, coots and killdeer. This document does not address impact to these nesting birds and other wildlife nursery sites. Environmental Management Division (Erma Hurse Senior Planner, 909-387-1864): 1. The Draft EIR should identify future drainage and flood control facilities in reference to the City's Master Drainage Plan (MDP) to allow for development within the area. 2. It is assumed that the Draft EIR will address adequate provisions for intercepting and conducting accumulated drainage flows around and through future development sites in a manner that will not adversely affect adjacent or downstream properties. 3. In meeting state mandated source reduction, recycling, and composting requirements, the Draft EIR should state specific programs that are in place to help reduce. recycle or divert waste from being landfilled. If you have any questions, please contact the individuals who provided the specific comment, as listed above. ® Sincerely, NIDHAM ARAM ALRAYES, MSCE, PE, QSD/P Public Works Engineer III Environmental Management Item B-80 It -r -V- C)o YF 303 EAST"I3•'STREET CIVIC CENTER ONTARIO mat 0" CALIFORNIA 91764-4105 (909)395-2000 FAX(909)395-2.070 PAUL.S. LEON A[ C. BOLING MAYOR CiTY ALAN D.WAPNER MARY E.VVIRTFS,MMC PAAYOR PRO TVA Gil V CLERK J!PA VIV.BOWMAN tTav 2 2)0 15 JAIMIES R.MILHISER CIEWIA DORST-POFIADA PAUL.VINGENI AVILA COUNCIL M:_N!1KHj CITY OF RANCHO CCICU ONGA City ol'Rtncho (Aicamonga Mr. %fichaell Smith. Assoc;,itc P111wicr MAY 2 7 2015 1050( vis 'ECE'VED ® P/ANNING �1 ncl lo ( ..carrion-a. C a h f0rni a O1-;0 RE: N*o-ric.F, OF PREPARAMN OF A DRAFT ENVIRONNIENTAI. INSPACT REPORT AND P17BLIC SC"OPING NIFE TING FOR TFIE RANCHO CUCAMONGA INDUSTRIAL ARE.X SPECIFIC PLAN SUB- AREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT PROJECT (EMPIRE LAKES SSIECIFI(.' PLAN PRWECT) Mr. Tn"ak Wl; I'Or 3i1oxITl(_, tile City of(hit-rioar,. opportunity to rc%ic�% and commient on the aho%c reCercriced project. Atler, rt_,:IeW:1_,2 the \oticc (.•t Preparation, the Cits request ."at the f0llov,` -, tilLy Collifil.1W b�.!" 14(ldresscd. a Tile FIR should coinpletc a tragic in pact anal.vsi.-.; in accordance with the San 13crnardino Countv ( o-?-estt on \Cmailei"i -nent Prourarn. All CIt% of Ontar111 ' i intersections anticipated to add at least 511) two%UV peak hour trips over existlin-, ku.-mes should h� analyzed. .t;o. -1 he proJec' proposcS a new traffic sl an'll controlled street collne—, , n on cei ` A%enUIC. An anal vsi�; �.vas prepared by approximately 300 feet ea< of Clc�Blanc; Fch- and Peers In June. -?!)1!4 d-.-islonStra-ted that the intcr•cLJi(m would ��o,k without an traffii� impacts. the i:6r & Peers study should be updated to refect Linticiparod traffic volumes fron, the proposed land USeS a the results of the stud\ should he docunwrited in the TIT to validate the earlier Cindlrl,s. The EIR should con-ilplete -;-- IIWr;)10(_1v and 111%dri'lUlic analysis to Identify potentia I impact` troin the P1,10POsed develtipinent. The EIR should discuss the correspondinlu il,itiaar* I 'dontifv the fair share of improvcment.s. 1o,1 ani I www.d.cintarici.cams @ Pirmted en recycled Pape' r. Item B-81 Mr. Smith Nilay 27. 2()15 Page 2 We appreciate hcing involved in the enwon-mental review of' the lin)lect and look, for-%%ard M C01"ItillU:d COMMUnications re!4ardirig this project. Ityou ha',e any quest' IC)n. S regarding our comments, please contact me at (909) 395-?419. or Richard Ayala. Seniol, Planner, at (.909) 395-2421. S Ficerel y. Scott Nlu P I a n I I ill ctor • Item B-82 }' May 26, 2015 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA :. Mr Michael Smith, Associate Planner MAY 2 7 2015 City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Department k 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga. California 91730 RECEIVED - PLANNING Phone: (909)477-2750 x4317 Email: Michael.smith@cityofrc.us so"!a r I of RE: SCAG Comment on the Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project [SCAG NO. IGR8456] Main Office 5'3'1':e:t 5ev•_nth Street Dear Mr. Smith. zt ;oor Thank you for submitting the Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Los Angeies.Cal,fvmReport for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project ("proposed project)to the Southern 9CX ;135 California Association of Governments (SCAG)for review and comment. SCAG is the authorized regional agency for Inter-Governmental Review(IGR)of programs proposed for federal financial assistance and direct development activities, pursuant to Presidential Executive Order 12372. Additionally: SCAG reviews the Environmental Impact Reports of projects of regional significance for consistency with regional plans pursuant to the Ca!iforn a Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)and CEQA Guidelines SCAG is also the designated Regional Transportation Planning Agency under state law, and is responsible for preparation of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) including its Officers Sustainable Communities Strategy(SCS)component pursuant to SB 375. As the ' clearinghouse for regionally significant projects per Executive Order 12372, SCAG reviews the consistency of local plans, projects, and programs with regional plans.' Guidance provided by these reviews is intended to assist local agencies and project sponsors to take actions that contribute to the attainment of the regional goals and fir= policies in the RTPISCS. SCAG staff has reviewed the Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project The proposed project involves Specific Pian Amendment which would allow for high density and medium-high density ErecutiveiAdministration residential, mixed-use, open space, and transit-oriented land uses in the area. The Committee Chair number of residential dwelling units would range from a minimum of 2,500 units to a -y" maximum of 4,000 units and a maximum of 220,000 square feet of non-residential uses Policy Committee Chairs When available, please send environmental documentation to SCAG's office in Los . ur Angeles or by email to sural@scag.ca.gov providing, at a minimum, the full public comment period for review. If you have any questions regarding the attached comments, please contact Lijin Sun. Esq., Senior Regional Planner. at(213) 236-1882 or sunl ascaq.ca qo.•. Thank you Sincerely Ping Chang Program Manager II, Land Use and Environmental Planning SB 375 ar^ends CEQA;c 3,j-.Cnapter 4 2 mplernentat!or of Te Sus-.a naele Ccrrl'r,n!t=s:tr3teg, Nt!ct, allows ror ce ia.n CE0A.streaml!n!rg for pro;e:ts cer.s!s:ert Nwi the RTP•SCS Lead agencies imclucirg'oca! ,ursdictior,sl maintain;he discreticr,and will be solely responsible for deterrnin.!rg consistency"of any fi;ture project mth the SCS Any 'ccns,stency'findirg by SCAG pursuant to the:GR process s`ould not ce corstruec as a fincirg of cors;ste icy under SB 375 fcr curpcses:f CEQA streartlirirg r... .:'�.:r':f'i? "'r.r,•..I,t�rr.,,j Item B-83 May 26, 2015 SCAG No. IGR8456 Mr. Smith Page 2 COMMENTS ON THE NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF • A DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE EMPIRE LAKES SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT[SCAG NO. IGR84561 CONSISTENCY WITH RTP/SCS SCAG reviews environmental documents for regional'y significant projects for their consistency with the adopted RTP.'SCS. 2012 RTP/SCS Goals The SCAG Regional Council adopted the 2012 RTP/SCS in April 2012. The 2012 RTPISCS links the goal of sustaining mobility with the goals of fostering economic development, enhancing the environment: reducing energy consumption, promoting transportation-friendly development patterns. and encouraging fair and equitable access to residents affected by socio-economic, geographic and commercial limitations(see http.;:rtpscs.scac; ca-god). The goals included in the 2012 RTP/SCS may be pertinent to the proposed project. These goals are mean; to provide guidance for considering the proposed project within the context of regional goals and policies. Among the relevant goals of the 2012 RTP/SCS are the following: SCAG 2012 RTPISCS GOALS RTP%SCS G i: Align the plan i.nvest.ments and poircies with improving regiona!economic development and comPeNiveress UP/SCS G2: Maximize mobility and accessibiiity for ail people and goods in the region i RTP/SCS GI Ensure travei safety and reliability for al;peopie and goods ir.•the region, RTP,SCS G4 Preserve and ensure a sustainable regional transP(W'atior,system P,TPiSCS GS: Maximize the ^rOCJC1i:'!:'V of our transpertatlon system RTP/SCS G8. Protect tha ervironment and healt^for our residents by improving air G:;alito.y and encouraging active trans,porfation jnon-mororized transportation, such as brcyci.ng a^d v✓alking) RTP/S(--S G7: Actively encourage and c.reare incentives for energy efficiency. Where possible RTP;`SCS G8: Encourace lard use a^d cro,th pa"en^s that faci+;tare transit and non-motorize-i transportaflor I RTP,'SCS G9: Rfaxi;mize the security of the regional transportation system through improved system rron;torrng. rapir,'recovery plarni.ng are coordination w to other security agencies For ease of review. we encourage the use of a side-by-side comparison of SCAG goals with discussions of the consistency, non-consistency or ron-applicability of the policy and supportive analysis in a table format. Suggested format is as follows Item B-84 May 26, 2015 SCAG No. |GR8456 Mr. Smith Page SCAG 2012^^^^~S~S GOALS ` Goal Analysis � RTP!S CS G 1gn the plan investments and policies with improving Consistent-Statement as to why: Or �-_ regicnal economic development and competifiveness Not-Consistent: Statement as to why: ` ' / Not Applicable: Statement aumwhy, � 1DEh9 number reference i n�p�SC5G2: 8�m�izemo�J�and auc000�V�'�reVponp�and / Cono�mnc8Wemen'aotuwhy: ' goonain�emD�n No^Con�u�n� �e�nnnvasmW-17y ! Or � i . � Not Appficab�- 3tatemen as/nwhy. / DEIR page number reference � etc. ..........�__-----______- -__'_-----_Lj��'_-_ RTPISCS Strategies Toachieve the goals of the 2O12RTPYSC8. awide range ofstrategies are included inSCS Chapter (starting on page 152)of the RTP.1SCS focusing on four key areas: 1) Land Use Actions and Strategies: 2) Transportation Network Actions and Strategies,- 3)Transportation Demand Management (TDM)Actions and Strategies and: 4) Transportatioi System Management(TSM) Actions and Strategies. |fapplicable bothe proposed project, please refer to these strategies aaguidance for considering the proposed project within the context ofregional goals and policies. Toaccess alisting ofthe strategies. please visit 2O12:'!:inal.if2Ol2RT (Tables 43 -47. beginning onpage 152). � Regional Growth Forecasts At the time of tnis letter, the most recentiy adopted SCAG forecasts consists of the 2020 and 2035 RTP/SCS population, household and emp'oymentforecasts. Toview them, please visit . The forecasts for the region and applicable jurisdictions are below. Adopted SCAG Region Wide Fore�;�� Adopted City of Rosemad Forecasts Population 19,663,000 22,091,000 167,100 167,100 Households 6,458,000 7.325,000 56,300 57,600 9,441,000 63,900 68.300 MITIGATION SCAGs�aff recommends that you review the SCAG 2012 RTPISCS Final Program EIR Mitigation Measures for guidance. aaappropriate. See Chapter 8(beginning onpage 143) y�. ]2.'-ina0Fina�20l2pBf .pd AsreferenoedmChapterG. ucomprehensiveUstnfexamp|emidgationmaaeunmsthatmaybeoonuidenadas appropriate is included in Appendix & Examples ofMeasures that Could Reduce Impacts from Planning, Development and Transportation P,oierts Appendix Gcan beaccessed at: � � Item B-85 Morongo Band of Mission Indians Cultural Heritage Program 12700 Pumarra Road, Banning, CA 92220 ® Phone (951)755-5025 Fax(951)572-6004 Date:March 30,2015 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Re: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2015-00114 APR O 12015 Dear, Mike Smith RECEIVE® o PLANNING Thank you for contacting the Morongo Band of Mission Indians regarding the above referenced project(s). The tribe greatly appreciates the opportunity to comment on the project. After reviewing our records and consulting with our tribal elders and cultural experts, we would like to respectfully offer the following comments and/or recommendations: X The project is outside of the Tribe'scurrent reservation boundaries and is not within an area considered to be a traditional use area or one in which the Tribe has cultural ties(i.e.Cahuilla or Serrano Territory). We recommend contacting the appropriate tribes who have cultural affiliation to the project area. We have no further comments at this time. The project is outside of the Tribe's current reservation boundaries but within in an area • considered to be a traditional use area or one in which the Tribe has cultural ties (i.e. Cahuilla or Serrano Territory). At this time,we are not aware of any cultural resources on the property; however, that is not to say there is nothing present. At this time,we ask that you impose specific conditions regarding all cultural and/or a rchaeological resources and buried cultural materialson any development plans or entitlement applications (see Standard Development Conditions attachment). The project is outside of the Tribe'scurrent reservation boundaries but within in an area considered to be a traditional use area or one in which the Tribe has cultural ties(i.e.Cahuilla or Serrano Territory). At this time we ask that you impose specific conditions regarding all cultural and/or archaeological resources and buried cultural materialson any development plans or entitlement applications (see Standard Development Conditions attachment). Furthermore,we would like to formally request the following: 1. A thorough records search be conducted by contacting one of the CHRIS(California Historical Resources Information System) Archaeological Information Centers and have a copy of the search results be provided to the tribe. 2. A comprehensive cultural survey be conducted of the proposed project property and any APE'S(Areas of Potential Effect)within the property. We would also like to request that a tribal monitor be present during the cultural survey and that a copy of the results be provided to the tribe as soon as it can be made available. • Item B-86 3. Morongo would like to request that our tribal monitors be present during any test excavations or subsequent ground disturbing activities during the construction phase of the project. The project is located with the current boundaries of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians Reservation. Please contactthe Morongo Band of Mission Indians planning department for further details. Once again,the Morongo Band of Mission Indians appreciates the opportunity to comment on this project. Please be awarethat receipt of this letterdoes not constitute "meaningful"tribal consultation nor does it conclude the consultation process. This letter is merely intended to initiate consultation between the tribe and lead agency,which may be followed up with additional emails, phone calls or face-to-face consultation if deemed necessary. If you should have any further questions with regard to this matter,please do not hesitate to contact me at your convenience. Very truly yours, Raymond Huaute Cultural Resource Specialist Morongo Band of Mission Indians Email:rhuaute@morongo-nsn.gov Phone: (951) 755-5025 Item B-87 ® MORONGO BAND OF MISSION INDIANS A 50VF9Z,:LN NAVOW Standard Development Conditions The Morongo Band of Mission Indians asks that you impose specific conditions regarding cultural and/or archaeological resources and buried cultural materialson any development plans or entitlement applications as follows: 1. If human remains are encountered during grading and other construction excavation,work in the immediate vicinity shall cease and the County Coroner shall be contacted pursuant to State Health and Safety Code §7050.5. 2. In the event that Native American cultural resources are discovered during project development/construction, all work in the immediate vicinity of the find shall cease and a qualified archaeologist meeting Secretaryof Interior standards shall be hired to assess the find. Work on the overall project may continue during this assessment period. a. If significant Native American cultural resources are discovered, for which a Treatment Plan must be prepared, the developer or his archaeologist shall contact the Morongo Band of Mission Indians. b. If requested by the Tribe',the developer or the project archaeologist shall, in good faith, consult on the discovery and its disposition (e.g. avoidance, preservation,return of artifacts to tribe,etc.). 'The Morongo Band of Mission Indians realizes that there may be additional tribes claiming cultural affiliation to the area: however. Morongo can only speak for itself. The Tribe has no objection if the archaeologist wishes to consult with other tribes and if the city wishes to revise the condition to recognize ® other tribes. Item B-88 Smith, Michael From: Andy <gabrielenoindians@yahoo.com> ,ent: Sunday, May 10, 2015 8:49 PM To: Smith, Michael Cc: Christina Swindall Martinez. Kizh Gabrieleno;Tim Miguel.Kizh Gabrieleno; Matt Teutimez.Kizh Gabrieleno Subject: Notice of preparation of a draft environmental impact report and public scoping meeting for the Rancho Cucamonga industrial area ( Empire lakes specific plan project) CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Dear Michael Smith This email is in regards to tour letter Dated.4pril 27,201-5 MAY 10 2015 RECEIVED - PLANNING The prgject locale "Cucanionga "lies in an area it-here the traditional territories of the Gabrieleno Pillages adjoined and overlapped lt'ith each other, at least during the Late Prehistoric and Protohistoric periods. The homeland ol'thc Gabrielenos , probabli' the most influential Native.I rnerlcan group in aboriginal southern Calilbrnia (Bead and Smith 1978a.-_538), It-as centered in the Los Angeles Basin, and reached as far"east as the San Bernardino-Riverside - Channel Islands and the inland costal areas. Villages ivere based on clan or lineage groups. Their honle/base sites are marked bL' midden deposits, often ivith bedrock mortars. During their seasonal rounds to exploit plant resources, small groups lt'ould niigrate within their traditional territori' in search of specific plants and animals. Theirgathering strategies Offen left behind signs of special use sites, usually grinding slicks on bedrock boulders, at the locations of the resources. Therefore in order to protect our Culhrral resources K,e're requesting one of our e_rperienced& certified Native American monitors to be on 'ite during an}, & all ground disturbances. In all cases, when the NAHC states there are ''No" records of sacred sites" in the subject area: they always refer the contractors back to the Native American Tribes whose tribal territory the project area is in. This is due to the fact. that the NAHC is onl%r aware of General information on each California NA Tribe they are "NOT " the "experts" on our Tribe. Our Elder Committee& Tribal Historians are the experts and is the reason why the NAHC will always refer contractors to the local tribes. Please contact our office resardin✓ this project to coordinate a Native American Monitor to be present. Sincerel-v. Andv Salas Chairman Of Gabrieleno Band Of Mission Indians,'Kizh (Kit'c) Dation Of the Los Angeles Basin.. Orange county and the Channel islands. NOTICE: PLEASE FILE OUR CONTACT INFOR IA TIO:`'FOR CONSULTATION ON ALL FUTURE PROJECTS Ff ITHIN OUR TRIBAL TERRITOR I:....... t Item B-89 May 25, 2015 ® To: Mr. Michael Smith, Associate Planner City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department CITY OF 10500 Civic Center Drive RANCHO CUCAMONGA Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 michael.smith(ucityofrc.us MAY 0 5 2015 From: Leatha Elsdon RECEIVED - PLANNING 6035 Falling Tree Lane Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91737 jiwcelsdon@msn.ccm Subject: Comments Submission regarding NOP Draft EIR, Initial Study, Industrial Area Specific Plan Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project(Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project) In response to the City of Rancho Cucamonga's request for community comments regarding the EIR Scoping Process for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project, as a community member for over twenty years, and the parents of two current high school students I would like to submit the following comments. The city and/or Lewis Land Developers may not be aware that currently three of the four high schools within: the city; Los Osos, Rancho Cucamonga, and Alta Loma use Empire Lakes for golf team practice. The Los Osos golf team also uses Empire Lakes for course practice and league tournaments. Chaffey High school uses the golf course for both team/course practice and league tournaments. The complete • demolition of the Empire Lakes Golf Course would significantly impact the local high school teams, as well as all of the high school golf teams in the area, as there is very limited access to golf courses within the Inland Empire. The complete demolition of Empire Lakes would cause the high school golf teams to travel extensive distances to other courses: again if other courses are even available. The additional travel, which may not have been considered in the Initial Study, will cause financial hardship on the school districts, players and parents. Since Empire Lakes is a world class venue and an Arnold Palmer designed course, the Southern California Professional Golf Association Junior Tour(SCPGAJT) uses the golf course several times a year for junior tournaments. Most recently these tournaments have been qualifiers for the Toyota Tour Cup SCPGAJT series, with fields of one hundred juniors from the Inland Empire and surrounding communities. Empire Lakes is a challenging course that prepares local junior golfers for the Toyota Tour Cup series. Demolition of the course would negatively impact local junior golfers, residents and businesses since the challenge of Empire Lakes cannot be replaced; as well as the fact that there are limited golf courses within the area; again forcing additional travel and expense to local residents. The proposed project also impacts the community as a whole, the golf course provides much needed teaching/learning facilities, recreation and Open Space. The golf course offers numerous golf learning/teaching options, including very low cost junior clinics with free use of golf clubs. Complete demolition of the course would negatively impact everyone in the Rancho Cucamonga community by eliminating the ability to learn and practice a sport that teaches honesty, integrity and can be played for a lifetime. The demolition would also remove one of the last Open Spaces within the city and add a significant amount of residential units negatively impacting traffic, city services, education, recreation, utilities, etc., in • an all already high density area of the city. Page 1 of 2 EXHIBIT G Item B-90 A proposed project that would require such a major Amendment to the General Plan, changing the current land use designation from 'Open Space"to"Mixed Use", the complete demolition of Empire Lakes Golf Course needs to be studied in great detail and all possible alternates assessed prior to issuance of any agency approvals. Therefore, in accordance with the NOP the following alternates are submitted: Executive Nine Hole Golf Course Alternates: 1. Retain the driving range, putting/chipping area and the seven holes on the south side of Sixth Street. Manage the course so that existing holes 1 and 2 can be replayed as new holes 8 and 9. thus providing a nine hole executive course with minimal, if any changes to the current course layout. This alternate would complement the required access to the south side driving range facilities. 2. Retain the driving range, putting/chipping area and the seven holes on the south side of Sixth Street. Convert existing holes 5 and 8, (PAR 5 holes), into four PAR 3 or PAR 4 holes. This would provide a total of nine holes on the south side; two tee boxes and two greens would need to be installed. 3. Retain the driving range. putting/chipping area and the seven holes on the south side of Sixth Street. Convert a portion of the south side driving range/practice area, which includes a putting green and sand trap, into a PAR 3 hole. Convert holes 5 or 8(PAR 5) into a PAR 4 and PAR 3 hole, thus adding two holes to the south side for a total of nine holes. 4. Retain the driving range, putting/chipping area and a combination of nine holes on the south and north side of Sixth Street in a manner that would benefit the community and the proposed Lewis Land Development project. Eighteen Hole Golf Course Alternates: A. Retain the majority of the driving range, putbng/chipping area on the south side of Sixth Street. Convert a portion of the south side driving range/practice area, which includes a putting green and sand trap, into a PAR 3 hole. Delete holes 4, 5 and 10, reconfigure holes 11 and 12, in a manner that would retain a PAR 70 course. This alternate could be coordinated with the proposed"The Parkway"east side project development. I am confident given the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission's and Lewis Group of Companies commitment to the community's, health, recreation, education and business, an alternate solution to the complete removal of Empire Lakes Golf Course can be achieved. Sincerely, Leatha Elsdon. Date Page 2 of 2 Item B-91 Smith, Michael From: Donald Autrey <donald.autrey@gmail.com> 0ent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 7:41 PM CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 0: Smith, Michael Subject: Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project MAY 2 0 2015 Dear Mike Smith - RECEIVED o PLANNING I just stumbled upon the proposed changes to the Empire Lakes zone and saw that you checked off that there would be significant effects on the environment from the project. It would be a shame to see one more open area swallowed up. I was astounded first that the change would even be proposed. Then I was amazed at the idea of an additional 4,000 residential units in the area. Milliken is already a headache. I hope that the City gives this a great deal of thought. Once open space is gone, well, it is gone. Sincerely Donald Autrey i Item B-92 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA May 21, 2015 MAY 2 1 2015 Michael Smith Associate Planner RECEIVED - PLANNING City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho CucamonLa. CA 91 730 Subject: Notice. of Preparation of Environmental Impact Report (FIR) - Fntpire Lakes Specific Plan Project Dear Mr. Smith. "I frank you tin•the making available the Notice of Preparation of I;IR and Scoping NTeeting for the Fnipire fakes Specific Ilan Project. As a resident of Rancho Cucamonga arid frequent golfer at Empire Lakes, I have heard di>CUSSions at the course since summer 2014 regarding a change to the land use at. F.nipire Lakes. It %vas very helpful to review the information in the Notice and Initial Study. Fmpire lakes course is an exceptional.. well-maintained facility used by golfers and families from the local community. surrounding southern California areas, and visitors from out-of-state. It would Seem that keepinu an existing high-LILtality golf•course in a prime southern California location and city like Rancho Cucanionoa would be a high priority. in any event, please refer to my 1%,tav 20`" letter to the Southern California C?oIFAssoc iation, attached here as copy to the city. the purpose of the SCOA letter is to infirm the golf community ofthe Notice of!'reparation posted on the city's web Site, and to encourage them to participate in the public review, and comment process. Comment on the Notice ot:['reparation Initial Study iteut No. I�. a) - Is removal of the golfcourse considered an impact? ifso. could a diSCLISSlon of the tvpe of impact and mitigation be included in the 1:IR" I appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on the Notice of Preparation and Initial Study, and took fom-ard to next steps in the process. And, thanks again to you and all the city staff for your time and e[Tort to make Rancho a great place to live. Respectfulty'Yours, Tom Rhelner 110 30 De Anza Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Attachment Copy to: Mr. Kevin Heaney, SCCA Item B-93 • May 20, 2015 Kevin Heaney Executive Director Southern California Golf Association 3740 Cahuenga Blvd. Studio City, CA 91604 Dear Mr. Heaney, As an avid golfer and resident of Rancho Cucamonga, 1 wanted to inform you and the SCCA membership of the enclosed Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report associated with a change the land use at Empire Lakes Golf Course, specifically to remove the golf course and replace it with mixed use development. The full document is at: http:/.hvw,w.cityofrc.us/cityhalUplanninb'current_projectsiempire_lakes_specific_plan_projectidefault.asp This 30-dav public comment period (April 27-1%-1ay 26, comments accepted until June 10`x') is intended to solicit comments on potential environmental impacts related to the project. Other steps in the process • and anticipated approvals are indicated on page two of the notice at the web site above. I have golfed regularly at Empire Lakes since 2002. and am a member of SCCA. Empire Lakes is a First-class facility built by General Dynamics in the mid-1990s with an Arnold Palmer design. The course has hosted the Nationwide (now web.com) tour for several years until 2007. The course currently hosts many local high school, college, and amateur and professional (Pepsi tour) events, as well as lessons and clinics conducted by PGA professional instructors. While it is within the owner's discretion to transfer ownership of the property to a development company rather than continue as a golf course, I believe (along with many others) there is a valid case that the course has the potential to remain a going concern, given its high quality design and location. The course is well-maintained, has a unique 19-hole Palmer layout, and is situated at the 1-15/1-10 freeway- interchange in the Inland Empire approximately three: miles from Ontario airport. In addition to patronage by players from the local community, Empire Lakes is a frequent destination for golfers from other southern California areas and travelers arriving from out-of-state. I have frequently joined groups visiting from Orange County, Los An;eles, and beyond who make the trip for a quality- golf round at reasonable cost and less crowded conditions. 1 have reviewed the documents on the city's web site and plan to submit a brief letter to communicate the value and significance of the golf course to the community and to the sport. Judging from the extensive site assessments and exhibits in the Specific Plan land use change documents on the city's web site at the link above, the next steps appear to be in the direction of redevelopment. Item B-94 Page 12 As a private citizen with no ownership interest in the golf course property, I realize I am merely a member of the public who uses a facility open to the public, and that my options are limited to communicating with others in the golf community and to city of Rancho Cucamonga decision makers at the appropriate time and within context of the public process. I also acknowledge that there are greater issues involved among the owners, the development company, and the city with regard to future development and land use goals, finances, and overall municipal planning considerations. The city of Rancho Cucamonga is an exemplary community in all aspects, and I feel very fortunate to be a resident here. The well-directed planning by city staff is reflected in the balanced, safe, and comfortable community we have here today. I trust their staff will continue to exercise solid judgement for the best interests of the citizens. I would like to suggest to SCCA staff to encourage, whenever possible, that golf course managers act responsibly and put forth a sincere effort to operate their courses in a competent and creative manner to keep their investments intact. I believe that Empire Lakes has all the qualities to be a successful golf course operation, and should not have to be redeveloped and lost. Specifically, during the public comment periods offered by the city of Rancho Cucamonga, prominent members of the golf community should express their interest to the city to consider the value and potential of Empire Lakes golf course in light of the proposed Specific Plan Amendment. Development plans such as those now being proposed are certainly desirable in a community at the right place and time, however they should be in balance with other land uses and interests. Umpire I.,akes has been a success in the past, notably hosting the Nationwide professional tour events while attracting major spectator groups and supporting charities such as Loma Linda Children's Hospital, and others, and has tremendous potential for golf, dining services, and entertainment. Maintaining the course in operation would preserve a valuable golf venue in the local community, and protect a 162-acre open space asset in the city of Rancho Cucamonga. With a capable management team. this situation is entirely feasible. Respectfully yours, Tom Rheiner Enclosure: Empire Lakes Golf Course, Notice of Preparation and Scoping Meeting to change land use (excerpts) Copy to: PGA of America, 100 Avenue of the Champions, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33=118 (Mr. Derek Sprague) Arnold Palmer Design Company, 9000 Bay Hill Boulevard; Suite 300, Orlando, Florida 32819 (Mr. Thad Layton) City of Rancho Cucamonga. 1000 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 (Mr. Mike Smith, Associate Planner) Item B-95 ® _RANCHO Notice of Preparation and Scopang Meeting (;ta',ur()NGA April 27. 2015 To: Reviewing Agencies, Organizations, and Interested Parties Subject: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental impact Report and Public Scoping Meeting for the Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan Sub-Area 13 Specific Plan Amendment Project(Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project) From: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Contact: Mr. Michael Smith, Associate Planner Pursuant to Section 2.1165 of the California Public Resources Code and Section 15050 o` the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. the City of Rancho Cucamonga will be the lead agency for an environmental impact report (EIR) that will be prepared to address potential impacts associated with the project identified below The purpose of this notice is (1) to serve as a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of an EIR pursuant to the Section 15082 of the State CEQA Guidelines: (2) to advise and solicit comments and suggestions regarding the scope and content of the EIR to be prepared for the proposed project. and (3) to serve as a notice for the public scoping meeting. • VVe need to know your agency's views regarding the scope and conteni of the environmental information which is germane to your, agency's statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Your agency evil! need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering Your permit or other approval for the project. l he project description. location. and potential environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. An electronic copy of the Initial Study is attached. Due to the time limits mandated by State law. your response must be sent at the earliest possible date and should be received not later than 30 days after the date of this notice. However, a scoping meeting will be held on .dune 10, 2015 and your response will be accepted until that date. Project Title: Rancho Cucamonga Industrial Area Specific Plan (IASP) Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Project (also referred to as the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project) Project Location —City: Rancho Cucamonga Project Location; —County: Sari Bernardino The project site is located north of 4'1' Street, west of Milliken Avenue. east of Cleveland Avenue. and south of 8'" Street and the Metrolink rail line in the City of Rancho Cucamonga in San Bernardino County The City of Rancho Cucamonga's southern boundary with the City of Ontario is formed by 4:1 Street. The project site is currently developed with the Empire Lakes Golf Course (11015 6"' Street Rancho Cucamonga). Refer to Exhibit 1 in the Initial Study for the local and regional vicinity. • Project Description: The proposed project involves an amendment to the IASP Sub-Area 18 G(Empire Lakes) Specific Plan to establish a mixed use development on the existing Empire Lakes olf Course property (new Planning Area [PA1 1). The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would Item B-96 allow for high density and medium-high density residential, mixed use, open space, and transit- oriented land uses all within close proximity to transit services and local regional activity centers. The number of residential dwelling units in PA 1 would range from a minimum of 2,500 units to a maximum of up to 4,000 units. Additionally, a maximum of 220,000 square feet (sf) of non- residential uses would be allowed in PA 1. Vehicular and non-vehicular circulation and utility infrastructure would be installed, as necessary, to serve the proposed uses. Based on available information, anticipated initial approvals required frorn the City to implement the proposed project may include, but are not limited to, adoption of the proposed IASP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment; approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Open Space"to "Mixed Use": and, approval of a Zoning Amendment to update text related to the Mixed Use zone. Approval of Parcel Maps(s) and a Development Agreement may also be considered. Potential Environmental Effects: The attached Initial Study indicates that there may be significant adverse environmental impacts associated with this project, for the following topical areas: Aesthetics and Visual, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials. Hydrology and Water Quality. Land Use and Planning, Noise. Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation and Traffic, and Utilities and Service Systems. These topics will be addressed in the EIR. In addition, the EIR will also describe and evaluate project alternatives that may reduce or avoid any identified significant adverse imparts of the proposed project. Responding to this Notice: Pursuant to Section 15082 of the State CEQA Guidelines. responsible and trustee agencies and othecinterested parties, including mernbers of.the public, .-111ust submit any comments in response to this notice no later than 30 days after receipt. Comments and suggestions should. at a minimum, (1) identify the significant environmental issues. reasonable alternatives, and mitigation measures that should be explored in the EIR: (2) whether the responding agency will be a responsible or trustee agency for the proposed project: and (3) any related issues raised by organizations and/or interested.parties other than potential responsible or trustee agencies, including interested or affected members of the public. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency. The NOP and accompanying Initial Study are available for a 30-day public review period beginning April 27, 2015 and ending May 26, 2015: but the scoping meeting will occur on June 10, 2016 and your response will be accepted up until that date. Copies of the document are available for review at the following locations: Public Information and Services Counter City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 (909) 477-2700 Archibald Library 7368 Archibald Avenue Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 477-2720 Biane Library 12505 Cultural Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91739 (909) 477-2720 2 Item B-97 Arid can be accessed online at: ® http://www.cityofrc.us/cilyhall/planninoicurrent vroiects/default.asp in the folder titled `Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project". All comments and responses to this notice should be submitted in writing to Mr. Michael Smith. Associate Planner, at the address noted above. The City will also accept responses to this notice submitted via email received through the close of business on May 26, 2015. Email responses to this notice may be sent to Michael.Srnith@cityofrc.us. For additional information or any questions regarding the proposed project, please contact Michael Smith at (909) 477-2750 ext. 4317 or at the aforementioned email. Notice of Scoping Meeting: The proposed project is considered a project of statewide, regional, or area-wide significance. A scoping meeting will be held by thepity at the Planning Commission meeting on June 10, 2015 at 7:00 PM at the Rancho CLIcamondhiCity Council Chambers, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91730. Date Signature • 3 Item B-98 . . . . ...... 210, �nOo Cuc�onga RI.Iffil 1�bpl�*w E Project Loca I ion Rmrfld. C T Y.ffi�Utfd. 7ra C....... Late �4! Au a :�--s tot 4 ,0 1 11., , 1i -'"If tits ,�A ia it, I -I ..., — . r, -A . A ..,I 14L� nk 24. ; I , "" . I., PC it.a 16 NMI& Mcti E;uca City o tR a C t*y Qon'ta"ro d ,I E TA W, t, WA till WCO"',, I ij ska.I,' - Iltz lot Im IfT sy nil it ww4mw MAW*" 71 MetroinkFedLine- - f r. r..:rH Itill.ll}H :..IliIHHt,�'NiFtr-fHH+F+ri41�F{iT4f r^::..f,•f Pocket Palk --- Metrollnk N 2 - Statlon N C1 gaoaa icae.f:. iam 4ay. xa+aka N-4 _— _._ .- The Mine Ct N-5 N-10' ie aea.- 1 uN Mu na I 3ltl:Lk' N-tl Atlx'. Uw aaa_ r. N-17 RFC, N-6 N-9 rt CI we.. •era.-.. ---- The Vine L O a ;•, I ;� N8 VN VN• North 60 Seryxo S 13 South [.1 RF< HI/.. CI PoNt; Park s VN SIS Vi, vr, 5-16 — The Vine VN 14?14-4: 4.0 VN e Conceptual Development Plan by Placetype Exhibit 3 1A SP Sub-Area 18 Specific Plan Amendment Y PSOMAS .. � • ' ;• :.v".. ,.�,..e.uP nreYV'a4ehne ocl Item B-100 Smith, Michael From: Gregory Walker <gregory_walker2726@yahoo.com> .ent: Monday, May 25, 2015 2:00 PM To: Smith, Michael pNGA Subject: Empire Lakes Development CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM MAS 2 5 W5 Greg Walker C PIANtMG 6001 Milliken Avenue RE(,e,VL® " Rancho Cucamonga. CA May 24, 201 Dear members of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council and Planning Department. I am writin�(z you this letter in regards to the proposed project currently under review on the land where Empire Lakes Golf Course is built. I am currently the Varsity Golf Coach at Los Osos High School. I am unable to attend the council meeting that is scheduled for June 10 to discuss the impact the development will have on the community. I am hoping you «ill take into consideration the following when forming the final development plans. For the past 13 years. I have had the privilege of coaching and hosting hundreds of high school golfers at Empire Lakes. Currently we play 12 home matches and conduct over 30 home practices at the course. Chaffee {igh School uses the course on alternate days that we do not, so this development will effect them as well. The Claremont Colleges use the course so development will effect them negatively also. To lose the golf course completely, will have an extremely negative impact on the community. In a day and age where personal electronic devices and video games seem to dominate the lives of so many, especially young people. recreational opportunities should not be taken away. When a course is completely leveled and developed with condos or apartment buildings recreational opportunities are taken. Golf is a spurt that requires a course, you cannot gig to the local park to play as that is illegal. Over the past 13 seasons I have enjoyed seeing the personal development of so many young students. When the golfers are playing in a match, they have to evaluate situations, make sensible and correct rulings. and make decisions that effect the outcome of a match. As a high school teacher, I know based on conversations I have with community members that they want to see young members of the community become self sufficient problem solvers. I have witnessed many players use their golf experience as a contributing factor to solid personal development. The course should not be taken from them. Currently we have a few golfers who stand a solid chance of receiving a college golf scholarship. How will they be able to continue their development and pursuit of their goals without a golf course in their home town"? Again opportunities will be taken from them. You might be thinking that our school should just go to another course outside the community. Easier said than done. We have very limited transportation funds which we currently exhaust each ,ear. There is not additional funding for us to travel to another course. Other surrounding courses are currently at capacity with regards to the number of teams they host. Again, without a course it will be the death of a program that has had a positive impact on so many young students. 1 Item B-101 With all of that in mind. I would hope that the city would require the future developer to keep and manage the (7olf course as is. NVhile I am under the impression that keeping the golf course as is, is probably not a vossibility. I am asking that it be required of the developer to keep nine holes. A golf course architect will *urely be able to reconfigure the south side of the course into a nine hole -venue. Or. better yet, the North side readv has 11 holes. ? of which could be converted to a clubhouse and practice facility. This needs to be required of the developer. Our community desperately needs this to be done. The negative impact will be irreversible. Our community needs to have a golf course. I appreciate your time. I ask that you thoughtfully consider the students and the negative impact this development could have on the future of our great community. If I can be of further help in this matter. please contact me at (.909)373-7640. Sincerely. Gres-, Walker Los Osos 1-11-h School Golf Coach Sent From Yahoo Mail on Android 2 Item B-102 �lp -TM 6 - (�3 _ 157 l /2 G- 41�° eV SOLIMERN CALIFORNIA Jennifer Menjivar-Shaw C D'S O11i Local Public Affairs "'JZZ C 795 Redwood Avenue Nr rs)Isux 1AITTY%7a0A,v cur.:gin; Fontana,CA 92336 June 10, 2015 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Department 10500 Civic Center Drive JUN 10 1015 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Contact: Mr. Michael Smith, Associate Planner Michael.Smith cDcityofrc.us RECEIVED . PLANNING RE: NOP for Empire Lakes Specific Plan Dear Mr. Smith: Southern California Edison (SCE)appreciates the opportunity to review and provide comments on the Notice of Preparation (NOP)of a Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR)for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. The proposed project involves the establishment of a mixed use development on the existing Empire Lakes Golf Course property(new PAI).The proposed Specific Plan Amendment would allow for high density, and medium-high density residential, mixed use, open space, and transit-oriented land uses all within close proximity to transit services and local regional activity centers.The number of residential dwelling units within PA1 would range from a minimum of 2,500 units to a maximum of up to 4,000 units. Additionally, a maximum of 220,000 square feet(sf)of non-residential uses would be allowed within the Specific Plan area. Vehicular and non-vehicular circulation would be provided within PA1. Utility infrastructure would be installed, as necessary to serve the proposed uses. Construction of the proposed project would be initiated in 2016 and development is anticipated to be completed by 2024. SCE's Electrical Facilities SCE provides electrical service to the City of Rancho Cucamonga and maintains electrical transmission and distribution facilities, and substations in the City.The attached figure illustrates SCE's existing facilities within the project area: The Genamic Substation, illustrated as a red square, is adjacent to the northwest corner of the project site.The substation is accessed from a dirt road off of Cleveland Avenue, which is adjacent to the western project boundary. • Two existing 66kV subtransmission lines, represented as dashed green lines, are located on the north side of the project area(south of the railroad)and along the northerly side of 4th Street. Encroachment of SCE's Right-of-Way and Access Roads Development of the Empire Lakes Specific Plan (including perimeter fencing and landscaping) has the potential to encroach and impact SCE's existing substation, subtransmission lines, and access road.The proposed development should not impose constraints on SCE's ability to access, maintain, and operate its current and future facilities.The developer should submit five(5)sets of plans depicting SCE's facilities and associated land rights to the location below. SCE will review any proposed use of SCE's easement rights-of-way and fee-owned properties on a case-by-case basis by SCE. Approvals or denials will be in writing based upon review of the maps provided by the developer and compatibility with SCE right-of-way constraints and rights. The impacts will need to be consented to and addressed by SCE prior to finalizing the plan of development. Real Properties Department Southern California Edison Company 2885 Foothill Blvd. Rialto, CA 92376 General Order 95 SCE must comply with the California Public Utilities Commission's(CPUC)General Order(GO)951, which establishes rules and regulations for the overhead subtransmission and transmission line design, 'http://docs.cpuc.q.gov/PublishedDocsf June 10,2015 Empire Lakes Specific Plan (NOP) Page 2 of 3 construction, and maintenance which will ensure adequate service and secure safety to persons engaged in the construction, maintenance, operation or use of overhead lines and to the public in general. GO 95 also includes minimum vertical clearance requirements from thoroughfares, ground,and railroads, as well as specific minimum clearances from tree branches and vegetation around overhead wires. SCE is concerned that the Empire Lakes Specific Plan's landscaping plans may conflict with SCE's existing subtransmission line designs. Additional Electrical Infrastructure Based on the size and scope of the proposed Empire Lakes Specific Plan, electrical infrastructure that operates above 50 kV may be necessary to service the proposed project, which may include a substation and/or new subtransmission line. The developer for the Empire Lakes Specific Plan should contact Jessica Witte from SCE's New Development Project Design Department at(909)421-6432 or Jessica.Witte(�sce.com.to initiate an electrical service evaluation.The electrical service evaluation will begin the process for identification of on-and off-site electrical facilities required to service the proposed Project. General Order 131-D The construction of new electrical facilities that operate above 50 kV may be subject to CPUC's GO 131-D2.As a state agency, the CPUC is also required to comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). if the proposed project requires a new subtransmission line, it may result in significant and/or unavoidable environmental impacts that are off-site,which should be addressed in the DEIR. If not, the CPUC as CEQA Lead agency may be required to prepare an entirely new CEQA document for the new subtransmission line,which could delay approval of the subtransmission line portion of the project for several years. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me at Jennifer.Shaw(cDsce.com or (909)35 - Regards, 909)357- Regards, Jennifer Shaw Local Public Affairs Region Manager Southern California Edison Company cc: Jessica Witte, SCE NDPD Karen Cadavona, SCE LPA z http://docs.epuc.ca.gov/PUBLISHED/Graphics/569.PDF I June 10,2015 Empire Lakes Specific Plan (NOP) Page 3 of 3 SCE's Existing Facilities within the Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project Area Metrolink Red Line NHHU MMM!"WiH++tt++1+++H+4rFrM+=ttt. .w�_t#; �#f 66 kV --. �— WHbi trre '�•— Genamic Metrolink Substaion N-2 _ __ StOtlon N) UN 14-11 MU >e¢ vse asa �T 30m NA The Vine CL N., N-IT 'e z UNI Mu es yOg...ic µO Wls dirt access road + N'12 CL3 CL lax tBMO.z. S9.z The Vine i 6 IL � r4 a a L North ,,J, s22 � I szl I szo South CL 1 REC 1 E REG CL Pocke Pari( S-1a VN S-.5 VN - 6)¢ KSEJ¢ Yly S-16 The Vine VN wa.¢ 5-18 VN 1. Plan qp Legend .�m Mtted Use(MU) UrMn Neighborhood NM oam Core UNng(CL) 1a66x Village Neiy�tcrt.00d(MN Rrseoaon(PEC1 wh S.. - Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project W, Public Scoping Meeting WNW June 10, 2015 Purpose: Receive public testimony pertaining to the environmental issues to be addressed in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that is being prepared for a proposed amendment to the Empire Lakes Specific Plan. z�� ` yu t � •. nY +' a ti ',e-.. ym >`y' a-e W C �� Y • zarky' Ir WW - -- ii iv „� �„ .� ..� ..• � '- �.� � a "S' ,./"v`� i 9 t / i.F i � II � X44, t/� • � t ' J i •— S tI t � � oaf y� 40 •�': P ,:�#' y•� r �j 4 i « -Ar^rr.. 7•< t'�F��H''"Ffi'il"'�!.. ;'r`-+N"Mj'. ., .� 1�!'�/ itfr'+�,',� � � '�. •' tet, p , , /� $}1 F • ••' ASG (;+7 A .•• to _ . •! Sr. . - le '�. 'i' • n 1 r _ y �i��, �•�� Y i ..e • y w , (y, l r• d.._F°. mL� '}" 1 73�.v-�3 �r}`,.�i ',M' "�. � .�'..'�� 3..� rye,.. �'➢' S � a � _yam f�`4: � ` �•�-��{.r�}yy`^ ,. .k s n + 1 s F Y 1 �,?. �F �. r r �,- �� . ,p may. � � jt•• �: E s ��p�� S4 {fr tA! wY "y�x- •� �Y. �. '�,� '.'1� @ L•'w _�.., _ 3 446 a0/� h .. �.•. .. 'l� - � 2� : tel'- � $ a p s1 7 § Aad v 1 NO" a w _ ^ e > m �. �n.,€•3+bi . -.._ . � w. ":'i'-„,;;u-.. S>..�,. � � sE' ve >-, ..laa _ 't<#''--a{.v :-w,� a :::t t r� 'r'�i"�#i.�Y . .�'�1'.�4 ' ,f•n R,4 T ` Metrolink Red Line 141 II+I Pocket Park-- N-3Metrolink Transit :7r,arion N-2 N-1 UN N-11 CL 24-00 dura._ 76 ac:. m 185 dtdaC. _`SS duae. 4.8 ac N-4 j The Vine CL N-5 N-1 18-35 du'ac 0 M aa. UN Mu 2aboduka . 7.4 M. 6.3 x. s REC -- N-6 \ CL \ N-9 CL 18-35&Vac. `f 8.8 ac. 18-35 dLdoc f" 5.5 ac. L The Vine N-7 N-8 VN VN 14-28 dJaa 14-28 dufac. d5 ac, d4 ac. North 6GI'i SG reef ._ � --------�,� , ---- S o u G h s-22 � [ s-21 . S-20 � North S-13S-22 S-21 5-20 CL REC REC j CL 18-35 dUcc. -- ' 18-35 duh_. 95 aa. 37¢. Pca _ S-14 Pt7r' VN S-15 14-28 dulaa VNT 67 ac. 14-28 dulac.63 ac.__. . e S-16 , VN i 1428 dda . /� r 10.2 as S-18 - VN 14-28 du/ac. Placerype Legend 8.1 ac. MTransib (T) Mixed Use (MU) S-17 m Urban Neighborhood (UM 14401 Core Living (CL) 6G Village Neighborhood (VN) Recreation iRE t 4ChSCre t f Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project Public Scoping Meeting The City, as the Lead Agency, is responsible for the review/consideration of theJro ro osed project, and p p p addressing potential environmental impacts that may be associated with the project. • An Initial Study was prepared by the applicant's consultant prior to the preparation of an EIR. • The EIR is required to ensure that the potential environmental impacts of the project are fully evaluated. r , Empire Lakes Specific Plan Project ' Public Scoping Meeting • A Notice of Preparation (NOP) wasre ared and p p circulated to government entities on April 27, 2015. • The comment period ended 30 days after the date of circulation on May 26, 2015. • The City is accepting additional comments from the general public until June 26, 2015. -� Empire LakesProjectS ecific Plan p .-C..-P. Q.0. . ' Public Scoping Meeting E' 3 At this time, is the opportunity for the Planning Commission to accept public testimony pertaining to the environmental issues to be addressed in the Environmental Impact Report.