Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997/04/17 - Agenda Packet CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA II REGULAR MEETINGS 1st and 3rd Wednesdays - 7:00 p.m. April 17, 1997 Civic Center Council Chambers 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 City Councilmembers William J. Alexander, Mayor Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem Paul Biane, Councilmember James V. Curatalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember Jack Lain, City Manager James L. Markman, City .dttorney Debra J. Adams, City Clerk City Office: 477-2700 City Council Agenda April 17, 1991 I .All item submitted for the City Council Agenda must be in writing. The deadline for submitting these items is 6:00 p.m. on the Tuesday of the week prior to the meeting. The City Clerk's Office receives all such items. A. CALL TO ORDER 1. Roll Call: Alexander Biane , Curatalo , Gutierr;z , and Wiiliams B. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS 1. Presentation of Proclamation declaring the week of Apdl 13-19 as National Library Week in Rancho Cucamonga, recognizing the fact that "Kids Connect @ the Library." 2. Presentation recognizing the outstanding contributions of Bill Anthony, John Mannedno, Dusty Taylor and Dixie Langdon in planning, organizing and participating in the broadcast of the highly successful Library Telethon, Kids Connect ~ the Library. C. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council. Stab law prohibits the City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The City Council may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual. D. CONSENT CALENDAR The following Consent Calendar items are expected to be routine and non-controversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion. Any item may be removed by a Councilmember or member of the audience for discussion. 1. Approval of Warrants, Register Nos. 3/26/97 and 4/2/97 and Payroll 1 ending 3/30/97 for the total amount of $2,444,568.87. 2. Approval to receive and file current Investment Schedule as of 9 March 31, 1997. 3. Alcoholic Beverage Application for On-Site Sales of Beer and Wine 14 for Los Hermanos Cafe, Irene and Perry V'NeS, 7201 Archibald Ave., Suite 11. 4. Alcoholic Beverage Application for On-Sale General for Kens 16 Japanese Restaurant, 10006 Foothill Blvd. 5. Approval of Application to County of San Bernardino, Department of 18 Aging and Adult Services for a supportive services and services to the frail older person grant. City Council Agenda April 17, 1997 2 RESOLUTION NO. 97-044 19 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF APPLICATION TO THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, DEPARTMENT OF AGING AND ADULT SERVICES FOR A 1997/98 SUPPORTIVE SERVICES/SERVICES TO THE FRAIL PROPOSAL GRANT 6. Authorization to purchase one (1) Intemational Navistar Dump Truck 20 Model 4700 from Dieterich International per City of Rancho Cucamonga RFP 9697001. Amount of purchase not to exceed $52,626.03 from fund 72-4225-7045 fiscal year 1996/97 appropriation. Vehicle replaces asset #0798 (unit 632). 7. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement, Improvement Security 21 and Ordering the Annexation to Landscape Maintenance Distdct No. 3B and Street Ughring Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 6 for Conditional Use Permit 95-20, located at the southwest corner of Arrow Route and Red Oak Avenue, submitted by Kateladus. RESOLUTION NO. 97-045 23 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-20, KATELARIUS RESOLUTION NO. 97-046 24 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-20, KATELARIUS 8. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement, Improvement 27 Securities and Ordedng the Annexalion to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. I and 6 for MDR 96-06, located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Carnelian Avenue, submitted by Bandy/Shyer RESOLUTION NO. 97-047 28 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES FOR MDR 96-06 City Council Agenda April 17, 1997 3 RESOLUTION NO. 97-048 29 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 6 FOR MDR 96-06 9. Approval and execution of Amendment to Cooperative Agreement, 32 State Agreement No. 8-786, between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the State of California, for the design and construction of traffic control signals, safety lighting and roadwork on Route 66 at Baker Avenue. RESOLUTION NO. 97-049 34 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND SIGNING OF AMENDMENT TO COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT, STATE AGREEMENT NO. 8-786, FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS, SAFETY LIGHTING AND ROADWORK ON ROUTE 66 AT BAKER STREET 10. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extension, accept 35 irrevocable standby letters of credit issued by United National Bank and release irrevocable standby letters of credit issued by United World Chinese Commercial Bank for Tract 13759, located on the west side of Haven Avenue, north of the Southern Pacific Railroad, submitted by Fu Mai Limited Partnership. RESOLUTION NO. 97-050 36 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND ACCEPT IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTERS OF CREDIT ISSUED BY UNITED NATIONAL BANK AND RELEASE IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTERS OF CREDIT ISSUED BY UNITED WORLD CHINESE COMMERCIAL BANK FOR TRACT 13759 11. Approval to accept Contract No. CO 96-037, the roof replacement 37 for Civic Center and Police Station Project, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, funded from Account 17-5100, approve the final contract amount of $204,376.00, and authorize the City Engineer to file a "Notice of Completion." City Council Agenda April 17, 1997 4 RESOLUTION NO. 97-051 38 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE CIVIC CENTER AND POLICE STATION, CONTRACT NO. CO 96-037, AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK 12. Approval of Preliminary Engineer's Report and Setling of the Public 40 Hearing for May 21, 1997, to levy the annual assessments for fiscal year 1997/98 and approve the Preliminary Engineer's Report for Street Lighting Maintenance Districts Nos. 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8. RESOLUTION NO. 97-052 43 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S ANNUAL REPORTS FOR STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS NOS. 1,2, 3,4,5,6,7AND8 RESOLUTION NO. 97-053 44 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS NOS. 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 AND 8 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972; AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE OF HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO 13. Approval of Preliminary Engineer's Report and Setting of the Public 46 Headng for May 21, 1997, to levy the Annual Assessments for Fiscal Year 1997/98 and approve the Preliminary Engineer's Report for Landscape Maintenance Districts Nos. 1,2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8. RESOLUTION NO. 97-054 49 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S ANNUAL REPORTS FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS NOS. 1,2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5, 6, 7 AND 8 City Council Agenda April 17, 1997 5 RESOLUTION NO. g7-055 50 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS NOS. 1,2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5, 6, 7 AND 8 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972; AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE OF HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO E. CONSENT ORDINANCES The following Ordinances have had public hearings at the time of first reading. Second readings are expected to be routine and non- controversial. They will be acted upon by the Council at one time without discussion. The City Clerk will read the title. Any item can be removed for discussion. 1. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-02 - CITATION HOMES - A request to amend the Victoda Community Plan Development District designation from Medium-Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 18 acres of land at the northeast comer of Milliken Avenue and Victoda Park Lane - APN: 227-011- 17. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for consideration. ORDINANCE NO. 572 (second reading) 53 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-02, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8- 14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW- MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 18 ACRES OF LAND AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND VICTORIA PARK LANE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-011-17 City Council Agenda April 17, 1997 6 2. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03 - CITATION HOMES - A request to amend the Victoda Community Plan Development District designation from Medium Residential (8-14 dwelling units per acre) to Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) for approximately 12.4 acres of land south of Highland Avenue, east of Woodruff Place - APN: 227-011-26. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for consideration. ORDINANCE NO. 573 (second reading) 55 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8- 14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW- MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY' 12.4 ACRES OF LAND SOUTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE, EAST OF WOODRUFF PLACE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227- 011-26 F. ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS The following items have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. The Chair will open the meeting to receive public testimony. 1. CONSIDERATION OF INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN 57 AMENDMENT 97-01 - MILLER FAMILY AND ASSOCIATES - A request to add Funeral and Crematory Services as a conditionally permitted use in Subarea 8 (General Industrial) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. ORDINANCE NO. 574 (first reading) 132 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-01, TO ADD FUNERAL AND CREMATORY SERVICES AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE IN SUBAREA 8, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF 2. CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 96- 137 01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the radio and television antenna regulations in all zones to be consistent with Federal Communications Commission recent regulations. City Council Agenda April 17, 1997 7 CONSIDERATION OF INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN 131 AMENDMENT 96-04 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the radio and television antenna regulations in all industrial zones to be consistent with Federal Communications Commission recent regulations. CONSIDERATION OF SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN 137 AMENDMENT 96-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the radio and television antenna regulations to be consistent with Federal Communications Commission recent regulations. ORDINANCE NO. 575 (first reading) 145 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE; PART III, SECTION IV.A.5 OF THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN; AND SECTION 5.4 (PAGES 5-30) OF THE SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN, PERTAINING TO THE REGULATION OF RADIO AND TELEVISION ANTENNAS, INCLUDING SATELLITE DISH ANTENNAS 153 3. CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 97-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to change the zoning from Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) to General Commercial to be consistent with the General Plan for approximately 4.34 acres of land on the east side of Archibald Avenue, south of Arrow Route - APN: 209-041-27, 41, and 47. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for consideration. ORDINANCE NO. 576 (first reading) 177 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 97-01, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT MAP FROM LOW RESIDENTIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL FOR 4.34 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE, SOUTH OF ARROW ROUTE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 209-041-27, 41, AND 47 179 4. CONSIDERATION OF SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 97-01 - TEXACO - A request to amend the Sign Ordinance by adding regulations to allow the identification of subtenants within service stations. City Council Agenda April 17, 1997 8 ORDINANCE NO. 577 (first reading) 189 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 97-01, AMENDING TITLE 14 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING NEW REGULATIONS FOR SUBTENANT SIGNS WITHIN THE SERVICE STATION CLASSIFICATION G. PUBLIC HEARINGS The following item have no legal publication or posting requirements. The Chair will open the meeting to receive public testimony. 1. CONSIDERATION OF SECOND PUBLIC HEARING FOR 191 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 93-01 AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND ROCHESTER AVENUE (MASI DEVELOPMENT} RESOLUTION NO. 97-056 193 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING THE RESULTS OF THE BALLOT TABULATION, CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT, ORDERING THE ACQUISITION OF IMPROVEMENTS, TOGETHER WITH APPURTENANCES, AND APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT ENGINEER'S REPORT H. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS The following items do not legally require any public testimony, although the Chair may open the meeting for public input. 1. UPDATE FROM ROUTE 30 AD HOC TASK FORCE 200 I. COUNCIL BUSINESS The following items have been requested by the City Council for discussion. They are not public hearing items, although the Chair may open the meeting for public input. J. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING This is the time for City Council to identify the items they wish to discuss at the next meeting. These items will not be discussed at this meeting, only identified for the next meeting. . City Council Agenda April 17, 1997 9 K. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC This is the time and place for the general public to address the City Council. State law prohibits the City Council from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda. The City Council may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual, L. ADJOURNMENT MEETING TO ADJOURN TO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS: (A) PROPERTY NEGOTIATIONS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED ON ROCHESTER, BETWEEN FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND ARROW ROUTE; VALLEY BASEBALL AND JERRY FULWOOD, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER, NEGOTIATING PARTIES; REGARDING TERMS OF PAYMENT. I, Debra J. Adams, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on Apdl 10, 1997, seventy-two (72) hours pdor to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. II II II II it II II It 11 II I1 II II II II II ~ II II II II It II It II II ~ ;I ~ II II 0 II II .{ IIII n II II II i! il . II ~l~Oa),~'OOr~--~OOOC')~OOOOOIl~)['llO'OOOOOf~O0~O00C)O00(')O('llOl~'~O0 tl I-- II ~)~.('~1~.~q~1(~1r~~)~f)~~f~`r~r~`~Cd~(~d~`~~~.~~~~O~ I'~ II't' II Onn'~l .... ,q'll.~H 0 II ~ II It II II II LLI II II I-- II II ( I1 II ~ II II II II Z II II ~ II II n,' II tl IIZ II IZ~G~O)~O'O'&"O"O"O"O"&"O'O"O00000000 IIIt ~L~~~~~~`"~-~.~"~.~`"~'`"e~`.~'`"~`""~``'"'"'`~`~"'"~`-~`."~'~.`~~~~~~ II'1 tl · II II II tl fJl I I It II II r,, x 11 U 0"' II II \ II II ,,,0 II II . 0"' II II IJJ · II II I" e-~ f~l n , I-- t II II ~0 I-- ~ n Z rJ Z fil II 11 rJ D ..I ~) U1 ,'-, ,I =)(O H II U"J Z I- O,,,g'JC,~[,11 U) I- _1 LIJ I.IJ r,.,JCl. I X II UJr, J'lr. fi~ ~ I~ Z I,~ I~1 UJ ~ U U) U'JC/1U)r**JU1 IZ~ Ii Jl t. tJ rJI, ULJJ,JU) (,I) 1- DLI, I~ U (J (,,f) IJj I~ Z L&iI,UI,IJUJZ I,IJ 'T'1: II It Z )....1_./~,"~ ( "'eZ \/'_J ) · N ZZ I.U Z J_J_J..J7 / .U ItZ II ,(_JC~Q.O.I~'( ~J J"~ J(N rr (2: J l. IJMj Z IJ.I nnQ..0. UJ 0.. Zl.,.~ X O U Z(UJQ. O,. Q.r. nulu) cua. LUn (ZmC/1LU Ull. U n (OC:) ItN it tJJI--U)~DLulJ, ILulJJW, IZN DO.. · I--I--IJ, i LI, IU1tjJ(tl ~ N >.)- T'.DZ DDD]DZ D n,, N IiI-- II i-Z U')G1Zn"N~NIJ. IZ CtDI' NZI--n,'N l--tr II0,. II ZMJJ C:) ..J-l-.Jn"U') ~f,~r U'JLIJZI&i/J I.k~t. kl ItH fi ~a',(I,l,ll,l,lZl,tJO..O.,n IZ _1 C)O OINl-(2..( 0,.( r.J O_,lL&Jr IJJLaI,QU, lr'OU,I O,-,a. tlQ~ II ( ZUUO,.U~.O,.O, nWZO, ZUZZZO, ,4:,(O. ZZO..ZZ ZZZZZ Zn'n"Ul,~n' ZUUUU UU ,I tlU II ~'I-OZZ ZDDD~mO O ONtgI,iJI,,,I'3DOODOI3 OOOOOl,~OOO I-o.I-OZZZZIJ,I Z 1- O IIILl II LI. JI.I.JUIZZ(Z U) LIJl-..I..iJI.-Zl..-~.',ei--MILl. I> Ult.- [.I) 1-I-.1..-I-~-I-- I..-rJUIJ.,I),.._JLIJI'-'ZZZZ(LIJZ r.j IIIt UnlJ. Jl"l'-~)~-r, JUUIJJ I,i,I(IJJZLIJCCLt, IZII-UZUUJI~IULat~I 11ILl II II II II II II II II II I1 II Z II II O )" . II II N I-- U I1 II I- t, IJ Z II I1 (,,11 ( ~-q ~-~ II II Z ~ U II II O g O - II il ~ O U1 >. II tl l.-(J) I-- Z GGI U U'J I- rJ I II II ( ~ Z Lt, I n , 0 a'l ::l: rj '( ~ II II ~ [J'l (Z Z I. IJ )" IZ Z O C~ . I-- II II LIJ <[O ZN (ZC3 ..Jl~Z"') r~Zl.l.i n II II r.J C.~ fi" O U') 3 O ~' (.,1 Z G.. LU O Z Z [ )' · IZ~ ~ Z It It ~ Z ( Z (/1> ~ , I.--uJ( IZ.l-ml-. II II )Z,.'.~ J ~ L.l. ll~r,.)~ . Lun"LD ]D(m~'-Z I--LUT gO/') .J U') tu U .OI~'Z II II n"'On"[,fi .~ I-- Z(N I"13 I~ I-- g'J'~NO),' U~I,I II II I,i.l*-*L"''T',t ZLrJ~"rr..,I '4:(,) '4:~( trUj ([::)I. IJ:Z:( Ok4 n,' Z;"' I'-Z:~N' Unrr''' II II U'JI--ull-. ._1 "'eU[.J) mes 'I' t'~N U']ff) U'1"~'O U')""~ II II (Z~.,(./)l.tJ(3rr,..,:),-eZ~Q{Jn'(~-~ tJJJ(JtJJ II II i.~iI_~,~!'UUZI~'t'CD_I0,1JJ I~a,'_lrr(r(~ iJj II II ZZ'~ :Z u)(ZZZ&,km( G.. Zl.-r3Z2:: uOr |l II ;<(I..IJ(JC) U.J' 1:1::(',4:( iJ.. - . tr 14,1 II II ~rJ C) CI~)I.i. II=,-(.3UUU .[.~ g(J') Ox~"Z0 II II Z ..~i_.O3CC(~t~..~s..,~NQI. I. JI.i. ILLIb..I.i..LU C) t')..C)uJO( ItX~ t| ~t.J r. JJ(Z..Jt'~13..I. IJl.t. ll..Gl,.-,((..J~...~.JJZI-JI.J~Ur'Z IIII IIII III~ II OL'~l~)fill'~'.,OCl)qlrl'~)Ol~l)fit"O III,.IJ II ~ ,., ..~..~., .., ,., ,..,,.,,-,.,-,.,-e .-, / tl) II II II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~1 I I I I I I I I I ~1 I I I ~1 I {I I ~1 I I I I I ~O0~O~Ofi~O~OO~OOO~O~W~O--~O~OW~O0 W~O~ I~1 ~O0~O~O0~O~O~O000~~O0~O~O~O ~~ ~0~0~0~ ~1[I o~E~ ~1~1 O~ N ~ 0 I I I ~1 I ~1 I ~1 I I I A Z I I A D I I ~ r% I~1 I I I I 0 I I 0 ~ I I V V ~ ~ I I V V ON~ I~l U~(U~ZUU~ZZ~ZUUZ~ZUZ~N Z O~DZUUUZ (UOD~ J IUI Z~Z~NZZ ~O~OZZOOOZNU~W~O~~OZZZO ~ZZ~) DON I I I I I I I I I Z I I I I Z I I ( Z Z N I n Oa~ ~ ~. Z Z u~O D I I ~D ~)~UZ ~ 0 ~ ~ ZN~ ~ Z~ I n JO J~Z~ ~ ZZ ~[~ ~ OZ I 11 ~--~mJZUO Z Z~ ~ UU(~ ~ Z~ZW .O ~Z-~ I I I I I H I fl fi II I| ~ll II ~ ~ 11 II ti~ll ~11~11 o.~. II II ~ II II ~ II II ~ II Z ~ II I Z~ loft ~ 11011 l i If $ II I W II I II i II R II e II I I II I~11 ~ tl I I I I I I I I II I I I I I ~ I II ~ I It I ~ I I I I.II ~ 0 0 0 ~0 0 0 ~ I~11 ~ 0 0 0 ~0 0 ~ N~ 01~11 I II I I R I # U I I I I I I I III · 11 · I · I I Z I I V V V V V V V~V O h I ~ V V V V V V VJ~V ~ I ~ V V V V V V V~JV Z~ I X J ) ) Z Z)J)Z Z )Z ) J Z JZUZ Z 0 ~Z Z ~ I~l Q J JZ ZO ZJ Z~J)JZ(JZ J~ J IUB Z ~ O 0 O~ O [) [OZ~O~ODWO~ OW ZDO~OZOZ[OQD[N~ I I ~ Z I n ~ 0 I Y U ~ J . I I ~ ~ O ~ Z I M ~ u ~ ~ Z u, I ~ u Z ~ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 eZ NZ~O~ Z:D~m&-- Wi ~-~U O(- ~ZZ I II I I~X ~ -- . . I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~! I I I I I I I I I I I ~l I ., ~1 I I I I I 0~0000--0~000~0~0~000 ~O~O000~O0000~O~O~O~--~O I~1 ~O~O000hO)~OOO~O~~O00 ~~OOO~O~OO~O~hOh~(~0 hlXI ~m~m -~m~OmonOom~n~m~mO~oO ~m~m Ol~l I I I I ~1 I ~1 I ~1 I I I I~1 I I I I Z I I N w J V ~ UZ~ I I DJ D ~ ~ ~] I I JJ> ~ ZZ~Z J~ (JQ> JUJZ>Z ZZ ~ JZ ~ ! I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I Z D Z I I ~ ~ 0 I I U[ Z ~ ~ ~ Z U ~ I I Z ZO ZN ~ a D ~ 0 ~ ~ I I U ( ~Z ~ ~Z~e ~ U~ UN Z ~ZD I I Z~ Z ZO ~ ~UUO > ~ · Z(Z ~D N Z ~ I I I i | I II I I I I II I I I II I II I II I I I II ~1 tl - {I tl ~1 II I II I ~ ~00~0~0~0~ ~O~O0~O0~~O~O000~~O000~O~O~O~O I~11 ~00~0~0~0~0 ~O~OOW~O~~O~--~OOO~fiO~O0~O~O~~O ~l~ . I H ZI I ~ I H U ~ g H Z I I ~ N I U {~1 I ~ {Z ~ D(~ I I Z~ JJ _ ~ U ~ ~3 I I ~W Z Z ZZ~ WW~ ZZ J(Z )~ ZZ Z~ W ZZ Z~Z~J~Z J ION OO ZD~ODO~OOO ~O~OOOO~ZmOWOu~OOOOOm~OmO~ OOO~OZO0 X~X OO[~~k~W~O ZZU(U~Z--~OZ~U~U I m . < I B Z I H U ~ N H ~ Z ~ Z I I ~ U ~ ~ ~ i It ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ JZ UO D X a ~~ (~UZJEJ ZW ZU Z~E Z m. u~ -EOE II)ll II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~1 I I I I I I I I I .. I I ~1 I - ~1 I {I I ~1 I I 1 I I ~000~0 I~1 ~OOO~O ~O~O~OO~O~O00~~~O~O0~O~O~O0~ ~1~1 ....... ~1~1 01~1 I I · .I I ~1 I (I I ~1 I I I Zl I DI I ~ A I I ~~~~~~~~~000000000000000000000000000 I~1 I I I I ~ I I · Z I I V ~ ~ ~ ~ U~l I I ~ ~ ~ m J ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ lUl Z~O (ZZ ~00 ZZO 0 [~0[~ [O~O~Z~[Z [~ ~ZOO[ ~ Z I[I Z~ ZZ ~DZZ~U~[Q~~w~~Z ~Z.~[~Z I I I I I I m m m I I Z I I Z~~ Z MO U 0~3 ~ j~ ~ .~OO~N O I I ~ ~(J~ ~(OZ ~ZZ ~ MJ~U ( ~:) ~ ZO~~ WWO~J I I I I I~1 I I I I I I II I II I II I tl I II I II ! II I II I I It I II ~1 II ~1 II I II I-II ~O~O0~ I~ ~0~~0~0 ~0~00~00~0~0~0 ~--~--~00~ ~0~ ~1~11 - - MI(N I H I II ~1 II ~1 II I II I II ~0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 I]11 ~ I W 0 0 O N I II · Z I H V ~(~ I W J U U '7 ~ U ~ * J Iu~ bOO Z~OZ~ IEU Z~ Z~Z~ I~ <ZZ--<~Z~ OZZ<OJ~OZZ~~Z33kZ I S I fi I ~ Z I I U ~ · , U I i Z I I ~ u I I U ~ ~ ~ Z~ ~ ~ U I I Z ~ ZZ ~ Z ( V ~0( ~ ~ ( ZZ I I <~ ~:~J~U ~> I I JO~(uU~- uuU Z ~Z>(ZQDD Z~- Z~u(~O~--D~ ~ mO I I l>ll S 04/0~/1997 CITY OF RANCHO C[JCAMOMGA PN - 1 PORTFOLIO MASTER SUMMARY CITY MARC]{ 31, 1997 CASH AVERAGE ---YIELD TO MATURITY--- PERCENT OF AVERAGE DAYS TO 360 365 INVESTMENTS BOOK VALUE PORTFOLIO TERM MATURITY EWIVALENT EWIVALEb"r Certificates of Deposit - Bank ...............$ 10,325,532.20 15.45 520 152 6.112 6.196 Local Agency Investment Funds ................$ 16,103,45~.96 24.10 1 1 5.499 5.576 Federal Agency Issues - Coupon ...............$ 39,404,375.00 58.97 1,694 1,312 6.465 6.555 Treasury Securities - Coupon .................$ 272,845.00 0.41 1,180 152 6.057 6.141 Mortgage Backed Securities ...................$ 718,602.00 1.08 8,323 4,481 7.798 7.907 TOTAL I~TMENTS and AVERAGES ............. $ 66,824,813.16 100.00% 1,174 846 6.190% 6.276% CASH Passix>ok/Checking Accounts ...................$ 899,19V. 91 1.973 2.000 (not included in yield calculations) Accrued Interest at Purchase .................$ 7,233.90 ~AL ~ and PUKq{ASE TJT~ ............. $ 906,431.81 TOTAL CASH and IWVESTMD~S ................. $ 67,731,244.97 MONTH ENDING FISCAL T~yrAL EARNINGS ~ 31 YEAR TO DATE Current Year $ 346,403.43 $ 3,043,923.44 AVERAGE DALLY BALANCE $ 67,618,209.54 $ 64,218,716.34 EFFECTIVE RATE OF P, ETUIU{ 6.03% 6.31{  I certify that this report accurately reflects all City pooled investments and C. is in comformity with the investment policy adopted Angust 7, 1996. A copy of ~/////~ the investment policy is available in the Administrative Services Department. The Investment Program herein shown provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet the next six months estimated expenditures. Source of Valuation - DATE Interactive Data Corporation automatic pricing service. 04/08/1997 CITY OF ~ C[]C. AMOM<IA PM - 2 INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAILS - INVESTMENTS CITY Mj[R(~{ 31, 1997 CAS~{ ~Ellq' AVERAGE PURCHASE STATED ---YTM--- MATURITY DA.. IIUMBER ISSUER BALAN(:E DATE BOOK VALUE FACE VALUE {VALUE RATE 360 365 DATE ~ MAT CEI{q"IFICATES OF DEPq:rSIT - BANK 00937 FOOTHILL INI)~ BANK 04/06/95 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 6.950 6.950 7.047 04/09/97 ~45 SAJFWA 05/02/95 2,0(X),000.00 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 6.410 6.410 6.499 05/02/97 31 0(>975 S.AJfm/A 05/22/96 1,500,000.00 1,500,0(0).00 1,500,000.00 6.(K)O 6.000 6.083 05/26/98 420 00976 SAJFWA 08/06/96 1,515,000.00 1,515,000.00 1,515,000.00 5.650 5.650 5.728 08/06/97 127 00~980 SANWA 11/26/96 500,000.00 500,000.00 500,000.00 5.350 5.350 5.424 5/27/97 56 00986 SANWA 03/05/97 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 5.830 5.830 5.911 03/05/98 338 00987 SANIdA 03/18/97 1,810,532.20 1,810,532.20 1,810,532.20 5.700 5.700 5.779 09/16/97 168 E~ and AVEP, AGM 10,244,887.20 10,325,532.20 10,325,532.20 10,325,532.20 6.112 6.196 152 LOCAL AGENCY INVES'Y"MENT FUNDS ~ LOCAL AGENCY INV~ FUND 14,910,141.12 14,910,141.12 14,910,141.12 5.575 5.499 5.575 1 00804' LOCAL AGE]ICY II{VST FUN1) 1,193,317.84 1,193,317.84 1,193,317.84 5.583 5.507 5.583 SUlYI'C)T~ ~ AVERAGM 17,780,878.31 16,103,458.96 16,103,458.96 16,103,458.96 5.499 5.576 1 FEDERAl, AGENCY ISSUES - COUPOB ~4 FEDEI~J~L FAR){ CR]H)I'['BA]{ 01/I6/96 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 1,946,250.00 6.030 6.030 6.114 01/16/01 1, ~9 FEDE]{AL FAR){ CREDIT BAli[ 03/05/~ 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 1,950,6~.00 6.165 6.165 6.251 03/05/01 1,~ 00973 IqH)EP, AL FAR){ CP, E])I? BA]{ 05/20/96 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 999,~2.50 6.500 6.500 6.590 05/20/99 779 00978 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT ~_{ 10/03/96 1,500,000.00 1,500,000.00 1,497,656.25 6.610 6.610 6.702 10/06/99 918 00983 FEDERAL FARM CREDIT BAN[ 12/23/~ 1,0(0),0(0).00 1,000,000.00 985,625.00 6.700 6.700 6.793 12/24/01 1,728 O(~gU FEDEP, AL FAx{J{ CI{EI)IT I]wQIK 03/27/97 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 1,970,6~.00 6.620 6.620 6.712 03/27/02 1,821 00922 FEDERAL I{(:I[E LOAN BANK 12/19/94 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 1,014,062.50 8.030 8.030 8.142 12/19/97 262 0(~940 FEDERAl, HOME LOAN BA]I][ 04/06/~ 942,96~.75 1,000,000.00 981,562.50 5.240 7.030 7.127 11/30/98 ~2 FEDERAL H(311E LOAN BANK 12/18/95 4,000,000.00 4,000,000.00 3,908,750.0{) 6.195 6.195 6.281 12/18/00 1,357 0,[~971 FEDERAL HO!,[E LOAN BANK 03/19/96 995,312.50 1,000,000.00 987,812.50 5.880 6.053 6.137 03/19/99 717 00974 FEDERAL ~ LOAN BANK 05/21/96 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 997,812.50 7.025 7.025 7.123 05/21/01 1,511 00982 FEDERAL HCI[E LOAN BANK 12/30/96 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 982,500.00 6.195 6.195 6.281 06/30/00 1,186 00938 FEDERAl, HOME LOAN 11:)!{'1'{2. (3:) 04/06/95 1,002,031.25 1,000,0(0).00 1,003,750.00 7.420 7.226 7.326 09/23/99 905 00~)57 FEDERAL H(31{E LOAN ~. (3:) 11/20/95 2,54)0,0(30.00 2,5430,000.00 2,452,343.75 6.290 6.290 6.377 11/17/00 1,326 00,967 FEDERAL tK:)!{E LOAN )DEwlN~. (3:) 03/06/9,6 1,998,750.00 2,000,000.00 1,938,750.00 5.990 6.0(~3 6.088 03/~/01 1,435 0<)9M~8 FEDERAL H(314~ LOAN MORTG. <X) 02/22/96 1,985,312.50 2,000,000.00 1,922,500.00 5.695 5.86? 5.94~ 02/16/01 1,417 0(~)72 FEDERAL ~ LOAN MOE"I'(;. (3:) 05/15/96 3,000,00{).00 3,000,000.00 2,995,313..50 7.275 7.275 7.376 05/15/01 1,50'3 0,0947 FEDERAl, NATL M"IN2 AS.edl 05/08/95 1,500,000.00 1,5(X,000.00 1,516,875.00 7.270 7.270 7.371 05/08/0( 1,133 00959 FEDEP, A.[, MATT., M"I'G AS.Sil 11/29/95 4,000,0,00.00 4,000,O(M).O0 3,925,000.00 6.230 6.230 6.317 11/28/00 1,337 00964) FEDERAL NA~'L ~ ~ 11/24/95 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 993,750.00 5.970 5.970 6.05~ k[/~/98 603 00981 FED!IRAL MATL MTG ~ 11/29/96 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 1,941,875.00 6.230 6.230 6.317 13./~/01 1,701 00984 FEDER.A.L NAT]., M'[Y] AS..qll 12/12/96 1,980,000.00 2,000,000.00 1,940,000.00 6.160 6.3~ 6.467 12/14/01 1,71~ EA.L.5 ~ AVERAGES 37,726,955.65 39,404,375.00 38,852,5(30.00 39,500,000.00 6.465 6.555 1,31P 04,'~/1997 CITY OF RA]k'q{O CY2C. AMONCd ~ - 3 INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO DETAILS - 13rv"ES~ CITY ~ 31, 1997 CASH .......qTMENT AVEPAGE PURCHASE STATED ---YTM--- MATURITY DAYS NNiMBER IS,.qUER BALANCE DATE B(M2N[ VALUE FACE VALUE MARKET VALUE RATE 360 365 DATE TO MAT TREASURY SECURITIES - COUPON (X)903 ~Y NOTE 06/08/94 272,845.00 277,000.00 276,653.75 5.625 6.057 6.141 08/31/97 152 AVERAGES 272,845.00 MORTGAGE BA<3[ED SECURITIES 00071 FEDERAL ~ LOAN MORw~G. CO 02/23/87 41,759.28 42,872.04 33,836.20 8.000 8.336 8.452 01/01/02 1,736 00203 FEDEI~A.L NATL MTG ASSN 09/21/87 92,467.30 100,09~).92 99,950.56 8.500 9.557 9.689 09/01/10 4,901 OO(K)2 GOVERN]4ENT NATIONAL MORTG A 06/23/86 73,307.59 74,329.62 60,962.10 8.500 8.621 8.740 05/15/01 1,5435 (X3069 GOVERNP. I~{T NATIONAL { A 05/23/86 23,130.83 22,677.29 2,912.70 9.000 8.534 8.652 03/15/01 1,444 (X)O0 S]4Aij~ BUSINESS AI)MIN 07/25/86 487,937.00 442,949.90 478,595.95 8.750 7.261 7.361 07/25/11 5,228 EX[.~ and AVERAGES 721,338.98 718,602.00 676,257.51 682,928.77 7.798 7.907 4,481 ]'OTAL INVEST){ENTS and AVG. $ 66,824,813.16 66,234,402.42 66,746,905.15 66,888,919.93 6.190{ 6.276% 846 04/08/1997 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOMGA PM - 4 INVESTMENT INDRTFOLIO DETAILS - CASH CITY MAI~iH 31, 1997 CASH II~I'F, STMENT AVERAGE PURtq{ASE STATED ---YTN--- MATURITY DAx. NUMBER ISS~ER BALANCE DATE BO0~ VALUE FACE VALUE MARKET VALUE RATE 360 365 DATE TO MAT <3{ECKING/SAVINGS ACCCQITS 00180 BANK OF AMERICA 878,777.61 2.000 1.973 2.000 (3{)979 I]~ddK OF AMERICA 0.00 2.0{30 1.9V3 2.000 00985 EkaddK OF AMERICA 20,420.30 2.000 1.973 2.000 SUBTO~A/~S and AVERAGES 871,304.39 899,197.91 1.973 2.000 Accrued Interest at Purchase 7,233.90 TOT~ CASH $ 906,431.81 TOTAL ~ a]~d Ilfv~,S~ $ 67,618,209.54 67,731,244.97 04/08/1997 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PM - 5 PORTFOLIO MASTER INVESTMENT ACTIVITY BY TYPE CITY M~tRCH 1, 1997 - MARY]H 31, 1997 CAS]{ STATED TP. AMSACTION PURa{ASF..S SALES/MATUIL[TIES TYPE INVESTMENT # IS.SUER RATE DATE OR DEPOSITS OR WITHDRAWALS CERTIFI~TES OF D~IT - BANK BEGI~ING BALAI~IE: 9,825,532.50 0(0)66 GRiT W~TERN BAIU[ 4.700 03/04/1997 500,000.00 00977 GRFIT W~TEP. N BAI{K 5.300 03/18/1~7 1,810,532.50 00986 SAI~WA 5.830 03/05 / 1997 1,000,000. O0 00987 SANWA 5.700 03/18/1997 1,810,532.20 ~~ and EI(I)ING B~j~A.N(]E 2,810,532.20 2,310,532.50 10,325,532.~ AGENt'~f IIF~ESTMENT FUNI)S (~ntllly Summary) BEGINNING B~tLANGE: 18,103,45a.~ 0(0)05 LOCAL AGENCY INVST FUlfD 5.575 2,0<)0,000.00 00804 LC(IkL AG~ I~ST FUNI) 5.583 .F~3BT[FT~ ~ E){I)II~(] BALAI~CE 0.00 2,000,000.00 16,103,4~.96 CJ{E(:[j38G/SAVlNGS ACCOUN"I'S (Nontidy Summary) BEGINNING B~d,A]{t~E: 1,584,777.61 00180 ~ OF A)[EP.I~ 2.000 1,903,000.00 2,6eg,0(X).O0 0(~)79 BANI{ OF AMEP, ICA 2.000 (3(~985 ~ Of AMEPICA 2.0(30 20,420.30 SUBTOTALS a~d ENDING BALANCE 1,923,420.30 2,609,000.00 899,197.9I FEDF]~A[. AGE)k'"~ ISSU~ ' t'~iR3INDN BEGINI{ING ]~AL~d~(2E: 37,404,375.00 00988 F~ERAL F~d{M CI{EI)IT ~ 6.6~ 03/27/1~7 2,000,000.00 39,404,375.00 SECURITIES ' CO(]HDN BEGINNING B~d. Jdd<lE: 272,845.00 272,845.00 MORTT. dGE ~(]U{I) SECURITI~ B~I~I]NI B~d~x.N(2E: 723,9'97.01 00071 FEI)EP. AL ~ ~ ~R'ENS. CO~. 8.0(0) 03/17/97 738.08 00203 FEI)EP. AI, NA~ M"I'G ~ 8.5{)0 03/25/97 566.17 0(0)02 C, OVE]U{ME]{T ~ONdd~ )N3RTG A..qSN 8.f~30 03/17/97 1,303.13 00<)69 GOV1HtNMEF[ MATIONAL MORTG AS~N 9.0(N) 03/04/97 50.19 0(3(0)4 { BUSINES.~ AI3MIN 8.750 03/27/97 2,737.44 S[~T(YT~ ~ !!){I)I}{(2 Bdk..[J%d~2E 0.00 5,395.01 718,602.00 B[I'NNIN(2 !~A/.J~J{(IE:$ 67,914,986.08 6,733,952.50 6,924,927.51 67,724,011.07 /3 CALIFORNIA APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE(S) TO: Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control File Number ...............................329822 3737 Main Street, Suite 900 Receipt Number ........................907129 Riverside, CA 92501 Geographical Code ....................3615 Copies Mailed Date ................... 3/31/97 Issued Date ................................. DISTRICT SERVING LOCATION: Riverside District Office Name or' Business: LOS HEPaMA. N'OS CAFE Location of Business: Number and Street 7201 Archibald Ave Ste 11 City, State Zip Code Rancho Cucamonga CA 91701 C o u n t y SAN BERNARDINO Is premise inside city limits9 YES Mailing Address: (If different from premise address) If premise licensed: Type of license Transferor' s names/license: License Type Transaction ~De Fee TYPe Master DuD Date Fee 41 Original N/A Y 0 MAR31 1997 300.00 41 Annual N/A y 0 MAR 31 1997 205.00 State Fingerprints N/A MAR 31 1997 78.00 TOTAL $ 583.00 Have you ever been Have you ever violated any provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control convicted of a felony? No Control Act, or regulations of the department pertaining to the Act? No Explain any "Yes" answer to the above questions on an attachment which shall be deemed part of this application. Applicant agrees (a) that any manager employed in on-sale licensed premise will have all the qualifications of a licensee, and (b) that he will not violate or cause or permit to be vioh~:ed any of the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act. STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of RIVERSIDE Date MAR 3 t 1997 Under penalty of perjury. each person whose signature appears below, certifies and says: (1) He is an applicant, or one of the app[icants, or an executive officer of the applicant corporation, named in the foregoing application, duly authorized to make this application on xts behalf; (2) that he has read the foregoing and knows the contents thereof and that each of the above statements therein m~lse are true: cyt~ ~hat no person other than the applicant or applicants has any direct or indirect interest in the applicant or applicant's l~usmess to be condttctect under the license(s) for which this application is made; (4) that the transfer application or proposed transfer is not. ma~ to satisfy the payment of a loan or to fulfill an agreement entered into more than natty (c)O) days preceding the day on wtllch the transfer application is filled with the Department or to gain or establish a preference to or for any creditor or transferor or to defraud or injure any creditor of transferor; (5) that the transfer application may be withdravtn by either the applicant or the licensee with no resulting liability to the Department. VIVE$ IRENE VIVES PERRY .1 ,.7t,~~ ABC-211 (9/93) /5 c ,~ t t t o ~ N t ,~ DROPPING PARTNER YES NO APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOL BEVERAGE LICENSE(S) Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control File Number .............. 329403 Receipt Number ......... 1129300 Geographical Code ........ 3615 Copies Mailed Date . . 3/18/97 Issued Date DISTR/CT SERVING LOCATION: R IV E R S I D E Name of Business: KENS JAPANESE RESTAURANT Location of Business: Number and Street 10006 FOOTHILL BLVD City, State Zip Code RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA 91730 County SAN BERNARDINO .~,"~ Is premise inside city limits? YES Mailing Address: (If different from premise address) If premise licensed: Type of license Transferor's names/license: UENO JIM KENJI 226831 License Tvme Transaction ~ Fee 'TVDe Master Du~ Date Eee 1. 47 ON-SALE GENERAL EA PERSON TO PERSON TRANS P40 YES 0 MAR 18,1997 $1250.00 : 2.47 ON-SALE GENERAL EA ANNUAL FEE P40 YES 0 MAR 18,1997 $695.00 3.47 ON-SALE GENERAL EA STATE FINGERPRINTS NA YES 2 MAR 18,1997 $78,00 TOTAL $2023.00 Have you ever been Have you ever violated any provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control convicted of a felony? NO Act, or regulations of the Department pertaining to the Act? NO Explain any "Yes" answer to the above questions on an attachment which shall be deemed pan of Ibis application. Applicant agrees (a) that any manager employed in on-sale licensed premise will have all the qualifications of a licensee. and (b) that he will not violate or cause or permit to be violated any of the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act. STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of RIVERSIDE Date MAR 18,1997 Under penalty of perjury, each person whose signature appears below, certifies and says: (I) He is an applicant. or one of the applicants, or an executive officer of the applicant corporaUon, named in the foregoing application, duly authorized to make this application on its behalf; (2) that he has read the fo,regotnlg and knows the contents thereof and that each of the above statements therein made are true; (3) that no person other than the applicant or applicaats has the applicant or applicant's business to be conducted under the license(s) for which this application is made: (4) tha the tnutsfer eppticaeoe or proposed transfer is not made to saUsfy the payment of a loan or to fulfill an agreement enterext into more than ninety (90) days pMng the awy. of~ which the transfer applicauon is filled with the Department or to ga,n or establish a preference to or for any creditor or transferor or ~o defraud ct injure am/creditor of wanderor; (5) tha~ the transfer applicanon may be withdrawn by either the applicant or the licensee with no resulting Liability to the Depatnmem. Applicant Name(s) Applicant Signature(s) / KENS JAPANSES RESTAURANT ,<_. ' - Attached: 231 & 227 ..... BY"' Jim Kenji UENO: PRES ABC 211 <5/96) RAME~A / 7 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 17, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Suzanne Ota, Community Services Manager BY: Paula Pachon, Management Analyst II SUBJECT: APPLICATION TO COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, DEPARTMENT OF AGING AND ADULT SERVICES FOR A SUPPORTIVE SERVICES AND SERVICES TO THE FRAIL OLDER PERSON GRANT RECOMMENDATION Approval by the City Council to submit an application to the County of San Bemardino, Department of Aging and Adult Services for a SuppOrtive Services and Services to the Frail Older Person Grant. BACKGROUND The Older Americans Act requires that all funds for services be awarded through a competitive award process at least once every four years. Therefore, the Department of Aging and Adult Services is conducting a competitive award process to solicit for the delivery of comprehensive and coordinated systems to persons age 60 or older. Categories of supportive services eligible under their Request for Proposal include: Personal Care, Homemaker, Chore, Adult Day Care/Health, Assisted Transportation, Transportation, Outreach, Services which address Functional Limitations, Services which Maintain Health, Services which Protect EIder Rights, Services which Promote Socialization, Services which Assure Access and Coordination and Services which Support Other. Staff anticipates requesting funds for outreach services for the senior citizens of the City including to low income/bilingual senior residents of our community to increase participation in programs and services offered at the Rancho Cucamonga Senior Center. Special emphasis to be focused on human services needs of this population group. It is estimated that grant funds (combined for supportive services and services tbr frail older individuals) for the West Valley (Chino, Montclair. Ontario. Rancho Cucarnonga. Upland and surrounding areasj will be $33,097. If successful in receiving the grant award, the City will be notified by May 15, 1997 with contract agreements in place by July 1, 1997. Respectfully submitted, / Services Manager RESOLUTIONNO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF APPLICATION TO THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, DEPARTMENT OF AGING AND ADULT SERVICES FOR A 97/98 SUPPORTIVE SERVICES/SERVICES TO TttE FRAII, PROPOSAL GRANT WHEREAS, the Older Americans Act requires that all funds for services be awarded through a competitive award process at least once every four years; and WHEREAS, the San Bernardino County, Department of Aging and Adult Services is now conducting a competitive award process to solicit for the delivery of comprehensive and coordinated systems to persons age 60 or older; and WHEREAS, categories of supportive services eligible under the County' s Request for Proposal include: Personal Care, Homemaker, Chore, Adult Day Care/Health, Assisted Transportation, Transportation, Outreach, Services which address Functional Limitations, Services which Maintain Health, Services which Protect EIder Rights, Services which Promote Socialization, Services which Assure Access and Coordination, and Services which Support Others; and WHEREAS, an estimated total of $33,097 is available for the West Valley (Chino, Montelair, Ontario, Rancho Cucamonga, Upland, and surrounding areas) for supportive services and services for flail older individuals; and WHEREAS, said procedures established by the San Bernardino County, Department of Aging and Adult Services require the applicant to certify by resolution approval of the application submission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga authorizes the submittal of an application to the San Bernardino County, Department of Aging and Adult Services for a 97/98 Supportive Services/Services to the Frail Grant. The Community Services Manager of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is hereby authorized and empowered to execute in the name of the City of Rancho Cucamonga all necessary applications, contracts, agreements, amendments and payment requests hereto for the purposes of securing grant funds and to implement and carry out the purposes specified in the grant application. The foregoing Resolution was passed by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga this 17th day of April, 1997. CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~MONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 17, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lain, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Gary Vamey, Street/Storm Drain Maintenance Superintendent SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE ONE (1) INTERNATIONAL NAVISTAR DUMP TRUCK MODEL 4700 FROM DIETERICH INTERNATIONAL TRUCK SALES OF SAN BERNARDINO PER CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RFP 9697001. AMOUNT OF PURCHASE NOT TO EXCEED $52,626.03 FROM FUND 72-4225-7045 FISCAL YEAR 1996/1997 APPROPRIATION. VEHICLE REPLACES ASSET# 0798 (UNIT 632). RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council authorize the purchase of one (1) International Navistar Dump truck Model 4700 from Dieterich International Truck Sales, Inc., as the lowest responsible bidder. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS In the 1996/97 budget City Council approved the purchase for one International Dump truck identified in the budget document. This truck replaces asset# 0798 (unit 632). The Purchasing Department advertised and went out to bid on February 17, 1997. On March 10, tbur (4) bids were received, two were no bid and of the two compliant bids, Dieterich International Truck Sales, Inc. of San Bemardino, California was the lowest responsible bidder. Respectfully submitted, %~ /'~~ Wil O'Neil City Engineer WJO:GV:ju STAFF PORT DATE: April 17, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the CiW Council Jack Lain, AICP, CiW Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, CiW Engineer BY: Maria E. PereL Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: APPROV~ OF IN~ROVEMENT AGEEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECUMTY AND O~E~G ~ ~~TION TO LANDSCAPE ~TENANCE DISTMCT NO. 3B AND STEET LIGHT~G MA~TENANCE DISTMCT NOS. I AND 6 FOR CONDITIONAL USE PETIT 95-20, LOCATED AT TE SOUTH~ST CORNER OF A~OW ROUTE AND ED OAK AVE~E, SUBMITTED BY ~TELAMUS RECO~MMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting the subject agreement and security, ordering the annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. I and 6, and authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreement and to cause said map to record. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Conditional Use Permit 95-20, located at the southwest comer of Arrow Route and Red Oak Avenue in the General Industrial Development District, was approved by the Planning Commission on November 8, 1995, for the development of a restaurant. The Developer, Katelarius, is submitting an agreement and security to guarantee the construction of the offsite improvements in the form of a $18, 150.00 cash deposit. Copies of the agreement and security are available in the City Clerk's Office. A letter of approval has been received from the Cucamonga County Water District. The Consent and Waiver to Annexation form signed by the Developer is on file in the City C!erk's office. Respectfully submitted, Willi O'Neil City' Engineer WJO:MP:sd Attachments RESOLUTION NO. 9' "7-/--)/"/5' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNTCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOR:NIA, APPROVING THE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND INI PROVEMENT SECURITY FOR CONDITIONAL USE PEP~MIT 95-20, KATELARIUS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement executed on February 4, 197, by Katelarius as developer, for the improvement of public right-of-way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located at the southwest comer of Arrow Route and Red Oak Avenue; and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said real property as referred to as Conditional Use Permit 95-20, Katelarius; and \VHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, HEREBY RESOLVES as follows: 1. That said Improvement Agreement be and the same is approved and the Mayor is authorized to execute same on behalf of said City, and the City Clerk is authorized to attest thereto; and 2. That said Improvement Security is accepted as good and sufficient, subject to approval as to form and content thereof by the City Attorney. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COULNCIL OF THE CITY OF tL~NCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOtLNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 95-20, KATELARIUS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972", being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, said special maintenance district known and designated as Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 (hereinafter referred to as the "Maintenance District"); and WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972" authorize the annexation of additional territory to the Maintenance District; and WHEREAS, at this time the City Council is desirous to take proceedings to annex the property described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this referenced to the Maintenance District; and WHEREAS, all of the owners of property within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Maintenance District have filed with the City, Clerk their written consent to the proposed annexation without notice and hearing or filing of an Engineer's "Report". NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCA2MONGA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2: That this legislative body hereby orders the annexation of the property as shown in Exhibit "A" and the work program areas as described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto to the Maintenance District. SECTION 3: That all future proceedings of the Maintenance District, including the levy, of all assessments, shall be applicable to the territory annexed hereunder. EXHIBIT "A" ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO 3B STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO,S. 1 AND 6 FITRTITR i lJlllllllll ' ARRO "- b ' , , ,_ ""l z LEGEND * INDICATES STREET TREES o INDICATES STREET LIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA EXHIBIT "B" WORK PROGRAM PROJECT: C.U.P. 95-20 STREET LIGHTS: NUMBER OF LAMPS Dist. 5800L 9500L 16,000L 22,000L 27,500L S1 --- 3 ......... S6 LANDSCAPING: Community Equestrian Trail Turf Non-Turf Trees Dist. D.G.S.F. S.F. S.F. Ea. L3B ......... 6 * Existing items installed with original project. ASSESSMENT UNITS: Assessment Units By DiStrict DU or Parcel Acres S 1 S2 L 1 l 2.4 4.8 2.4 2.4 Annexation Date: April 17, 1997 Form Date 11/16/94 CITY OF RANCHO CUCA.MONGA ~ ~ STAFF REPORT ' r ' "'~,,,':, DATE: April 17, 1997 V'7~~ TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lain, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Willie Valbuena, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES AND ORDERING THE ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 FOR MDR 96-06, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROAD, WEST OF CARNELIAN AVENUE, SUBMITTED BY BANDY/SHRYER RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolutions approving MDR 96-06 Improvement Ageement and Improvement Securities, ordering the annexation to Landscape maintenance District No. 3 B and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 6 and authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreement. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS MDR 96-06, located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Carnelian Avenue, in the Neighborhood Commercial District, was approved by the City Planner on April 15, 1996. This project is for the construction of a 5,320 square foot expansion of an existing building in the Sunrise Center. The Developer, Bandy/Shryer, has submitted an Improvement Agreement and Improvement Securities to guarantee the construction of the off-site improvements in the following amounts: Faithful Performance Bond: $5,600.00 Labor and Materials Bond: $2,800.00 Copies of the agreement and securities are available in the City Clerk's office. The Consent and Waiver to Annexation form signed by the Developer is on file in the City Clerk's office. Respectfully submitted, Willi~eil City, Engineer WJO:WV:dlw Attachments A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOP~NIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES FOR MDR 96-06 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement executed on April 17, 1997, by Bandy/Shryer as developer, for the improvement of public right-of-way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Carnelian Avenue; and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said real property referred to as MDR 96-06; and WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Securities, which are identified in said Improvement Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, HEREBY RESOLVES as follows: I. That said Improvement Agreement be and the same is approved and the Mayor is authorized to execute same on behalf of said City and the City Clerk is authorized to attest thereto; and 2 That said Improvement Securities are accepted as good and sufficient, subject to approval as to form and content thereof by the City Attorney. sor..,ur-rro '"? 7-- 9' 2/ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COD~TCIL OF THE CITY OF RA. NCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 FOR MDR 96-06 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972", being Division 15, Part 2 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, said special maintenance district known and designated as Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 (hereinafter referred to as the "Maintenance District"); and WHEREAS, the provisions of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972" authorize the annexation of additional territory to the Maintenance District; and WHEREAS, at this time the City Council is desirous to take proceedings to annex the property described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this referenced to the Maintenance District; and- WHEREAS, all of the owners of property wig the territory proposed to be sexed to the Maintenance District have filed with the City Clerk their written consent to the proposed annexation without notice and hearing or filing of an Engineer's "Report". NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2: That this legislative body hereby orders the annexation of the property as shovm in E,'d'tibit "A" and the work program areas as described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto to the Maintenance District. SECTION 3: That all future proceedings of the Maintenance District, including the levy of all assessments, shall be applicable to the territory annexed hereunder. EXHIBIT 'A' ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 B STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 6 SlT~ ---- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDIN~i STATE OF CALIFORNIA jo ._ EXHIBIT "B" WORK PROGRAM PROJECT: M.D.R. 96-06 STREET LIGHTS: NUMBER OF LAMPS Dist. 5800L 9500L 16,000L 22,000L 27,500L S1 ...... 1 ...... S6 ............... LANDSCAPING: Community Equestrian Trail Turf Non-Turf Trees Dist. D.O.S.F. S.F. S.F. Ea. L3B ............ ASSESSMENT UNITS: Assessment Units By District Parcel Acres S1 S6 L3B N/A 3.61 7.22 3.61 3.61 ,~Mrmexation Date: April 17, 1997 Form Date 11/16/94 CITY OF RANCHO CUCA2vlONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 17. 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer B Y: James T. Harris, Associate Engineer, Traffic SUBJECT: APPROVAL AND EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT TO COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT, STATE AGREEMENT NO. 8-786, BETVv'EEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS, SAFETY LIGHTING AND ROADWORK ON ROUTE 66 AT BAKER AVENUE RECO~IMENDATION: It is hereby recommended that the City Council approve and execute the Amendment to the Cooperative Agreement, State Agreement No. 8-786, between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the State of California. tbr the design and construction of traffic control signals, safety lighting and roadwork on Route 66 at Baker Avenue and a certified copy of said Resolution along with the executed copies of the Amendment be sent to the State (Caltrans) for their execution. This Amendment extends the termination from May 1. 1997 to May 1, 1998 as specified in Section III, Article (17) of the original Agreement. BACKG RO UND/ANAL YSIS: The Cooperative Agreement provided for the design and construction of a traffic signal with sat~ty lighting and minor roadwork at the intersection of Foothill Boulevard (Route 66) and Baker Avenue. The costs are proportioned as follows: State - two-thirds and City - one-third. The agreement also provided for the maintenance and operation of the traffic signal and safety. lighting. Maintenance costs are proportioned as follows: State - two-thirds and City - one- third. The agreement set the State's portion at $79,800.00 and the City's portion at $39,900.00 with the provision to increase the State's and City's portion should the need arise. Funding for the Citv's share shall be from TDA Article 8, Account No. 12-4637-9305. CITY COE~'CIL ST.~FF REPORT APPROVAL AND EXECUTION OF COOPEP~,TIVE AGRjEEXlENT-STATE AGREE.',,IENT NO. 8-786 April iT. 1997 Page 2 This Amendment extends the tem~ination date fi'om May 1, 1997 to May 1, 1998 due to delays in designing and bidding the project. Original copies of the subject Amendment are available in the City. Clerk's office. Respectt~lly submitted, Wil':'hVm J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:JTH:Is Attachment ESO UT O XO. 7 - '¢ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COU~'CIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFOtLNIA. AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND SIGNING OF AMENDMENT TO COOPERATIVE AGR. EEMENT, STATE AGREEMENT NO. 8-786, FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS, SAFETY LIGHTING AND ROADWORK ON ROUTE 66 AT BAKER STREET WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga (hereinafter referred to as "City"), executed the Cooperative Agreement - State Agreement No. 8-786, for the design and construction of traffic controls signals, safety lighting and roadwork on Route 66 at Baker Avenue on July 6, 1994; and WHEREAS, the State of California, Department of Transportation (hereinafter referred to as "State"), has realized delays in the design and bidding of the project: and \~I--IEREAS, an Amendment to the original Agreement is required to extend the termination date from May 1, 1997 to May I, 1998, as specified in Section III, Article (17) of said Agreement; and WHEREAS, as a condition to payment of State funds for said project, the Local Agency shall approve and execute said Cooperative Agreement No. 8-786, including Amendments thereto. NOW. THEREFORE. the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby resolve as follows: 1. Authorize the Execution of City - State Amendment to Agreement No. 8-786 for the design and construction of traffic control signals, sat~ty lighting and roadwork on Route 66 at Baker Avenue to extend the termination date in the original Agreement from May 1, 1997 to May I. 1998. 2. To authorize the Mayor to sign said Amendment and direct the City Clerk to attach a certified copy of this Resolution, as well as type in the Resolution Number and date in the blank of the first block of said Agreement and for the return of the original copies of said Agreement to the State of California Department of Transportation, along with the certified copy of this Resolution. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 17, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam. AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Linda R. Beek, Jr. Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION, ACCEPT IRREVOCABLE ST,&NDBY LETTERS OF CREDIT ISSUED BY UNITED NATIONAL BANK AND RELEASE IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTERS OF CREDIT ISSUED BY UNITED WORLD CHINESE COMMERCIAL BANK FOR TRACT 13759, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF HAVEN AVENUE, NORTH OF THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD, SUBMITTED BY FU MAI LIMITED PARTNERSHIP RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended the City Council adopt the attached Resolution, accepting the subject Improvement Agreement Extension, and the Irrevocable Standby Letters of Credit Issued by United National Bank, release the Irrevocable Standby Letters of Credit issued by United World Chinese Commercial Bank and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement. BACKGROUND/ANAL YSIS: Improvement Agreement and Improvement Securit)' to guarantee the construction of the public improvements for Tract 13759, was approved by the City Council on January 20, 1994, in the following amounts: Faithful Performance Bonds: Labor and Material Bonds: Phase I S616,000.00 $308,000.00 Phase II $547,000.00 S273,500.00 Phase III $ 59,000.00 $ 29,000.00 Phase IV $ 58,000.00 S 26,000.00 Phase V $ 53,000.00 $ 26,500.00 The Developer, FU MAI LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, is requesting approval of an 11-month extension on said improvement. The project is located on the west side of Haven Avenue, north of ~.he Southern Pacific Railroad. Copies of the Improvement Agreement Extension are available in the Ci',ry Clerk's office. Respectfully submitted, William J. O'Neil ' City Engineer ',-j' ,, Y SOr UT ON xo. 7- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COU,.'NCIL OF THE CITY OF R:-XNCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOFL'N'IA. APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION ,~N'D ACCEPT IRREVOCABLE STANDBY LETTERS OF CREDIT ISSUED BY UNITED NATIONAL BANK AND RELEASE IRREVOCABLE STAND BY LETTERS OF CREDIT ISSUED BY D~'ITED WORLD CHINESE COMMERCIAL BANK FOR TRACT 13759 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement Extension executed on April 17, 1997, by Fu Mai Limited Partnership, as developer, fbr the improvement of public right-of v~'ay adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located; and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in Said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said Tract 13759; and WHEREAS. said Improvement Agreement Extension is secured and accompanied by good and su~lcient improvement security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement ExTension. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Calitbmia hereby resolves, that said Improvement Agreement Extension and Said Improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said improvement agreement extension on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the City Clerk to attest thereto. CITY OF RANCHO CUCA2vfONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 17, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Dave Blevins, Public Works Maintenance Manager SUBJECT: ACCEPT CONTRACT NO. CO 96-037, THE ROOF REPLACEMENT FOR CIVIC CENTER AND POLICE STATION PROJECT, LOCATED AT 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, FUNDED FROM ACCOUNT 17-5100, APPROVE THE FINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $204,376.00 AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY ENGINEER TO FILE A "NOTICE OF COMPLETION" RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council accept Contract No. CO 96-037 as complete, authorize the City Engineer to file a "Notice of Completion", release the contract retention amount of $20,437.60 and approve the final contract amount of $204,376.00. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The subject project plans and specifications have been completed with the approved plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The final. contract amount, based on project documentation, is $204,376.00. The original amount approved by Council was $193,270.00. Respectively submitted, William J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:DC:jau Attachments ESOLU'r ON NO. 7--d Z / A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE CIVIC CENTER AND POLICE STATION, CONTRACT NO. CO-96-037, AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for the Civic Center and Police Station, Contract No. CO 96-037, have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOW, THEEFOE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby resolves, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. RECORD[NO REQUESTED BY: CITY OF IL-~NCHO CUCAMONGA P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 \~TIEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City Clerk City of Rancho Cucamonga P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 NOTICE OF COMPLETION NOTICE IS HER/BY GIVEN THAT: 1. The undersigned is an owner of an interest or estate in the hereinafter described real property, the nature of which interest or estate is: · All public rights-of-way within the boundaries of CO 96-037 Roof Replacement for the Civic Center and Police Station 2. The full name and address of the undersigned owner is: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 10500 Civic Center Drive, P. O. Box 807, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729. 3. On the 17 day of A. pfil, 1997, there was completed on the hereinafter described real propert3,.' the work of improvement set forth in the contract documents for: Roof Replacement for the Civic Center and Police Station (CO 96-037) 4. The name of the original contractor for the work of improvement as a whole ,.vas: Stone Roofing Co. Inc. 5. The real property referred to herein is situated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bemardino, California, and is described as follows: 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Roof Replacement for the Civic Center and Police Station (CO 96-037) CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation, Owner \ , DATE ~WiHiaFn J. O'Neil C_.-/ City Engineer /--- CITY OF RAN'CHO CUCA~MONGA " STAFF REPORT DATE: April 17, 1997 TO: Mayor, Members of the City Council and City Manager, FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Walter Stickney, Associate Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORTS AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR MAY 21, 1997, TO LEVY THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS AND APPROVE THE ENGINEER'S REPORTS FOR STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, AND 8. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that City Council approve the preliminary Engineer's Reports and set the Public Hearings for May 21,1997, to levy the annual assessments and approve the Engineer's Reports for Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8. It is recommended there be no increase in assessment rates in these districts for Fiscal Year 1997/98. The preliminary Engineer's Reports are on file in the City Clerk's Office. BACKGROUND/ANAL YSIS Below is an itemized analysis on a district by district basis. To summarize, the assessment rates in all eight of the Street Light Maintenance Districts are not recommended to be increased this fiscal year. These assessments cover the actual costs of the districts. The Southern California Edison electric rate is expected to remain stable for the 1997/98 fiscal year. In prior years State Gas Tax Funds were used to subsidize the districts. At the present time, each district is able to stand on its own without additional funding from other sources. In some districts there is an increase in the number of street lights being maintained. However these will not effect the assessment rate at this time. Edison charges for traffic signals are also included in the applicable districts. In addition, Operations and Maintenance charges for traffic signals, will also be borne by the applicable districts. In past years any available prior year carryover was used to keep assessments below the annual assessment revenue requirements. This policy continues for the FY 97/98 and will allow the assessment rates to remain stable. The following, in conjunction with reference to the Preliminary Engineer's Reports, identifies proposed FY 97/98 rates which are not recommended for an increase t?om the FY 96/97 rates. The Preliminary, Engineer's Reports identifies the required budget for each district and any carryover used to offset maintenance costs. Street Lighting .Maintenance District No. l - Arterial The assessment rate is recommended to remain at S17.77 tbr Fiscal Year 1997/98. Prior year carryover funds will still be used to keep the rate fi'om increasing. However, these carryover funds may not be available in future years. Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 - Local The assessment rate is recommended to remain at $39.97 for Fiscal Year 1997/9. Prior ,,,'ear can3,'over funds ,,',,'ill be applied in the district. However, these carryover funds may not be available in future years. Street Lighting Maintenance DiStrict No. 3 - Victoria Planned Community It is recommended the assessment rate remain at $47.15 for Fiscal Year 1997/98. Street Lighting Maintenance DiStrict No. 4 - Terra Vista Planned Communiw It is recommended the assessment rate remain at $28,96 for Fiscal Year 1997/98. Street Lighting Maintenance DistriCt No. 5 - Carvn Planned Community It is recommended the assessment rate remain at S34,60 for Fiscal Year 1997/08. Prior year carryovers will be applied but may not be available in the future, Street Lighting Maintenance District NO. 6- COmmercial/Industrial It is recommended the assessment rate remain at S51,40 for Fiscal Year 1997/98, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 7 - North Etiwanda It is recommended the assessment rate remain at $33,32 for Fiscal Year 1997/98, Street Lighting Maintenance District No- 8 - South Etiwanda It is recommended the assessment rate remain at S193.75 for Fiscal Year j997.,.'98~ 'D'~i$ 9roposed rate is higher than the average lighting district due to a disproportionate number of'.srree'~ Vtgh,ts to assessment units, As more assessment units are armexea ~o me distric: it is expected that c.i:e .~-~.reet light-to-assessment unit will be reduced therebv reducing the assessment rate. Respectfully submitted, / , William~ City Engineer WJO:leh Attachments: Resolution Engineer's Reports so u-r:oN No. 7- ? fX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF R.&NCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOR~NIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S ANNUAL REPORTS FOR STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 AND 8. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby resolve that: WHEREAS, pursuant to the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, the City Engineer is required to make and file with the City Clerk of the City an annual report in writing for which assessments are to be levied and collected to pay the costs of the maintenance and/or improvement of said Street Lighting Maintenance Districts Nos. 1 '~ 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has made and filed with the City Clerk of said City a report in wTiting as called for under and pursuant to said Act, which has been presented to this Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, said Council as duly considered said report and each and every part thereof and finds that each and every. part of said report is sufficient and that said report. nor any part thereof, requires or should be modified in any respect. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby order as follows: 1. That the Engineer's Estimate of itemized costs and expenses of said work and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in said report be, and each of them are hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. 2. That the diagrams showing the Assessment District referred to and described in said report, the boundaries of the subdivisions of land within said Assessment Districts are hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. 3. That the proposed assessments upon the subdivisions of land in said Assessment Districts in proportion to the estimated benefit to be received by said subdivision, respectively, from said work and of the incidental expenses thereof, as contained in said report is hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. 4. That said report shall stand as the City Engineer's Annual Report for the fiscal year 1997/98 for the purposes of all subsequent proceedings RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COU~TCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLAK[NG ITS INTENTION TO LEVY A2ND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS NOS. i, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, ? AND 8, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972; AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, does resolve as follows: Description of Work. SECTION 1; That the public interest and convenience require and it is the intention of this City Council to levy and collect assessments within Street Light Maintenance Districts Nos. 1, 2,3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 for the fiscal year 1997/98 for the maintenance and operation of those street lights, traffic signals and facilities thereon dedicated for common purposes by deed or recorded subdivision tract map within the boundaries of said Districts. Said maintenance and operation includes the cost and supervision of street lighting maintenance (including repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement providing for illumination of the subject area) in connection with said districts. Location of Work. SECTION 2: The foregoing described work is to be located within the roadway rights-of-way and easements enumerated in the report of the City Engineer and more particularly described on maps which are on file in the City, Clerk's Office, entitled "Assessment Diagrams Street Lighting Maintenance Districts Nos. 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8." DescriptiOn Of Assessment Districts. SECTION ,3;. That the contemplated work, in the opinion of said City Council, is of more than local or ordinary public benefit, and the said City Council hereby makes the expense of the work chargeable upon the districts, which said districts, are assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and which districts are described as follows: All that certain territory of the City of Rancho Cucamonga included within the exterior boundary lines shown upon that certain "Map of Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1", "Map of Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2", "Map of Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 3". "Map of Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4", "Map of Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 5", "Map of Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6", "Map of Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 7", "Map of Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 8", indicating b.v said boundary, lines the extent of the territory included within each assessment district and which maps are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of said City. Reference is hereby made to said maps/zbr further, full and more particular description of said assessment districts, and the said maps so on file shall govern for all details as to the extent of said assessment districts. .R..eport of Engineer. SECTION 4: The City Council of said City by Resolution No. _ has approved the annual report of the City Engineer which report indicates the amount of the proposed assessments, the district boundaries, assessment zones, and the method of assessment. The report title ".~dmual Engineer's Report" is on file in the Office of the City Clerk of said City. Reference to said report is hereby made for all particulars for the amount and extent of the assessments and for the extent of the work. TIME AND PLACE QF HEARING. SECTION 5: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARINGS IS HEREBY SCHEDULED IN THE CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, 91730. WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 1997 AT 7:00 P.M. Any and all persons may appear and show cause why said maintenance and service for the existing improvements and the proposed improvements should not be done or carried out or v,'hy assessments should not be levied and collected for fiscal year 1997/98. Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. SECTION 6: All the work herein proposed shall be done and carried through in pursuance of an act of the legislature of the State of California designated as the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. Publication of Resolution of Intention. SECTION 7: Published notice shall be made pursuant to Section 6061 of the Government Code. The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published 10 days before the date set for the hearing, at teast once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City, of Rancho Cucamonga, California. STAFF REPORT DATE .-x.=ril 17, 1997 TO: NIZayor, .'v[embers of the City Council zad Cirv FgO.'v[: \Villia.m J. O'Neil, City, Engineer BY: Walter Stick. hey, Associate Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF PKELIMENARY E,'G12x'EER'S 1REPORTS AND SETT~'G OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR NL~ Y2 I, 1997, TO LEVY THE .-L\~'b'.-tL ASSESS.', [EN'TS A,ND APPROVE THE ENGI~'EER'S KEPORTS FOR LANDSCAPE NL~'TEN'ANCE DISTRICTS NOB. l, 2, 3A, 3B, KECO.',,[MENDATION: It is recommended that City Council approve the Preliminarv Engineer's Remorts and set the Public Hearings for },,lTay21, 1997, to le',7 the annual assessments and approve the Engineer's gepo,qs for Landscape .X, laintenance Districts Nos. i. 2, 3A, 3B, -'., 5, 6, 7 and S. It is reco,m_rnended there be no increase in assessment rates in these districts for Fiscal Year 1997/98. The preliminan,' Engineer's Re,~or~s are on fiIe [n the City Clerk's Office. BACKGROrv.."ND/ANAL YSIS: Below is a.n itemized analysis on a district by district basis. To su,,'zunnarize, it [s recorr',:nended that -assessment rates not be increased in ~,,,' ofthe Landscape X,[ainten~ce Districts for the FY 1997/98. Re~ons for this recommendation include ,.vater costs savings due to water conse~'ation efforts that inciL:de a program to computerize the irrigation systems for all of the District's maintained landscape L-eas. [n many of the districts back taxes have been maid ~,,-ith interest and penalties thereby increasing the revenue in those districts. In some districts an increase in the amount of landscame -area to m~ntain has caused an increase in the a,'-not.unt of maintenance and operation costs. These costs ,.,.'ill be offset bv thoses increases in revenue. in past ,,'ears an',' available prior >'car cam'over was used ~o keep assessments below the armua[ assessment revenue requirements. In some distNcts this is still tr,:e and has altowed the assessment rate to remain constant. The follo,.','ing, atong with reference ~.o the Prelimir,.a~' Engineer's Reports, identifies proposed FY 97/98 rates. The Pretimina5,' Engineer's ge.~o~s identifies the required budget for each distric~ and an',' carr}'over used to reduce rates. A tax delinquenc.`.' amount is added to each district's budget to cover antici=ated delinquencies in tax payments. [f the '~iinquencies ~"~ less than expected, 5,~nds within the district can be added ;o dgstricts .:'~nd balance. / LandstaTe .NfaE:-.:e:'.ance Dis:tic: .N'o. i - Ge:'.~r,~.[ C{7.' It is recommendei :hat the assessment rate remain at 592.21 for the FY 97,'98. Prior veto- ca..-$'over Funds will be applied in the district, however :hey ma}' not be available in Future La,,dsca e N[aintenance District No. 9 -Victoria Pla.,-med Community It is recommended that the assessment rate remain ,-.t S422.00 tbr the FY 97/95. L.MD ~2 has the largest landscape area off any district in the City udth 124.66 acres, of ,.vhich 32.37 acres is parks. Prior ,.'ear cana:'overs ,.,.'ill be applied but may no: be a,,'aiiable in the Future. Landscase .x, rafntenance District No. 3.4. - H``'ssoo it is recomanended that the assessment rate remain at S413.74 tbr the FY 97,98. Prior )'ear cz,n-vovers will be applied but may not be available in the Future. Landscape Maintenance District No.3B -Commercial/"[ndustrial It is recommended that assessment rate remain at S352.80 per acre tbr the FY 97/98. 22.87 acres of the .Adult Sports Complex and the Metrolink Station is maintained bv this district Landscaoe X[aincenance District No.4 - Ten'n Vista [: is recommended that the single fimiI,.' residential assessment rate remain at S252.50 9T.'95. L:,,fD =4 has 36.23 acres of parks. Prior ,.'ear carr}'overs will be applied but mav r'.ot be a,.'ailab[e in :he future. La.".,!scaoe N'[ain:enance District No. 5- TOt Lot It is recommended :hat the assessment rate remain at S l [3.29 for the FY 97,'95. Prior ,,'ear corTvovers '.,.'ill be asslied but mav not be available in :he ~ature. Lzr'.dscaoe .x.'fain:enance District No. 6 - Ca3'n [: is reco,,'zu'nended :hat the assessment rate remain at S246.97 tbr :he FY 97/'95. Prior year ca:Tvovers '.,.'ill be applied but mp, v not be a,.'ai!abte in the f:zture. Landscape Nfain:enance District No. 7 - Noah Etiwanda 1: is reco."rumended :hat the assessment rate remain at 5307.05 rbr the FY 97/95. Eti',vanda Creek Park located on the ezs: side off East Avenue north of and adjacent to :he Sur,..'T'.,it !n:e.nm. edia:e School '.,'.-as 2zceDte! into t:h~ .dis:rio: in fiscal ','-,"' 96"97r'or maintenance o,5i' acres V7 Landscape .xfafncenance Dfs:ri:; .X'o. 8 - South E:i'.;'anda It is recommended that the assessment rate remain at SI51.45 for the FY 97/98. ResDectf.~l!y Submitted, CiLv Engineer Arcac,h. rr.,ents: Resolutions En~ineer's Reports A KESOLUTION OF THE CITY COL~'CI.L OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON'GA, C.~LIFOK\'IA, OF PRjELIM/NARY .APPROVAL OF CITY ENGEN'EER'S AN,.~'U.M, ,REPORTS FOR LANDSCAPE .X. DKINTENANCE DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5, 6, 7 AND 8. WHEPjEAS, the City Council of the Cirv of Rancho Cuca. monga does hereby resolve that: WHEREAS, pursuant to the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, the Cirv Engineer is required to make and file with fine Cit}' Clerk of the Ci~' an annual repo~ in u, Titing for which assessments are to be levied and collected to pay the costs of the maintenance and/or improvement of said Landscase Maintenance Districts Xos. l, 2, 3A, 3 B, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has made and filed with the Ci~' Clerk of said Cit}' a re=or'c in ,.,.Tiling as called for under and pursuit to said Act, which has been =resented to this Council for consideration; and \VHEREAS, said Council as duly considered said re=oft and each and e,.'e~' part thereof and finds that each and even.' pa:-t of said re=oft is sufficient and that said re=oft, nor an>' part thereof, requires or should be modified in an,,' respect. NO x,~,' THER_EFORE, the Cis' Comncfl of :he Cif' of Rancho Cuc!monga does herebv order as follows: I That the En~,ineer's Estimate of itemized costs and ex=enses of said v.'ork · ~ and of the incidental expenses in connection therev.'ith, contained in said re=o~ be, and each of them are hereby prelimina. rily approved and co,~rm. ed. '~ That the diaorams showing the Assessment District rea",'ed to '~,d described in said report, the boundaries of the subdivisions of land v.'ithin said Assessment Districts are hereby preiiminarilv appro,.'ed and confirmed. 3. That the proposed assessments upon the subdivisions of !and in said Assessment Districts in proportion to the estimated benefit to be received by said subdivision. res=ectivetv From said work ~d of the incidental exDenses thereof, as contained in said recort is hereb.v preliminarilv approved and confirmed. 4. That said resort shall stand as :he Cfkv En.gineer's Annual Report r. br the fiscal ,.'ear 1997.'98 ffor :he ~u~oses offal[ subsequent proceedings. RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~MONGA, CALIFOI~NIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY ,,-END COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5, 6, 7 AND 8, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1997/98. PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972; AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, does resolve as follows: Description of Work. SECTION 1: That the public interest and convenience require and it is the intention of this City Council to levy and collect assessments within Landscape Maintenance Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3A, 3 B, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 for the fiscal year 1997/98 for the maintenance and operation of those parkways, parks and facilities thereon dedicated for common greenbelt purposes by deed or recorded subdivision tract map within the boundaries of said Districts. Said maintenance and operation includes the cost and supervision of landscape maintenance (including repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement providing for illumination of the subject area) in connection with said districts. Location of Work, SECTION 2: The foregoing described work is to be located within the roadway rights-of-way and easements enumerated in the report of the City Engineer and more particularly described on maps which are on file in the City Clerk's Office, entitled "Assessment Diagrams Landscape Maintenance Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8." Descril~tion of Assessment Districts. SECTION 3: That the contemplated work, in the opinion of said City Council, is of more than local or ordinary public benefit, and the said City Council hereby makes the expense of the work chargeable upon the districts, which said districts, are assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and which districts are described as follows: All that certain territory of the City of Rancho Cucamonga included within the exterior boundary lines shown upon that certain "Map of Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 ", "Map of Landscape Maintenance District No. 2", "Map of Landscape Maintenance District No. 3A", "Map of Landscape Nlaintenance District No. 3B", "Map of Landscape Maintenance District No. 4". ".Map of Landscape Maintenance District No. 5", ".Map of Landscape .Maintenance District No. 6", "Map of Landscape Maintenance District No. 7", "Map of Landscape Maintenance District No. 8" indicating by said boundary. lines the extent of the territory included v, Athin each assessment district and which maps are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of said City. Reference is hereby made to said maps for further, full and more particular description of said assessment districts, and the said maps so on file shall govern for all details as to the extent of said assessment districts. Report of Engineer. SECTION 4: The City Council of said City by Resolution No._ has approved the armual report of the City Engineer which report indicates the amount of the proposed assessments, the district boundaries, assessment zones, and the method of assessment. The report title "Annual Engineer's Report" is on file in the Office of the City. Clerk of said City. Reference to said report is hereby made for all particulars for the amount and e.,ctent of the assessments and for the extent of the work. TINIE AND PLACE OF HEARINQ. SECTION 5: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARINGS IS HEREBY SCHEDULED IN THE CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE, CITY OF RANCliO CUCANIONGA, CALIFORNIA, 91730. WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 1997 AT 7:00 P.M. .Any and all persons may appear and show cause why said maintenance and sen'ice for the existing improvements and the proposed improvements should not be done or earned out or why assessments should not be levied and collected for fiscal year 1997/98. Landscaping and g, ighting Act of 1972. SECTION 6: All the work herein proposed shall be done and carried through in pursuaz~ce of an act of the legislature of the State of California designated as the Landscaping and LFghting Act of 1972, being Part 2 of Division 15 of the Sweets and Highways Code of the State of Cali.fomia. Publication of Resolutio_n of'Lntention. SECTION 7: Published notice shall be made pursuant to Section 6061 of the Go',,'ernment Code. The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and ~i:e City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published 10 c,.ta~.s ;~e~ore rt',,e date set for the hearing, a~ ~east once in The Inland Vallev Daily Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Calit'omia. ORDINANCE NO. ~ ?~:;~ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-02, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW- MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 18 ACRES OF LAND AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND VICTORIA PARK LANE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 227-011-17. A. Recitals. 1. Citation Homes has filed an application for Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 96-02, as described in the title of this Ordinance. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the subject Victoria Community Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On February 26, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. On April 2, 1997, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to the Planning Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on February 26, 1997, and to the City Council during the above referenced hearing on April 2, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 18 acres of property located at the northeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Victoria Park Lane; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Village Commercial and is developed with a neighborhood commercial shopping center. The property to the west is designated Low-Medium Residential and developed with single family residences. The property to the east is designated Low-Medium Residential and is developed with a neighborhood park and a single family residential subdivision. The property to the south is designated Low-Medium Residential and is developed with single family residences. c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. VCPA 96-02 - CITATION HOMES April 2, 1997 Page 2 d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the subject property is suitable for the modifications permitted by the proposed amendment in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and c. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated - thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the City Council; and, further, this Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the City Council finds as follows: in considering the record as a whole, the initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project wilt have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council dudrig the public hearing, the City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the Califomia Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Council hereby approves Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 96-02. 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. _~ 73 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 96-03, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (8-14 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO LOW- MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR APPROXIMATELY 12.4 ACRES OF LAND SOUTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE, EAST OF WOODRUFF PLACE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 227-011-26. A. Recitals 1. Citation Homes has filed an application for Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 96-03, as described in the title of this Ordinance. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the subject Victoria Community Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On February 26, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. On Apdl 2, 1997, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to the Planning Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on February 26, 1997, and to the City Council during the above referenced hearing on April 2, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 12.4 acres of property located south of Highland Avenue, east of Woodruff Place; and b. The property to the north of the subject site is designated Low-Medium Residential within the Caryn Planned Community and the property is developed with single family residences. Immediately to the north is the right-of-way for the future Foothill Freeway, which is presently vacant. The property to the west is designated Village Commercial and developed with a neighborhood commercial shopping center. The property to the east is designated Low-Medium Residential and is developed with a single family residential subdivision. The property to the south is designated Low-Medium Residential and is developed with a neighborhood park and an elementary school. c. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. VCPA 96-03 - CITATION HOMES April 2, 1997 Page 2 d. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and e. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the subject property is suitable for the modifications permitted by the proposed amendment in terms of access, size. and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and c. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the City Council; and, further, this Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That based upon the changes and alterations which have been incorporated into the proposed project, no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the City Council finds as follows: In considering the record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project wi.il have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wii~llife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration. tt"~e staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council during the public hean'ng, the City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d} of Title 14 of the Califomia Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Council hereby approves Victoria Community Plan Amendment No. 96-03. 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~MONGA -- STAFF REPORT DATE: April 17, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Brent Le Count, AICP, Associate Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-01 - MILLER FAMILY AND ASSOCIATES - A request to add Funeral and Crematory Services as a conditionally permitted use in Subarea 8 (General Industrial) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends approval of the Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment. ABSTRACT This amendment would allow any property owner within Subarea 8 to request a Conditional Use Permit to operate a funeral home and/or crematory. A Conditional Use Permit may be approved by the Planning Commission when it is found and determined that the property is suitable for the use and that said use will be compatible with surrounding uses. ANALYSIS On December 1, 1997, the Planning Commission initiated an amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan to conditionally permit Funeral and Crematory Services in Subarea 8. This was in response to a request by Miller Family and Associates to open a mortuary with crematory within Subarea 8 on the south side of Arrow Highway between Utica Avenue and Red Oak Street. The Commission determined that Funeral and Crematory Services would not conflict with the currently allowed land use mix or the stated purpose of Subarea 8. Furthermore, the Commission considered the proposed amendment a non-site/project specific text change wherein project specific impacts would be addressed with future Conditional Use Permit application(s) and associated Environmental Assessment(s). Therefore, on March 11, 1997, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed amendment. Copies of the Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes of the March 11, 1997, meeting are attached. FACTS FOR FINDING: The proposed amendment is consistent with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the General Plan. -5'7 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ISPA 97-01 Miller Family and Associates April 17, 1997 Page 2 CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper as a public hearing. Public hearing notices were mailed to all property owners within Subarea 8 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, all property owners within 300 feet of the subarea, and to all persons who sent letters or testified at the Planning Commission meeting regarding this amendment. Staff received letters and petitions in opposition to the proposed amendment (copies of letters and petitions attached as Exhibit "C"). For the most part, these letters seem to address a site specific project rather than a text amendment. The primary issues of contention are traffic impacts, psychological/emotional stigma associated with cremation, impact on property values, and creation of objectionable odors. City Planner BB:BLC:gs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Planning Commission Staff Report of March 11, 1997 Exhibit "B°' - Planning Commission Minutes of March 11, 1997 Exhibit "C" - Public Correspondence and Petitions Exhibit "D" - Crematory Equipment Brochure Planning Commission Resolution 97-15 Ordinance approving Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 97-01 CITY OF RANCHO CUCA_~MONGA -- STAFF REPORT DATE: March 11, 1997 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Brent Le Count, Associate Planner SUBJECT: INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMi~NT 97-01 - MILLER FAMILY AND ASSOCIATES - A request to add Funeral and Crematory Services as a conditionally permitted use in Subarea 8 (General Industrial) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. A. BACKGROUND: At it's December 1, 1996, meeting, the Planning Commission initiated an amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan to conditionally permit Funeral and Crematory Services in Subarea 8. Funeral and Crematory Services are already conditionally permitted in Subareas 4, 6, and 16 which lie along Archibald and Haven Avenues. The issue arose in response to a request by Miller Family and Associates to open a mortuary within Subarea 8 on the south side of Arrow Highway between Utica Avenue and Red Oak Street. Mortuaries are classified as "Funeral and Crematory Services" by the Industrial Area Specific Plan: Funeral and Crematory Services: Activities typically include, but are not limited to, services involving the care, preparation, and disposition of human dead other than in cemeteries. Uses typically include, but are not limited to: funeral homes, crematories, and mausoleums. B. ANALYSIS: The intent of land use categorization is to group together uses which are compatible because of similar intensities in order to reduce potential conflicts. Therefore, in a Subarea where more intense uses are permitted (such as Heavy Industrial) lighter uses (such as Administrative and Office or Assembly) are not permitted. Subarea 8 functions to provide for General Industrial activities and to assure for a transition area from the Heavy Industrial category south of the subarea. In general, Subarea 8 contains many of the same allowed uses as Subareas 4, 6, and 16 (where Funeral and Crematory Services is allowed) and it has a wider range of permitted and conditionally permitted uses than the other subareas. This is especially true for commercial uses within these subareas (see Exhibit "C"). PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT IASPA 97-01 - MILLER FAMILY & ASSOCIATES March 11, 1997 Page 2 In general, Funeral and Crematory Services does not appear to conflict with the land uses already allowed in Subarea 8 and proliferation of the use is not likely. Funeral and Crematory Services within Subarea 8 would be conveniently located for serving the Rancho Cucamonga community as well as neighboring communities. As a conditionally permitted use, Funeral and Crematory Services would require approval of a Conditional Use Permit which involves a public hearing, the ability to attach conditions, and revocation authority. Through the Conditional Use Permit process, the Commission would consider the compatibility of the specific location desired by Miller Family & Associates and the Cowboy Burger restaurant under construction on the adjoining parcel to the east. C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The proposed amendment is not defined as a project by the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15378 and is therefore exempt from environmental review per CEQA Section 15061 b. 1 D. FACTS FOR FINDING: The proposal is consistent with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the General Plan. The proposal will not be detrimental to adjacent properties or uses and will not cause adverse environmental impacts. E. CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Dail_v Bulletin newspaper and notices were mailed to all property owners in Subarea 8 and within 300 feet thereof. F. RECOMMI~NDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of this amendment and issuance of a Negative Declaration by the City Council through adoption of the attached Resolution. Respectfull submitted, City Planner BB:BLC/mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Subarea Map Exhibit "B" - Subarea 8 Map Exhibit "C" - Summary of Land Use Types Exhibit "D'" - Letter from Applicant Exhibit "E" - Location Map (Appiicant's Proposed Site) Exhibit "F" - Planning Commission Minutes dated December 11. 1996 Resolution Recommending Appro,',/a[ to City Council TABLE SUMMARY OF LAND USE TYPE BY SUBA EA I'~F,-'~CE PROFESSIONAL. ~EStG,N' & RESEARCH iWHOLESAL_=. STOPpAGe. & DISTRI!BLJTIbN [~.!AT=_RIALS R[COV=_RY FA'CILFFI-_":S , , , .. · ' ....... ..... rS .'.:i~eC 'jse,'Osen J{ TABL-' i11-I (Continued) ~::,.-.=i~e ~,.: S::~,r l tc I I C I I C I I..C k.::~:i.,e.~e~:,t I I~1 !.=1.=1 !A.,'::,-.,:dVe,tZgn: Tn.:-,...k Repair-,Vlincr [ I .= l ~ I'= i.? .:,.-.::=i:i~:Satesa~Ue,,i=.~ t IIIi i' i C k-.::=::iv, s:.-,,i:, c~:n J i.: I.= I~ I? .......... s.~ii~-i=.; .~,i~.:e~,.~ s.~i~, Jj~ I I.= i.= I &. cj,. E=ui:~men~ Suetiles &Sails , , , 's=,i.~:,, s~::ly R.-:.il ~ s.~i:. ~.='t ~ l ' i;;i~ .... C=~e~.i~.-,~S.,.,~.S.,,,i~, I c'lclct.~l.~t !clcI lcicl ll Iclc =,=er:,,i.-.=e,-,: (ctillcl t c I ccil I c l clltc[' - , ........ =,:e.".,~',ei=:,cc=,~,,,:~,l [ IIIt111 c i IIIcic i cll , · , .--,,: .:::: sa~:, I c't t t I c I I c t ccI I c I c I I I I c i ......... :::3 i.:,.-.,.-.:~,,.,.-.,~,,,.:,~.~,,,-',:,:eS,.-,,:,, [.:t:! !:l:l I.=:0~,_.se~e,.~es.;e. [c'lc[ tclcl Iclc c l lclcllt lct (::~ t I IIicl icl i11ili Icl o :~.=:0r '.':.'.:~.,,,e,.=.,:,, C:--....-.:r:i,, I I i I t I I [C' C !C i C I i C i C I C.I I ~ ' , ..... '-.. c:: =:,,:=.al s:,,ice, t c'l c I t.: l .~ I .=e:::;e.;= .=,.:C~::. S:=~a;.- [ ~ "i j I J C :i .=.:::-.a:i:.-..=,=~.ie, ~ C C ( I c I c i c f c i c= I c 1 c t .= i I I i .='( .=. .=,-_:~irS~.:,i:-_, I I.=IPICI.=t.=i ' s:~.::a.:, s;::i~.: s~::t;~s ,_. ~:..-,-_ ,,.-.:r:~e..-.e~.: i I I !~ I.~ I I '~ InZust:ial ~:Jrk D ~,-'--:-,.'~ Use HO - :-:avert Avenue Over:a'/Dis:rio: C - Canci:Ecnafi'! ;-.rmi:_-C Usa ' - .%'an-,.'nat~ce~ ~'s-' :~er..--:.r:le~ .., 3! -3~_.,e:al In:us:rfal .'.:hill · ,'.1!r.L.--,um l,--.,;ac: Hear'/inZus::ial A - A_1,_'f: Er.:e::ainmen: HI - Hear'/fnt',.;.sttfal - ,R-_:er :~ H. aven ,: ','..','OS -,'.'.ize~ Ljse/O~en ! T,~;'s/s .~n e::e.~t fm,,,.~ ;he/r.::;$:.'Tat Area S~ec;;7c .-'~;a.'~ (zS.~)..;/ease re,"er .'; :'a.'~'~ i :e.'7'r.~:.':.'~s. ;'f '/~u ~eed ne/,~/~ .-e:e.,'~.,/n/~-~ ;.'~e "a,'~d us-~ t'/~e :/a :;s;'ne.~s. ;,'ease c:t:ect the .-'~/anm'.'~' November 2{5, 1996 " Chairman and Planning Commission City Of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Ci~Ac Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 · % Subject: Funeral and Crematory Use Within Subarea Eight Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission: Miller Family & Associates is interested in establishing the city's first mortuary. We propose a 10,000 square foot mortuary on a 1.6 acre site on Arrow Route east of Haven Avenue. This location is within Subarea Eight of the Industrial Specific Plan, which does not currently reference funeral and crematory services. The primary concern with mortuary activities is typically related to funeral processions and the potential impedance of traffic flow. Not all services are held at the mortuary, and less than 30% of the families served will actually require a funeral procession. Further, these services are normally held between 10:00 ~M and 3:00 PM, thus avoiding peak corrmluting areas. The use of traffic control escorts and secondary routes to access the freeways will sufficiently avoid any traffic conflicts. Any other concerns regarding the day to day operations of the mortuary can be addressed through the regulation by the Funeral Directors and Embalmers Law, found in the California Health and Safety Code. In the past year, there were 500 deaths in Rancho Cucamonga. As there are no mortuaries in the city, local citizens must drive to Upland or Ontario to obtain these basic services. The neighboring mortuaries, without exception, are all owned by large, out of state funeral conglomerates. We intend to be the only local, family owned and operated mortuary in the ~eater Rancho Cucamonga area. Mortuaries provide a basic service, integral to the daily function of any community, and are traditionally centrally located. This site, just east of Haven Avenue, which is serviced by an off ramp of Interstate 10, is ideal for our purposes as it provides a visible, easily accessible location not only to the citizens of the community, but their relatives and other visitors unfamiliar with the area. We ask the Planning Commission's support in amending Subarea Eight of the Industrial Specific Plan by allowing funeral and crematory services within this area. We wish to emphasize that this action will not initiate a proliferation of funeral homes within the area, as the population of most cities is not large enough to sustain more than one mortuary. This is evidenced by the many nei~,hborin~, communities that have only one mortuary, if at all. We look forward to making our professional services available to the community. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (909) 737-3244. Sincerely, Christopher B. Miller Nliller Family & Associates Mr. De:mar~ :es:s:sed :eC and white. ' ommissigner McNiel asked if this sign is being used at anozher location. M Denman stated the grea store uses the same s~gn. Corn issioner McN~el asked the operating hours of the business. Mr. Den n responded the scuba instruction begins 8~ 7:00 a.m. and the main s~ore opens at ~ 0:00 a.m. Commissioner istoy stated his suppo~ of the proposed sign. Dennis Stout, Federal Sig 1 North Maplewood Street, Orange, indicated Hollywood Video is a large corporation with to open 60 to 100 stores in Southern California and strives to maintain a cohesivehess throuc the chain. He pointed out the Uniform Sign Program allows intermediate tenants with d logo graphics to utilize their custom colors with approval of the landlord and the City. He Hollywood Video's name is their logo, trademark, and identity. He pointed out other tena the center using white in their signage. Commissioner McNiet asked if Federal plans neon signs inside the building and if so, what color. Mr. Stout answered in the affirmative, but did now which treatment had been chosen. Mr. Hayes reported conditions have been placed on Video tenant improvement plans regarding interior neon being placed a minimum of 10 re: 'om any outside window. Commissioner McNiel felt the white color might be a better to apply than the red. Commissioner Tolstoy asked if the word "Hollywood" is to be in red, d the word '~'ideo" in white. Mr. Stout answered in the affirmative. Commissioner Bethel commented that the building in Loma Linda looks Commissioner Macias supported the use of white. Chairman Barker announced unanimous approval of Items H and I by minute action. -~tvl. MILLER FAMILY & ASSOCIATES - A request to consider initiation of text changes to the Industrial Area Specific Plan to add Funeral and Crematory Services as a conditionally permitted use in Subarea 8. Dan Coleman, Princioal Planner, presented the staff report,. .P!anning Commission Minutes -10- DeceraSer 11, I,c9-3 ~ 7 ,'¢:d..,-, t ' '_ t ;~,b i ."f"' m f_, ~ ~ c. ./.. , ,; _ Chris Miller, Thomas Miller Mor, uar-,/. 1118 East Six:.h Street, Corona, rescr-:,ed the firm :hat ins:oils ~.he c, rematorium equipment hanU[es all Air Quality Management Distrio: setnits. Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Macias, to direct staff to process-the amendment uson submittal. Motion passed by the following vote: AYES: BARKER, BETHEL, MACIAS, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE -carried PUBLIC COMMENTS lere were no additional public comments. COMMI ION BUSINESS Dan Colema Principal Planner, suggested that the Commission may wish to move the Design Review Co meeting from Tuesday, December 31, to Monday, December 30, because of the holiday The Commissioners reed to schedule the meeting on Monday, December 30. Mr. Coleman then Drought .ubcommi~ee appointments in conjunction with the City Council. Chairman Barker indica'~ed, per Council direction, a task force will be set up to consider each of the following topics: Economic Foothill Boulevard, Multi-Family Development. and Signage. He recommended the two Commissioners each serve with one of the t'wo veteran Commissioners, allowing himself to a alternate. The Commission concurred: Commissi and Bethel will serve on the task forces for Foothill Boulevard and Economic'Development, ',ile Commissioners Tolstoy and Macias will serve on the task forces for Multi-Family Development d Signage. N. COMMERCIAL L,~ND USr- S~UDY ulSCUSStON - o report) "' e ' ' ee ' , ' e :e e. ,D!anning Commiss:'cn blinutes -! I- December 11 i E. INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-01 - MILLER FAMILY AND ASSOCIATES, INC. - A request to add Funeral and Crematory Services as a conditionally permitted use in Subarea 8 (General Industrial) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan. Brent Le Count, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. He indicated that staff had received several telephone calls requesting information about the location. He reported that several letters and petitions had been received in opposition citing concerns regarding traffic, fear of lowering of property values on surrounding parcels, and the potential for noxious odors or smoke being emitted. Commissioner Macias observed that the Commission was being asked to allow an applicant to request the use in the subarea but that any actual project would require environmental assessment. Mr. Le Count confirmed that was correct. He said that text changes are exempt from California Environmental Quality Act. Chairman Barker asked staff to point out the other areas in the City where the use is already conditionally permitted. Mr. Le Count showed the boundaries of Subareas 4, 6, and 16. Mr. Coleman pointed out that the use is permitted in corridors along Archibald Avenue and Haven Avenue and in an area located between Fourth and Sixth Streets to the west of Archibald. Commissioner Macias asked that staff outline the process for the benefit of the public. Mr. Le Count stated that if the Planning Commission recommends approval, the matter goes to the City Council for consideration of adoption of the amendment. He indicated that if the City Council adopts the amendment, then an application could be submitted for property within the subarea at which time there would be an environmental assessment which would be subject to public review. Commissioner Macias noted that the public would be permitted to provide input and voice their concerns at that time and asked if the City is required by law to address those concerns. Mr. Le Count stated that was correct. Commissioner Macias asked if the Commission would then review the project following the environmental review. Mr. Le Count said the Commission would see both the conditional use permit application and the associated environmental assessment. Commissioner Macias observed there would be further public review and the opportunity for testimony at that time. Mr. Le Count confirmed that was correct. Chairman Barker asked that staff define conditional use permit for the benefit of the audience. Mr. Le Count explained the difference between a permitted use and a conditionally permitted use. Commissioner Bethel stated that he realized this application was merely to permit an application to be filed, but said that air quality is one of his concerns. He thought that it would be good to have a funeral home in the area but asked what air quality issues would arise with a crematorium. Planning Commission Minutes -3- March 11, 1997 ~_/9 Mr. Le Count stated that the Air Quality Management District has specialized criteria for dealing with crematories. He stated that the Industrial Area Specific Plan also has performance criteria which do not allow businesses to emit odors which are noticeable to surrounding properties. He said the applicant has indicated that retort ovens would be used which do not emit particles or smoke. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Dan Hinson, H, C, & D Architects, 1700 Hamnor Avenue, #204, Norco, stated he was representing the Miller family. He felt the equipment to be used addresses the concerns raised regarding the fumes and smoke. He indicated they had researched the other subareas which allow funeral homes but there were no properties available and the property they found on the south side of Arrow Route between Utica Avenue and Red Oak Street would best suit the applicant at this time. Chfis Miller, Miller Family & Associates, 1118 East Sixth Street, Corona, provided literature regarding the type of equipment they propose to use. He observed that the equipment is guaranteed to be smokeless and odorless. He stated that only heat vapors could escape. He offered to provide telephone numbers and addresses where the equipment is currently in use. He noted that at this time, they were merely asking for a change in the zoning so that they could present an application. He discussed the traffic situation and reported they will have ample parking on site to accommodate any services and noted that no parking is allowed on Arrow Route. He stated that generally a funeral procession would be leaving within a two to three minute time frame. Jim Doltar, Advanced Coating, 10723 Edison Court, Rancho Cucamonga, stated they were not opposed to having a funeral home and crematorium in Rancho Cucamonga but they were opposed to changing the zoning for Subarea 8 because the use is already permitted in Subareas 4, 6, and 16. He reported they had collected 42 letters and petitions with over 150 signatures from surrounding businesses who also oppose the amendment. He said the basic concern is that such a use would not fit with the current business atmosphere in that particular area. He felt the site is the heart of the City because of the proximity of City Hall and Quakes Stadium. He said it was his understanding that there is a limited number of crematories in Southern California, and he feared this facility would be cremating bodies from all over Southern California and it would be a large volume business. He felt there will be parking violations. He acknowledged that he did not understand how the retort oven would work but felt that if something burns, there must be exhaust and expressed his concem about environmental issues. He observed they recently purchased their building on Edison Court and he felt that changing the zoning and allowing other types of uses subverted his selection and purchase process. He asked that the Commission deny the amendment request. Richard McMillan, Attorney at Law, 1205 North Broadway, Santa Ana, stated he represents Pete Katelarius, an adjacent property owner. He indicated that Mr. Katelarius purchased the adjacent property with the goal of building a fast food restaurant with the belief that there w'euld probably be commercial buildings on the adjacent parcel. He observed that the Miller property has easements over Mr. Kateladus' property and he was concerned about the traffic burden that would be placed on his parcel. Mr. McMillan did not feel the Industrial Area Specific Ran should be amended on an ad hoc basis. He said he could understand the need for an amendment if the use were not permitted elsewhere, but he felt there must have been specific reasons the use was not permitted in Subarea 8. He feared the City was not addressing those reasons. He stated that when Specific Plans are adopted, it typically involves hundreds or thousands of hours of community anci staff and community discussion. He did not feel that piecemeal changes should be permitted. He thought the Commission was being asked to permit a use without knowing the eff(~cts the specific business would have. He stated that Mr. Katelarius had been informed that the applicant ,,,,,as co:nsic~er)ng a 10,000 square foot mortuary. He feared that meant there would be mu)tipte fur, erals at .one t. ime and there would be a lot of vehicles coming to the facility for funerals even if the 'funeral do. es not involve a procession. Planning Commission Minutes -4- March 11, 1997 7~ Rich Fletcher, owner of Certified Leasing and president of the Board of Directors of Arrow Owners Association, 10722 Arrow Route, #306, Rancho Cucamonga, said he understood the entrance to their condominium association would be directly across Arrow Route from the proposed mortuary/crematory. He commented his main objection was lack of notice. He said he was made aware of the proposed change because some of the neighbors to the south of Arrow Route distributed a notice in opposition to the change. He stated he checked the list of people who were notified and that only a few of the condominium owners who are located along Arrow Route were notified. He said there are 75 units located within eight buildings and those owners all have an undivided interest in the association complex. He questioned the legality of the notice since only those individuals who are located within 300 feet of the proposed zone change received notice. He thought all of the association owners should have been notified. He commented that he had only been notified of the proposal two days before tonight's meeting. He said he had polled the other directors of the association and the majodty are opposed to the location. He noted that even though the applicant's representative had said the usage should fit in with the community, he did not feel such a use is compatible with general industrial or light industrial or the proposed fast food restaurant which would be adjacent to the property. He said there are industrial properties to the north and south with an undeveloped strip which is presently zoned general industrial. He asked if it is the intent of the Planning Commission to change the area to general usage with a hodgepodge of different uses, noting there is a welfare office just down the street, a fast food restaurant, and now a proposed mortuary. He thought it would be more appropriate in a mixed use area. Stephanie Burke, 8429 White Oak Avenue, #103, Rancho Cucamonga, stated she is the manager of Arrow Business Center at the corner of White Oak Avenue and Arrow Route. She said the business center is located in Subarea 7, which is office buildings and light industrial. She noted that the applicant had indicated that no property was available at the time in Subareas 4, 6, and 16, where the use is already permitted. She stated there may be properties available in those subareas now or in the near future and she did not feel it makes sense for the City to change the Specific Plan just because of lack of immediate availability of land. She said she has 134 tenants at the business park. She acknowledged there may be a need for the service, but felt it should be in one of the subareas where it is currently permitted. She did not think such a service should be on Arrow Route because it is a heavy truck route and also a route to the stadium. She did not feel the use would be compatible with the proposed fast food restaurant on the adjacent parcel. She suggested the applicant either go the subareas where it is already permitted or go deeper into Subarea 8. Wally Schultz, President of City Com, 10722 Arrow Route, Suite 500, Rancho Cucamonga, felt the intended office, professional, and other industrial uses of Subarea 8 should not be subverted because of economics. He feared land values in the area would be affected and said that other areas of the City are more appropriate and are currently zoned to accommodate the use. Mr. Hinson stated they would be willing to meet with the individual owners of adjacent parcels and explain the retort equipment and how parking issues would be handled. He indicated they currently have a plan to subdivide the property and provide another lot between the proposed hamburger stand and their lot. He said that even if that is not done, there would be a landscape buffer. He was confident they could deal with the parking issue because it is a large site. Mark Huffnet, Miller family, stated that Subarea 6 has a Haven Overlay District, which restricts the use. He said there are only two parcels in the City which would be suitable; one of which is just west of Utica on Arrow Route and the owners were unwilling to sell at a decent price. He said Subarea 4 is a more developed commercial area and there are no properties large enough to accommodate their use. He stated that Subarea 16 is owned by Lewis Homes and Lewis Homes is not willing to sell them a parcel. He also indicated that Subarea 16 is on the fringe of the City and said that a mortuary should be part of the community. He indicated they want to bring a family-owned mortuary into the community. He observed that Kentucky Fried Chicken located a restaurant on the property line of the mortuary in Ontario and Del Taco built across the street from them. He felt that proved that those large food chains do not think of a mortuary as a bad neighbor. He observed that they Planning Commission Minutes -5- March 11, 1997 "7'/ would like to locate only a few hundred feet from were they could be located in Subarea 6. He asserted that most mortuaries have a crematorium and said that Moreno Valley recently approved one next to a residential area. Rudy Doltar, Advanced Coating, 10723 Edison Court, Rancho Cucamonga, did not think that most mortuaries have crematoriums. He stated Draper Mortuary in Ontario had to send a body to Santa Ana several years ago for cremation. Mr. Fletcher felt the applicant was asking for the change. to the Industrial Area Specific Plan for financial reasons. He observed that the applicant had indicated property was available in an area currently zoned for the use, but the applicant was not willing to pay the price being asked. He asked that the Commission consider the financial impact on the surrounding property owners. He did not feel there is an environmental problem and said he did not object to mortuary services; however, he felt there is an emotional problem for others who have to drive by the site. Larry Lenz, Lenzco, 10722 Arrow Highway, ~E412, Rancho Cucamonga, did not feel the parking issue had been adequately addressed. He stated that Arrow Highway is heavily traveled and he observed funeral processions would stop traffic. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Barker closed the public hearing. Commissioner Macias observed that the Commission was being asked to recommend approval of a land use designation, not a particular project. He remarked that questions revolving around environmental impacts such as traffic, circulation, air quality, and community concerns are dealt with through the environmental review process when an application is processed and a project is designed. He observed that the City has the ability to deny a specific project or any aspect of that project, such as the crematorium services. He said the issue tonight was the land use. He recognized that such services are not in the City at this time and said he would be willing to consider such a use in the future assuming that environmental impacts are appropriately mitigated. He favored the redesignation of the land use but indicated that if a project were submitted at the proposed location, he would have major concems regarding the traffic. He felt it would need a traffic analysis. He said he also thought social concerns related to the mortuary and crematory services should be addressed. He expressed reservations about the use being located adjacent to a fast food establishment and felt that there needs to be a buffer. He asked that the applicant consider the feasibility of a mortuary without a crematorium or be prepared to convince the Commission that it is not an issue. He suggested that if the crematorium remains part of a proposal, the potential volume of cremations should be addressed in the environmental assessment and the locations of other such services in the Inland Empire should be indicated. Chairman Barker observed that Subarea 8 runs along Arrow Route from the eastern City limits almost to Haven Avenue. He asked if notices were sent to all property owners within 300 feet of the entire Subarea 8. Mr. Coleman replied that notices were sent to all property owners within Subarea 8 as well as within 300 feet of the limits of Subarea 8. Commissioner Bethel felt that Commissioner Macias had done a good job of describing the process and the fact that the Commission was considering the use, not approving a specific pro)ect. He remarked that two or three large corporations are taking over every funeral home in every state in the nation. He felt that lack of competition is then allowing people to be ripped off at a time when they are most vulnerable. He felt encouraged that a family-owned funeral home was consideri,n,g a move to Rancho Cucamonga. He observed that the notification was correct)y done and sajcl ne supported the change. Planning Commission Minutes -6- March 11, 1997 Chairman Barker said the issue before the Commission was more limited than what had been brought forth. He stated it was premature to discuss the technical aspects of a crematorium, parking, or traffic and those issues would be addressed when a conditional use permit application is considered. He indicated he was not prepared to try to determine if the proposed site is the right place for this kind of an operation. He observed the question in front of the Commission was if it is possible that there is a parcel within Subarea 8 which may be appropriate for this type of use. He said approval of the Amendment would only give an applicant permission to ask, and if an application is submitted, the issues brought forth tonight would be addressed. He remarked that projects are often dropped once the applicant finds out what will be required. He acknowledged that the applicant's interest in one particular site motivated the request for an amendment, but said the request for amendment could be made without any property in mind. Motion: Moved by Macias, seconded by Bethel, to recommend approval of Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 97-01. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: BARKER, BETHEL, MACIAS NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL, TOLSTOY - carried Chairman Barker observed that the recommendation would be forwarded to the City Council for final action. Mr. Coleman stated that the item would be re-advertised and notices would be mailed out again to announce the hearing before City Council. Commissioner Bethel asked that those individuals who spoke this evening receive a notice. F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 97-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to change the zoning from Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per"acr~e) to General Commercial to be consistent with the General Plan for approximately 4.34 acres'of.!.and on the east side of Archibald Avenue, south of Arrow Route - APN: 209-041-27, 41, and 47,, .,,. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, present~'d .t,he staff report. Chairman Barker recalled that the Assistance Le'ag.ue of Upland approached the City many years ago and they have since provided' a great service to the'cOmmunity. He thanked them for their work. He opened the public hearing. "" ,,,,. June Wallin, Assistance League of Upland, P. O. Box 927, Upl~'hd,..said they are trying to prepare the back building for an Operation School Bell project and they have tried to be a good neighbor. Chairman Barker closed the public hearing as there were no more commer~ts.. Motion: Moved by Bethel, seconded by Macias, to recommend issuance of a Nega~i~Ze Declaration and adopt the resolution recommending approval of Development Distnct Amendment 97-01., Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -7- March 11, 1997 RICHARD V. NICNIILL-%.",' ATTORNEY AT LAW I 205 NORTH BROADWAY S,--~'qTA ,--t'WA, CAL[FOR.,"4IA 9270/. (7 I ..4,) 542-55~2 RECEIVED Nfarch 10,, 1997 MAR 11 1997 City of P,,ancho Cucamonga City of Rancho Cucamonga Chairman of the Planning Commission Planning Division C/O Dan Coleman 10500 Civic Center Drive P,,ancho Cucamonga, California 91730 F AXED AND M,',~ELED Obiecdon to application for Conditional Use Permit in Subarea 8 by Miller Family & Associates Dear Chairperson: N.fr. Katelaris is the property and business owner of the property adjacent to east of the proposed site for the ,.Miller Family & .Associates proposed Mortuary site. My Client is opposed to N'[ilIer Family's proposed use of the site, on the following grounds: 1. The specific location of the crematoria on thjs property is unknown to my client, but it is .his understanding that the crematoria will be within a hundred and fifty feet of hjs restaurant. %[y client is concerned that the crematoria's discharge into the air of the by-products of the process may at worst result in no.'dous odors or at best in visible smoke which would be obiectionable to my client's customers. As this use is permitted in other subareas where these concerns would not be present, my client requests that this application be denied. '~ This proposed use will have a significant nec, ative impact on the traffic in the area. We are unaware on any other type business which would by design draw twenty or more vehicles to one site at a time, and then by design, place all of those vehicles on the street at one time, in a convoy, which by design stops all traffic in its path as k passes. Further, there is no limitation on :he time of day these processions occur, nor is there any limitation on the number of processions per day. in addition, even the 30% of The Miller Family's customers who do not require a funeral procession will have some impact, for Rosary's and Funeral Services which do not require a ';procession" will gather numbers of people to the site at a specific time and will discharge those vehicles at one time. Further, if this proposal includes facilities which are large enough, more than one funeral at a time could be held on the site which would cause sigrfi~cant traffic congestion, and business disruption to my client. Absent additional in.formation concerning :his proposed use, these are my c[ient's concerns, and form the basis for his objection to the proposed use. \'e~ truly yours, .x, tarcll ,5. 1997 Citv of Ra. ncho Cucar~or~a P.O. Box 807, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Attn.: Planning Division Dear Sirs, Re: Industrial area specific plan amendment 97-01- N'liller Family ,.ec A. ssocialion Inc., A request to add funeral and crematory sen'ice as a conditionally permitted use in Subarea 8 (~eneral industrial) of the industrial area specific plan This letter sen'es as mv NOTICE OF OBjECT[ON for the above project base on the following negative impacts:- ( 1 ) It ,.,,,'ill sharply reduce the property value of the surrounding area immediately. (2) [t ,.,,.'ill create a strong uncomfortable feeling to the residents or owners in the vicinity area. (3) It will discourage new investors for any new potential investments to the surrounding area. (4) It may also make the existing tenant in the surrounding area to move out aft:er lease expired. (5) It ,.rill damage the tax income of the city in the tong run. [ am looking fortyard Io hearing the cancellation of the above project soon. Thank you for >'our kind attention. /:? ~' O ~. / l/' ~. O 'I,14R 0 1992 '~ 'ours t ru ly. ~/tj,. ~anR,na/.Z,c, ho .Co'ca . , g O/l,,/:~,,b?o,')ga Chunk, Kwok Biu:Owner S580 Oakwood Place Rancho Cucamon~a. CA 91730 75 ling CITY COMMERCIAL MANAGEMENT, I C. RECEIVED t AR 0 G 1997 Thursday, March 6, 1997 City ot ~ancbo Cucamonga pla~mng Division Pl~g Co~ission Cin,' nfR. ancho Cuc-~ong: Post O~ce Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga CA 91729 Re: ~dustrial Area Specific PI~ .~endment 97-01 Nfiller F~ily and Associates, Inc. Please accept t~s le~er ~ vehement opposition to the ch~ge in periled uses in Sub~ea 8 to petit a mo~a~ and cremato~ seNices. The proposed location on Affow Route is directly across the street ~om my business, and [ believe that the operation of a mo~a~' and, in particular a cremato~, ~vill be hilly de~ental both to the value of my prope~y as well as the continued success of my business and the business of my ne~by tenant. This area is properly zoned to petit light industrial and o~ce uses, and should not have ~o tolerate a facili~ which will introduce into the local atmosphere the odor ~d other products of combustion associated with the cremation of human remains. Should the applic~t wish to ~end the request M order to establish a mo~'-only facili~ at this location, I could potentially reconsider my opDosition. based uaon review oF that amended application. But a cremato~'? Out of the question~ Stn / Wallace M. Schultz, President Prope~' owner of Assessor's Parcel Numbers 0208-053-0 i,-02, and-07 " cC~'lt/So -,rty of Ran h Company, Incorporated 110 Nodh Market Street, East Palestine, Ohio 44413-2095 · Phone: 216~26~151 Planning Divison February 26, 1997 City Of Rancho Cucamonga P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: As a business person o~-ning Wagner-Insul Company, Inc. in the area before the park was ever conceived, I strongly object to the use of land in'the park for the use of funeral and or crematory service. It is an unhealthy and environmentally incorrect concern for all, not only physically but mentally. It is not the type of business that was intended for this great industrial business park. People have spent a great deal of money to come into ~hat ~as intended and anticipated to be a superior business park. Much income has been spent on taxes to achieve this end. I am sure that there is land available that ~ould better suit a business of this type in another area where it is not so congested. Again ~ith great concern I object to the use of any land in this industrial business park being used for funeral and or crema~orv service. Sincerely yours, 77 · · NEW MAILING ADDRESS: P. O. BOX 151, EAST PALESTINE, OHIO 44413-0151 · · t ~anc~o Cuc~rnong'~ Company, Incorporated 3~tY ~ ' ' ' 110 Nodh Market Street, East Palestine, Ohio 44413-2095 · Phone: 216~26~151 Planning Divison February 26, 1997 City Of Rancho Cucamonga P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91729 Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: As a business person o~ning Wa~ner-insul Company Inc in the area before the park was ever conceived, ! strongly object to the use of land in the park for the use of funeral and or crematory service. It is an unhealthy and environmentally incorrect concern for all, not only physically but mentally. It is not the type of business that was intended for this great industrial business park. People have spent a great deal of money to come into what was intended and anticipated to be a superior business mark. >!uch income has been spent on taxes to achieve this end. i am sure that there is land available that would better suit a business of this type in another area where it is not so congested. Again ~ith great concern I object to the use of any land in this industrial business park being used for funeral and or crematory service. Sincerely yours, · · NEW MAILING ADDRESS: P. O. BOX 151, EAST PALESTINE, OHIO 44413-0151 · · , Advanced Coating Par),'lene ConforTn~i Coa:ing Specialists // 10723 Edison Court · Rancho Cuc,~jnonga, California · 91730 Phone: (909) 481-1~00 · Fax: (909) 481-1427 TO: Planning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Amendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: As residents, property owners, and voters, we are stronqly opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. We have received a tremendous amount of support in our position from our business neighbors in the area. Enclosed are letters and petitions from 42 companies with over 150 signatures opposing the subject zoning change. Our reasons for opposition include the following: 1. The City zoning currently has provisions for Funeral & Crematory Services within sub areas 4, 6, and 16. There is no pressing reason to amend zoning for another area. 2. Subarea 8, especially the proposed site on Arrow Highway, js a light industrial area with a professional atmosphere which is conducive to all of the businesses currently located therein. A Funeral Home & Crematorium does not fit in with the neighboring businesses. 3. Amending the zoning could have a negative impact on property values n the immediate area. 4. We purchased our property on Edison Court in August 1996 after a engthy search for the ideal location. Part of our selection process was based on the types of neighboring businesses in the area and the strict zoning parameters that we believed to be in place. Amending the zoning completely subverts our selection and purchasing process. 5. A Crematorium located in Rancho Cucamonga would possibly be providing cremation services for a wide area of Southern California based on the extremely limited number of Crematoriums within the area. This could mean a very large amount of business activity with regard to the delivery and cremation of bodies. 6. The proposed site location is in an area we feel is "The Heart of The City" (i.e. The Courthouse, City Hall, High Profile Office Buildings and Quakes Stadium etc.) and as such should be afforded extra scrutiny in the development and planning of future growth. 7. A funeral home at the proposed site would create traffic, parking and police enforcement problems. Arrow highway is a major artery for the area and would be adversely affected. 8. A funeral home & crematorium would have an undesirable environmental impact on the area due to odor, air emissions and waste water emissions generated from both cremations and embalming. in addition, there would be additional hazard of explosion and fire with the chemicals involved in embalming. We hereby urge the planning commission to disapprove the subject amendment and any future like proposals. Thank You, ~-/1~ ' Steven J. Doltar oltar Rudy J. Doltar Universal Food Company 10646 Fulton Court Rancho Cueamonga, CA 91730 TEL: (909)987-0470 FAX: (909)987-0920 M arc h 1 l, t 997 Planning Commission City of Ranch~ Cucamonga P. 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucam¢~nga. CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Amendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: As citizens and concerned business members affected by the subject proposal, we would like r~ ,,'tlicc o.r opposition to the proposed amendment for and not limitcA to the following reasons: reasons for ~¢ es~bl~shment of our facility in ~e subject ~ea is the actual and perceived condititm of the envi- ronment in providing a s~im~ ud healthy condition for our products. We klicv¢ the addition or' a funeral and cremato~ s¢~1c¢ so close to o~ facili~ will ~is~pt ~ condition and fft~t the reputaticm of our pr¢~du~ts with our ~usmmers. As our clients ~ mossy Asia, there ~¢ strong customs and cu[turaI be[ieves in regards Funeral services. In turn, ~ese ass~ia~oas will ~f~t ~¢ reputation and perceptions regarding the quality and sanitatinn of our prt~ducts because of our clos¢ vicinj~ to ~¢ pro~scd addition. Employee Opposition We do have employe~s who come to ~¢ Fa¢ili~ late in the evening and also early shirrs. tsp~m hearing this possible change, many ¢mploycea have expressed concerns. There h~ been employees who has wishes to change shi~s if the ~nerai home should be built. Whe~er these fears are validated or m~r, feelings and mo~¢ cannot be l~ored. As employers, w~ would like to offer a co~'o~nble working envirtm- ment for our ~mployees which would obviously b~ dtected as alr~dy evident. Change in ~nin When we chose t~¢ It~a~on and purc~¢d ~e facility in which wc now occupy, it was with th~ understandi~ lished our busine~ at ~s l~ation. For these obvious reasons and o~r subj¢¢fivu f;;lings reg~ding this project, we strongly urge the comnmi~ sion to OPPOSE the e~nge in ~~ for the chug¢ would greatly disturb businu~se~ already established the area. ~ you' hake uy ~uesHons, please ¢on~t us. Thank you for your consideration. inc r . Tony C. Kan 'Michael I Oeneral Manager ViG= President ___ Owner and ------ HI TECH PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS March 6, 1997 Planning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: Subarea Zoning Amendment Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We are one of the many companies in this area opposed to a Funeral Home & Crematory in Subarea 8. Let's keep the Funeral Homes & Crernatories in the areas that current zoning allows, i.e., Subareas 4, 6 and 16. Sincerely, President JB/tf Attachment 1074~ $Ett COURT · IA~iCHO CUCA~b~OI~I~7;]0-4834 · FAX: (909) 944-4883 UTO i R ESTORATORS, INC. COL~ON REPAIR CENTER ~arch ~. ~., ~. 997 R E C E IV E D MAR 12 1997 Planning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 City ot Rancho Cucarnonga Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Planning Division Dear Sir, I have received information regarding the proposed site location for adding funeral and crematory services to sub area 8 which would allow a funeral home and crematorium to be built on the south side of Arrow Highway. As a resident, business owner, and multiple property owner in Rancho Cucamonga I strongly oppose this usage to be permitted at the proposed location and will continue to solicit support against any permitted use. nte Corporate 8605 Utica Avenue * Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 * (909) 980-7421 TO: Planing Commission .City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Address: ~. 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ L 5 o~ ~ o u ~~o ~ c~~ %, ~ Phone: ~~Oq~ H~-I~O0 Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P O. Box 807 Rencho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: ,,~"'?'Z-~-'~.----~, ///¢/d~. ~ : > , , , / /- Signed: ~~~~ Date: 7 Signed: ~ ~. ~ Date: Signed: r,~~~.~,,,~.._ :~,~ Date: ~ "//' ':7' q k..,,t TO: Planing Commission City of Ranch0 Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opl~osed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: ~7-~ -"7"EX ,.7:::/u C__., . Address: · Phone: Signed: .~~, Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: · - Date: Signed: Date: TO: Planing Conemission City of Rancho Cucamonga P, O. Box 80 Rancho Cuc ~monga, CA 9172g Subject: SubAre, 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho CL, ;amonga Planning Commission: We the unclersigrled are oDOosed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral ~, Crematory Services. Company: ~.~.,.,"~ ~ '%,",,,-,-,.~ · % ,-,,,~ '~:~., ~,\-,~,,-,.~ Address: \~ '--.'~. '~,,,_,~,..,,, "'~.,.,,.,~,,, c,.~,,,, Phone: q,~-,"~ Sign C---,_"x .~Date: I Signe~:~~'-,., Signed:--,r, ate: TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Phone: ' ' ' Date: ....... U Date: Signed: -,---- , Dale: / Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Subjed: SubAreel 8 Zoning Ammendmen( Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commts~slorl: We the undersigned are O~oosed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Cremetory Services. Company: Address: . ~~- / / TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea '8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: Address: Phone: cgr',) P , Signed~2~~~"'~ . Date: ] - / h-la~-lO-97 04:48P P.Ol TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SuDArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are oo_o.Osed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Ctematory Services. / ~,,,,. Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for SuDarea 8 ,..., ,.,ll~.,-=-:--, ~ ,"'.-- ...... c'.':, ~, ,~, ,-,, a. , matory S"'rvi~-"'s Company: C A ~ .3 U Address: 8250 ?,-:0 RA,~iCH0 CUCA~0Xr:^ CA a~7~0 Phone: Sioned: , ~, ,.~,_ ?l~.,.,&,k,~ Da.:e: 3 - 07 - 97 - Signed· :L,L.L.L, -~¢b,... Date.--~ · .//../" Signed:?.,-',','~:jx.-%'--".------ Data: '~ - o 7 - --$, 7 /~-- o TO: Plank~g.Cornmission ' : City of Ranct~ Cucamanga ... .; P.O. Box 807 ! Ramho C.tJCaTt0nga, CA 91729 .... :" · Sub~ SubArea. 8 Zoning AzTm'mndment ' -.. · '- . .- -. Deer RartchO Cucarnonga Planning Commission:, · .'. ,. · . .-~ . .,~ ....... We tJle ;mdersigrled are pgposed to the proposed.~-d'e~ for SUbre'ca 8- · .. to Allow Ft.fiera! & Crematory Services. ..';... < ....-.-':- · . · .. .. · .-' : . .- , .... :~,, . . , , .... ,,- ... : ·. "" ;' ""' ' ' """ ' '~~i "' " ~ :........... ... ... . _ , . , , .,, .., / ... · ..,~,~- ·, · ., . .. .,: .. ... ,'.: ..... .... ~i?i. . . ' · L~/~ ~,~ ~ ~(~. ' ' "" ' ' I ' '. ..'. ' ' ' ., . 'l .:,.,: . : ..' '. ...... ---~. .:....: ,.. · ~! ~ ".' "" '!I';':'."" ' :'.- -- :..... ...':: ',...:->....:...:-. · .:..' .. :.:.... . :.. ..',~. · ...=~,. , ./ · - -. ,,...~.. .. . . ...~ .... . . -. -- _ .;. .. .. . . · . .: · .. · . .. . ~. · . . · :. . .... D~',..~.~' .,... :.. ,., . . . . '~ ., .. '.~ .; · .. ' . . · ~l : ""'.'.~. ' .. , ' ..:>., .....'.......~:.....',... .... . :..': :~ ......"S~:.:-, ~:!',.' . ~:.:-:.' - ~ ....... , -. ..:..~.:.:.: ..... ... :,.. .. :. . ~.,.' ... ; Z . ' ,,, ' .: :;:: :. Date~:. .. _.,..,,. _ :~ · ',. o ,, ...,.~ ~ . . · ,-' · . .. .. :..!..;.- . .' ... '; ; ' . .: I.i~. signed:. ,,;_. Dins::" '_.._ :. i:- - ' ,',' .., .' , ..... . . ~.:.. :., ... ,;,~ :: . · '. . . . ,:,'..: .. · . -; .. . :. ;,o..,. · . :".. . . : · . .. .. .. '. · .-"*;,.. - 'o, . - . .. . -, . . ,.;- . ,,.... .......::...': - , · ..-.-: .... · . ,'. :..' : , - -.. · ,.. . .. .. . . · · '~,. · :. TOT;L TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucam~)nga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammemctment Dear Rancho Cucamong,i Planning Commission: are We the undersigned ......Jjjjllj:to the proposecl zontng'.cl'tanlle.for Su~area 8 to Allow Funeral & Crem'atory. SerVices. ": .. _ _ ss :: : :s -. 's"- Address: ,, , ., .. J -~/'k ,4 ~,,v~,,~ ' ' ;' "' "'" " _'7.-/,~q/.~ ,/'Az. z,,~; ' ' i: ':' ' ..... ' '2' ~: ' . ' ')~'/%"~'~"" Sign ' " Date: , ~,.~ ,,~,*-,,...,t, Signed: _ _ , : .. . _ SO 5~,,d. SCSO_-I V!ZN3~3O 1;5S~585Et~5 58:8~ t. , , ,. iii TO: Plmnlng Comrni~ion City of Rencho Cucamonga i!l P,O. Box 807 : Renoho Ctr_,e~ga. CA 91729 "": 6ub/Q~; ~M~Ars. i Q Z~nin8 Ammandreamt '.,~' , Deer Ranoho Oucemonga Planning Cornmtslio¢"t: i !i ', ! i . We the unde.r~lgned ere ~ to the proposed zOning dqqlmla " tO Allow F~I & Cremetory Services. " !' ' · P~,rw:.~' %' [.-, - ',--% ~ %. " "; "" sv.,u: .. o,.e: '~: , .;, ~,': - _ ' .,ii:.. ../...-...,-~ ~ ' :, / 0 ; t' .i~, 'j ' ' " ".:.~,.~ '. : --~ TO: P!aning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga tRE C E / V E D P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 t,-,IAR i 0 7997 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment -',x ot aancho Cucamonga Planning DivEsion Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: Cont::inenmal Floo:'ing, Inc. Address: 10763 Bell Courm Rancho Cucamon~a C.~. 91730 Phone: ( 909 ) g~ I -3305 Signed: :--:--:--:--:--:--~:~ D~: ' Signe e: Signe ~ Date: / / TO: Plantng.. Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 ': Rencho CUcarnonga, CA 91729 SubjeCt:- SubAnae 8 Zoning Ammendrnent ,L:,.' -. Dear. Rane.,ho CUcemon~/m Planning Commission: .-. : . We th~..undersi.'gnsd are ~ to the proposal.Zoning ~ .for Subarea '~ "' ,. to Allow Funeral & P_.,rematory Services. ., .i.L .', .. ... ~ . ' ,: , . ~ ' ":' . ' C .ompany: ......... ,-, _:... _:-_--,-_ -.:-_. _-~ -_--_: 2;"' '; ..... ' ::'.i:: . ". Address:/'~ ~2,~ ~,t,,'~r_4~ -/~,~.:..:~ · . '.. Z_ _ . .;,. ....: · .. -. .: J'. ~ .,_- _.- _ L'L; '; ' /'/ ~' ':' ' : ' ' ~""" " ~z99~~'d2~'i.""': !i" "Phone:. -_._ ' -- -;':'~" ..':'Sigrlsd.;~. 7/ "~/ . .;: '..: , : . , . .. ,. ·"Slgn. edi get '.. L:._.___--_ ' · .. . . - ,~. :'. : ..' ,. . · , . , -!. '. ':~i' ':'. Signe~.. _ _ Date:_ .....:._. ,.~, ';. ,,, .. . _ _ ['.r: ?::. "Signed.L. Date:_: __ A .+ :.~ ..... "~':~i~. "" ':" " - . ~,, , '. , , . . . ~-~.'.- ....,..,,..v.' ;:}':"' ':' "':' gne~. Date: · ". · /'.S;I -- -"- , ':~--;" lib , ,.,,", !' ,L.'. " '* ~'- . . . , -: · " ~' .' · : · ... :~..' · .. ,. '. ,.. · "' '. · ,~.! CRy of Rancho Cuommongm ,'~, ... ,.,. , .... .. .... '~'" 8ubje~: 8ub~oo 8 ZontnQ Amrnendn'~c.~n~ ,: ..... :~:{ '.' ...~ .' . ',Dear Rsn~o .cuc~onga Planning cc.~rnmlssion: .". ,:.. ..,. · .... , ..,..... . , ':.' , , · :,~ .~.... ;' ' .... .., ..- ..... '. :.~ ~. ~.. , '. . .. ',. ., .'. .. ., ., ,: . , .3 , '{ ....; .. '..=' , ., -. ;..- . ' :~: , .. ,,. :~ ..... ~ , ... .. ;. ., , .~ ... . ..,.. . TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga "' P. O Box 807 / , ,' Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are o_.p_posed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company:-, Address: R.~nchn Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: Ptanlng .Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P, O. Box 807 RerK~o CucemonVa, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Arnmendrnent Dear Rlncho CLicamonga Planning Commteeton: We the.understgned are ~ to the proposed zoning '.d'lange for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. zzZ" 5:_ZZ E',~:',EE;:'..S ='-CNE xC. : 5855452L85 .":s~. L.2 LSS' .Z'::.Z''z'' =: Post-it" Fax NOte 7671 To TO: Ptaning Commission ~ ' ' '7 City of Rancho Cucamonga ~ P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are ~ to the proposed zoning change for Subarea'8 to Allow Funeral & Cremetory Services. Company: (~'," / ~, ~ c /-: ,d~:., //v' g,,._-- ,~, ,,dd,, //,/~. Address: / b ? .3'3 /--:-,~/d'o,,U C_,'-r:. ,; Phone: _ ~f ~ ,) .~' z-/'zF/-- ef~oS Signed: _~zZZ¢,.: ~. o_ _-.n~.~ Date2 ~//0/2 ? .,,-,,~ Signed: Date: _ Signed: Date: TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: Lowell S. Hill Enterprises Address: 8555 Red Oak Street Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Phone: (909) 941-8785 / TO: Planthg Commission Oily of Ranc~qo Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho/CUcamonga, CA 9i 729 SUBject: SubArea B Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho CUcarnonga Planning Coinmission: We the underslgned are pppose.d, to the proposed zooming dta~tl- f,- Subarea ' ": ' to AII~ Funeral & Cremalo~ Se~ices. F~C. rd: Ir;LFqI'JD F__/"IPIRE ~,IjILE:ERS PHI'~I. IE HO, : 9Er9 '?45 24-_':b3 r. laf-, iD 1'9'97 0,1,: 16,Pr,1 ~1'24,':I,~8 05:2G ;PO', T,.~ 744",-;,- p.e2 - I' -; TO: Ptaning Commission .~ . City of Rancho Cucamonga  P.O. Box 807 i 7: Rancho Oucamonga, CA 91729 "; Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment .. : ;,,." , ! · ;'; Dear Rencho CLtcamonga Planning Commission: p ,,: We the .undersigned-~re ~ to the proposed zoning c~ange for Substea 8 . {o Allow Funeral & Cramstory Services. ! i;~:i::Z Address: ,' ;':"' /"' ...... d ' " .:.:!' . . ~,,~, ~:'~ "' Signed:. , E~-,L, Dal. e: · ~: , /~, -- - -. ..... ::'~'!' Sign Date: ~ '_~_ ' '~i Sig . ~ Date: ~_,_~__7_//2__' _ _ .. ,..;~: f;. J j Signed: . Date: ..... )l!~. . . ·"' . Signed: Date: .: :' .,,:: ~.... TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P,O. Box 8O7 MiTre Z 2 199/ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Cf~,y ~anRnaTn~l%:ucarnO v,~bn riga Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for SuDarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Signed: ,~ ,.- _ -__. Date: ,~ "' ~, -'- d277  .~...~ ',-.' //, Signed:_ ~._ 4...,--.~< _.,._ Date: xTM /' J Sign Date: ~'-' ")-' :2 ,'77 >!~-2~-~? 14,BS FROM,J&J INT/DEFLOODMASTS~ INC %D,SZSS443ZSS P~GE TO: Ptaning Commis,~ion City of Pancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are o~oDose~, to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Cremetory Services. Companyi_j a J Inte..riors/D.eFl°°dMaster Address: 10681 Pullman Court Rancho Cucamonqa, CA 9! 730 Phone: (909)944-7925 Signed: \., ~..~L ~,,~ Q_~..~-.-~--~ Date: Signed: ~~~' Date: Signed: ~ Date: . , TO: Pianing Commission City nf Rancho Cuc;~monga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject' SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment D~,ar Ranch0 Cucamonga Planning Commission: W,q the undersigned are ~ to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 tO Allow Funeral & Crematory Servi[:~. Signed: ,,, Date: Signed: .... Date: .... Signed: Date: Signed: [Date: ._ : _ __ TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Signed: f~~.,~_z . .. - Date: ~. ~ . C--I '7 Signed: ~~::)~~..P Date: g-":2 ' ~ "7 Signe ~ ~Z/_-c-f ~ Date: ,_.,2_ 7- '9 7 - / SignedJ',.~z,,,2.~./'~ Date: '~ --' Z"' ~ ? · ~,~~~T_~~,~- 7- ~2 TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. --' LENZCO Company: ~-,~nl lt"'T~ C/"~l~ I1~.11""~! I~'TI~V I I,'~l~ime~V'~m~lV I Vl'~ II11~lrte/V ll~,l 10722 Arrow ~ f 412 Address: Ran<;ho CVcamonaa. CA 9]720. Phone: Signed: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: /I6> r'l;~'. ',O. L'_:'_~7 2:-:EFt'. P Z F~.:rl: r'!~'3TE~ F;-4tl :::¢2_F.P PHOfIE riO. : '_'-tD'? ?:37 TO: PIerCing,. Commission .~ Ran~o C~monge, CA 91729 .. -... ~~~~ Su~ect: SUb~a 8 Zoning Ammendmnt , .. .. Demr R~~ CU~monga Planning Commission; .... , :- .. .... ~,'; ~ , . '.'. . . ::..'..,,~.......- : .... .;'.~ . .--., .-...~..-.:. , ..,..~, .....'. :. . ,. ...:. .-.;~ ..... ~,r .~ ~. , . ~ . · . . .~ .-.. .,. ,. ,. , ., ~C~O CUC~O~CA, CA 9/730~ , . : ..... . .. ._ ~ rZ . . . -~..,.: .. ':~. ..~;~~:.... (909)987-9667 .... · ". .. ' :; '. . . · . .....,...,:, . :-~. , t:~' . .'' '· ,.<; .:"..........' -.~ "' , .. .~ ..~ . ..~.-,....... :.-..-/ ..~" .- ........ . -'~' .' . ... . ~.~ :::..,"~. ,: .. ,-., . ,~ ~ · . .... ; ,.~..-,-~ .. - TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company:/~fer [fir / ~zf,',~/ ~ c. :I~,,. / / Signed: ~~~~ Date: 97 Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: Ptaning Commission City of Rsncho Cuc,.monga P.O. Box 807 Ranct~o Cucamonga. CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancbo Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Address: W-AYr_,gO CvCblvO g:~ CA. G r T,~ Signed: Date: 'Signed: Date: ~,Iar-06-97 O2:OgP NUGEN INS. SER. 909 941 9453 P.O1 TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamong., CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are ~DDQSecl tO the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Atlow Funeral & Cremetory Services. Address: .... ,X::r;,y'.~':/4'~.'.''' ~-:.,.r..-f/'/,.'~.'-.:,f.-~:;. ~."Z.~,'~'.~ Phone: . Signed: ~ Date: '7" Signed: ":"/' Dal:e: ': ....~, - d/; ,-7.. · Sigr'~.d: Date: //d TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Arnmendment Deer Rancho CLicamonga Planning Commission: ;' We the, undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning ~ fet 8uberee 8 !!" to AlloW Funeral'& Crematory Services. 'Phone: ~' ~ ? "E ,,c- 6 O ~! !!~ Signed: ? ' """'Date: -? 0 : ::+:. Signed: Date: lJ' .. I. "*' .;, · . TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Ranct~o Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned ~re 9.P_EM to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: Par~t: Machine Co., Inc. Address: 10824 Edison Court Rancho Cuba, CA 91730 Phone: ( 909 ) 484-3600 - TO: Praning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucarnonga Planning Commission; We the undersigned are .opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea '8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. - ~ ' ' g' ~ ' · Signed: J~¢ ~~, Date: ~-~t- ~Z.. ' ~ - ' [ ' ' //7 TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Address: /o9 2] ~~ ~ Phone: ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ? - S ~ ~ C Signed: ~ d,-,,, ~ Date: _.:I'---- ~ -- '¢ 7 Signed: '/2~ Date: 23 -- br-f' 22 Signed: ~ ~ Date: ,.Z - "7--- ~"7 Signed: /'~,2,-- ._~~ Date: Signed: Date: :!a."',f,".~: 'Commission C;t'.,' "': R.ancho r'uca.m,cr'za P.O.B.sx 907 Ranc~o Cucamonca. CA 91729 Subject: Su;~Area 5 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are _opposed to ihe proposed zoning change for Subarea to Allow Funeral & Crema~or',/Services. co,-,-,o ~, n ~ a, ,/,b a ',-',,--- . a ,y: · -. bf'n.C~ h~ ~ r z. / ..J Signed: Date: ~"c,~.j~ ///' "" ~:, L,,f ' 2 //,. ! ' TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: /""~ ~_ ~-, .; c~_2 .~ Address: ""7~ ~ rift, l, ~">,~ ,~ Tr-r,/' ( ~ Sign .... ~ ,~ ,,/ Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: /.26) TO: P!aning Commission City of Rancho Cucar'n~anga P.O. Box 807 Rancbo Cucamonga. CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Address: ./Q / dq, /__ _JJ.,b ~ ~ (, ..~ ~ . Phone: ('7, ~/3~$7 / ~ y Signed:~__ _~ Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: Planing Commission CiTy of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Raancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Sul~ject: SuDArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are ooooaed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea to Allow Funeral & Cramstory Services. Company: .~.~.c,}c tf-At~ 3 E!Nt~NC. iAc., Address: Phone: Signed: Date: Signed: ~ Date: d~:~)~.Z/~ ' Signe ~ Data: si.,, _ _ 'ed.'~ · ~, ., ...... ~-.... .... , ..... : ..., .., ... . .. ~= _' ' _ . . . . . :,':.-' .,'~ ",: .:":=r.. %":"'~ ' ' "': "', .j'. . .. ~J"TJi . . .. ,. i . TO: Plfi'~ieg'. ~ion .' ;. "i. '." ~' ' cu~. el ~i~"C~u~m ng~ ...... "" "' ....."' "' ~:i~,i~:.~;~..~:.:.-=.. ......,.. ....· .... - ...........: ~.. . ~ i:;~g~, CAg~ ~,~g '.,,:'.:. ~. ;.' :,:',..: ;. .:: ........ ! . : ~', : . . .,' .. . · , . · . i i~:~!~',s.b~ .~.~,~.~.e Zo.~ k,.,~.d.~.,.:.,:....: :.,..,.~ ........:. :,. ..',, ~ " . . .. , , , ... " ' D~.....R-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_~~, OUcamgega Plannlnl;I gammissi~.~:... .:: ,; .:,~.; ~. ~.. :, ... .,. .- . .. ..' . . . · .:. .'. · . . .... .,, ""' "" . l~O .,B.~' i~1.i.~[-iil & Or~m~len/$e~'Vk~s. . . ..~.i.'~· ..,~......!:'~.:::.~/. ~. :. ...... !.1 :.~; ' ' . .: . , ..:.. .':. '., ..,. .... :: ., , .. · ':'=''... . , . .~... . .... . ......~. ~ · ~ ..- ~ _ ..-~- . ~-;~..~ ,.....: · .: .. . . ... . . . .;,,~~.:. . . .......'~.'.'. ~ ' "'. ~n~.~ .. ~~~~ ....~..~~'~...'~"."~'::.~:.~.~..~.:~.".": ,..,~:"-'::~".~'-""' :,~~ .'-'.=~'_ .qoq- q~l-~~ ".'. ::~[:4~.' :'~ ::. ~:..~-?',.'..~.':~,'.'.'.-.~. ',.... . . , · ....... :..: , '.~:, . ..: .' :. ','. . . :: .. .'~,.'.: .,,.~.~:~,'..'~:-.:... , .... . ..... ...:..... ...-;...::' , .:': ~,~ '.. .....'.. :...~...'.:.... %: '.'...'....~~-~ ~- -, ~ ..... ~ ' .~ :.,.....~...:....:=..:.~..... . ..,.:~..:S'. ....... .... .:....:. · .. .. .... . ~ . ., .. . · ..~%. . ...:..,.. ,· :-:... % ~:~,.~/~ : .::'.-. -.. . .' : . , ~,. .?. : ... ..- -- , -- , _~., ~ . '.' . .: ,. ,· ...~. :.~=.' ~...-. ..~..,' .L.~-...,~,........ . ,':."~.' '-... ~ .. - .. .. . . -. .. . ~..: ... :-,~.' ... : . =: ..., .-..... .. , .: ...... J""'~:"~ " .~.. " g~l~." ~"~' " '~ " :"' .. , . . .: .. . ... . .... .. . ..... .-:-....= :~.(,... ,. : ..· :.~ · ... : '~ . ..: .:' ...? . . ... , .. .. . . .. . .. . ~.'.,- ,:'~ ..~ . ...~. · ..... : ~ · ~ ': -. ., , . ~ .... .. .. .. . .... . , · . .. . - ~i~' g~'..' ..... ~" "" ' "~:' :' "' .~' ':' ~.- .: ... ~. '.... . ..., .:.,. :. , . . ~ . . ...... . ._ · ...,, .... '_ .~ .' .~. :..~ .... ~.,': ".: ' 't' , .~. · . . ,-,' ? ,,.-' *-,' .." .' . .. ,.. ~ .. .. ....... ..~... ~...,.... ...: .. ~::.. .' .. . ~.~- . . . . :,-:,. ';t' .: ' ' "' ' '. ~' ~ ' - · . ..-. . .. . .,,.. . ' : . .; . ... . . .: . ~ · :: ~: .': ~.~. ., . :~3 ..":" ':,, ...,..~. "".,.,~. ...=,'~ :..-....-....':.,.... ..'. '.~: :'~: . ~:. ~. -..: :. ' .....<,..... , . . .'. ~ ,j- - . ~=~:.~- ...: .,... ::.........~,:.....~.C. . . · .~:.....:. :. . ........-... ,..:. :"' ~",~. '..: .' "' '..' ':" .~.~,. ':':'~.'.~ ': , -'L" , ' :~ ": ."' "' ".": ""~ """::~'. ,~.~:.. : . ~. .: .,, .': :~.~:~.:~ :~?,.~ ~.~'%......~ ,. .... :.. ~.. ·:..:...~. ~..:.. ~:,.:.'. ..' .. :....(~.~'..~.:;~':-(:.' :,: .....; '~.'.... ::'.. .:. ..-: ...............~:c: ....;~ .~... ...:...... .:...~-~'..~. ~....''..:,..~..... .. '" . '%"' ". ":.~:" ~" "~." '1 . . ., -, : .~ '. · ~ "'~: :. : ~.' . ..~. : .. .. ,. , ..,. '.~ :...... :':.' '.~':'%t ".. %:: ::.' .': . .. .~ .. - '. .. . · . ..' .. ':. ~ . 7: : ·. .'~ '~ . :;... · . ....: .'. ~ '.~ TQT~L P. B2 TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Sign . _ Date: Signed: ~~ z--//~ TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. U iZ_ne - ' . a: O ~ Signed: ~/~ Date: 5 - / ~ - Y 7 Signed: J~ ~~ Date: 3'/a ' ]J / %~I Signed~ ~e: G' I~ -~ ? 1t5 TO: Planing Commission City of Ranctto Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 SulJject: SulDArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the uncler$igned ~re 9M to the proposed zoning change for SuDarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company:_ :~ TRI-BEST VISUAL DISPLAY PRODUCTS Address: 8620 RED OAK STREET. RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CAL. 91 730 Phorle'. 9 980-9982 Signed: : 3 / 6 / 9 7 CLYDE HELTON, PRESIDENT Signed: _-_ -_ Date: Signed: _ : ...... Date: Signed: ..... _-: Date: ..... Signed: ........ Date: IT APPEARS TMA~ TM~S PROJECT WILL B~ LOCATED NEXT TO A RESTAURANT CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTI~UCTION.'WHAT INPACT DOES THIS HAVE ON OWNER? TO: Planjng Commission City of Ranone Cucamonga P. 0. Box 807 Ranc~o Cucamonga, CA g172g Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are OPPO.eed to the proposed zoning change far SuParea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematoty Services. , '.,~/// ' _Z~..,).4, .,.~:/j:, L: ' / ..... ~, ._ signga: Signed:: Date: Date: TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancl3o Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. m Signed: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: mmmt · Newest high temperature technology handle all caskets alike. controlled air or starved air incineration. · High temperature, heavy duty refractory Guaranteed smokeless and odorless. materials throughout. Easy loading, simple cremains removal. · Automatic cycle time and temperature · Automatic gas burners with controls in controls on main burner and afarburner. accordance with the latest safety · Factory assembled and tested. requirements. · Two year written guarantee furnished with · Top-fired burners that make it possible toevery unit. CREMATORY EQUIPMENT CO. DONALD L. RIDGEWAY 8130 ALLPORT AVE _' SA:NTA FE SPRINGS. CA (3!8) ~,a3-5'2~, ;:X: (3]0)693-5601 - / Cx: t /1' RESOLUTION NO. 97 - Z 5 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-01, TO ADD FUNERAL AND CREMATORY SERVICES AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USE IN SUBAREA 8, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. Miller Family and Associates has filed an application for Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment No. 97-01, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereina~er in this Resolution, the subject Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 1 lth day of December 1996, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga initiated this amendment through minute action. 3. On the 11th day of March 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Pan A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on March 11, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The appticatic}n applies to property located within the City; and b. The proposed amendment wii~ not have a significant impact on the environment: and c. The proposed amendment will allow refinement of the list of aIR. owed uses in Subarea 8. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upc~ the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the ind',,strial Area Specific Plan or the General Plan and w{[l provide for devejopment, 'within Subarea 8, in a manner consistent with the Industr/al Area Specific D!an a~a t~e General P!an and with related development; and /J/_j ~ ~NZNG CO ISSION RESOLUTION NO. 97 .s iSPA 97-01 - MILLER FAMILY & ASSOCIATES March 11.1997 Page 2 b. This amendment promotes the goals and objectives of the Industrial Area Specific Plan; and c. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and d. The subject application is consistent with the objectives of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, and the purposes of Subarea 8; and e. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that the amendment identified in this Resolution is not defined as a project and is therefore exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Sections 15061 b. 1 and 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment No. 97-01, amending Table II1-1 and page IV-54 as attached. 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF MARCH 1997. PLANNIN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: . ATTEST: Dan"~an, Act' ~ecretary I, Dan Coleman, Acting Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 11 th day of March 1997, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, BETHEL, IdAC[AS NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: I~ICN~.EL, TOLSTOY /J/ ORDINANCE NO...~ 7V AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING INDUSTRIALAREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-01 TO ADD FUNERAL AND CREMATORY SERVICES AS A CONDITIONALLY PERMI'I'FED USE IN SUBAREA 8 OF THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. Miller Family and Associates, has filed an application for Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment No. 97-01 as described in the title of this Ordinance. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the subject Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On March 11, lg97, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. On April 17, 1997, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and ordained by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that 'all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing on April 17, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to all properties within Subarea 8 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan; and b. The properties to the north and west fall within Subarea 7 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan which is a mixture of vacant parcels and developed with various commercial and office buildings. The properties to the east fall within Subareas 14 and 15 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the Medium Residential District of the Etiwanda Specific Plan and are vacant and developed with industrial buildings and a multifamily complex. The properties to the south fall within Subareas 9, 14, and 15 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan and are vacant and developed with various industrial uses; and c. The application proposes to make Funeral Homes and Crematory Services a conditionally permitted use in Subarea 8. d. Subarea 8 is intended for a broad range of General Industrial activities and service uses. Subarea 8 also serves as a transition area from the Heavy Industrial area to the south. e. The Industrial Area Specific Plan establishes Class B Industrial Performance Standards for Subarea 8 which are intended "to provide for uses whose operational needs may produce noise, vibration, particulate matter and air contaminants, odors, or humidity, heat, and CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. tSPA 97-01 - MILLER FAMILY & ASSOC. April 17.1997 Page 2 glare which cannot be mitigated sufficiently to meet the Class A standards." These standards are designed to protect uses on adjoining sites from effects which could adversely affect their functional and economic viability. In addition to compliance with Air Quality Management District standards, all Funeral Homes and Crematories shall be operated so as not to emit odors, heat, particulate matter, or air contaminants which are readily detectable without instruments by the average person beyond any lot line of the lot containing said uses. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The application does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the Industrial Area Specific Plan or the General Plan and will provide development, within Subarea 8, in a manner consistent with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the General Plan and with related development, and b. The application promotes the goals and objectives of the Industrial Area Specific Plan; and c. The application will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and d. The application is consistent with the objectives of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, and the purposes of Subarea 8; and e. The application is in conformance with the General Plan; and 4. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the amendment identified in this Ordinance is not defined as a project and is therefore exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Sections 15061 b. 1 and 15378 of the State CEQA Guidelines. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Council hereby approves Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment No. 97-01, amending Table II1-1 and Part IV, Subarea 8, Conditional Uses listing as attached. 6. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this ordinance and shall cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage at least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. b,,jzestrkd .4rec~ Sflecific PI~ Part T~B~E Ill4 (Continuo~) ~ND USE IP GI GI GI GI fGI IP IP GI MI/H GI GI IP GI GI fill IP IP MU/O~ USE ~PES SUBAREAS HO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ~11 12 13 14 15 16 17 COMMERCIAL Adult Entertainment A A A A A A A A A A Agricultural/Nurse~ Supplies & Seaices P p p p p p p p AnimalCare C C C C C C C C Automotive Fleet Storage C C C C P C C P Automotive Rental p p p p p p p p p Automotive/Light Truck Repair - Minor p p p p p p p p p Automotive~ruck Repair - Major P C Automitive Sales and Leasing C C C Automotive Seaice Cou~ P P P P C P P p p Automotive Seaice Station C C C C C C C C C C C C Building Contractor's O~ce &Yards P p Building Contractor's Storage Yard P P Building Maintenance Se~ices p Building & Light Equipment Supplies & Sales Business Supply Retail & Se~ices P" P p p p p p p p p p p p Business Suppo~ Se~ices P · Communication Se~ices P P P p p p p p p p p p p p p p Convenience Sales & Sere/cos C *~ C C P P C C C C C C Ente~ainment C C C C C C C C Extensive Impact Commercial C C C C Fast Food Sales C* C C C C C C C Financial. Insurance &Real Estate Se~ices P P P P P P P C P C C P P ~& B~erage Sales C * C C C C C ~ C C C Heavy Equipment Sales &Rentals C C C C Hotel/Motel Indoor WholesaletRetail Commercial C C C C C C C Laund~ Se~ices P p Medical/Health Care Seaices p P p p p p Personal Seaices C · C P P P P D C P P P Petroleum Products Storage C C C C C C Recreation Facilities C C C C C C C P C C P P p Repair Se~ices P P C P P P P P P P P C Restaurants P p p p D p p p Restaurants with Bar or Ente~ainment C C C C C C C C Specialty Building Supplies &Home Improvement P D C Warehouse-Style Retail Merchandising "' C NOTES: IP - Industrial Park P - Pertained Use HO - Haven Avenue Overlay District C - Conditionally Petitted Use GI - General Industrial ~ - Non-marked Uses nat pertained MI/HI - Minimum Impact Heavy Industrial A - Adult Ente~ainment Zoning Permit Required HI - Heavy Industrial * - Refer to Haven Avenue Overlay District far additional restnotions MU/OS - Mixed Use/Open Space "' - Refer ta Subarea 12 Special Considerations for additional restrictions This is an except from the Indust~al Amp Specific Plan (ISP). Please refer to Table 111-2 of the definitions. If you need help in determining the land use type of a business. p/ease contact the ~fanning Divisjon at (~09) 477-27~. II I-4 Revised 11 /ndz~strial .4recs Spec!t~c Plcsn Part/t:'C Subarecz ~ SUBAREA 8 LAND USE DESIGNATION General Industrial PRIMARY FUNCTION This area functions to provide for General Industrial activities and to assure for a transition area from the Heavy Industrial category located north of this subarea. North of Arrow Route and west of Milliken Avenue, the industrial uses should be allowed to continue and expand with all service according to the development standards of the plan. Subarea 8 extends north of Arrow Route approximately 1,000 feet east of Cleveland Avenue to the east Plan boundary, including a portion south of Arrow Route along the eastern Plan boundary. PERMITTED USES Custom Manufacturing Light Manufacturing Research Services Public Storage Light Wholesale, Storage and Distribution Medium Wholesale, Storage and Distribution Agricultural/Nursery Supplies and Services Automotive/Light Truck Repair-Minor Automotive/Truck Repair-Major Building Contractor's Offices and Yards Building Maintenance Services Building Supplies and Light Equipment Sales Business Supply Retail Sales and Services Business Support Services Collection Facilities Communication Services Eating and Drinking Establishments Laundry Services Recreation Facilities Repair Services Administrative Civic Services Flood Control/Utility Corridor Administrative and Office Professional/Design Services Financial, Insurance, and Real Estate Services Medical/Health Care Services Personal Services Adult Entertainment (') 'Adult Enter-', --~mt Zoning Permit required. IV-52 11/96 bzjustrial .4tea SFeci/~c P/an Part [T [ Subre'ca 3 CONDITIONAL USES Medium Manufacturing Animal Care Automotive Fleet Storage Automotive Service Station Entertainment Fast Food Sales Food and Beverage Sales Heavy Equipment Sales and Rentals Personal Services Processing Facilities Petroleum Products Storage Public Assembly Public Safety and Utility Services Religious Assembly Convention Centers Day Care Centers Schools Indoor Wholesale/Retail Commercial Automobile Service Court ACCESS AND CIRCULATION 120-foot Right-Of-Way - Day Creek Boulevard - Mitliken Avenue 94 ft. 120 ft. ROW IV-53 11/96 CITY OF RANCH0 CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 17, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 96-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the radio and television antenna regulations in all zones to be consistent with Federal Communications Commission recent regulations. CONSIDERATION OF INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 96-04 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the radio and television antenna regulations in all industrial zones to be consistent with Federal Communications Commission recent regulations. CONSIDERATION OF SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 96-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -. A request to amend the radio and television antenna regulations to be consistent with Federal Communications Commission recent regulations. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends approval of all three amendments through adoption of the attached Ordinance. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS These amendments are necessary due to recent changes in the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules for radio and television reception. The proposed changes to the City of Rancho Cucamonga's regulations have been carefully drafted by the City Attorney to comply w~h the Federal Communications Commission regulations. The Ordinance is a comprehensive set of regulations for all radio, television, and satellite dish antennas, excepting amateur radio~ and citizen's band antennas. A detailed explanation of the proposed regulations is contained in the attached Planning Commission staff report. ~ The Planning Commission is working on a separate amateur radio ordinance at the request of local amateur radio operators. 7 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DCA 96-01, SPA 96-04, SPA 96-01 - CITY OF RC April 17, 1997 Page 2 FACTS FOR FINDING The facts listed in Planning Commission Resolution No. 97-14 support the requisite findings in support of these amendments. CORRESPONDENCE This item was advertized as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper. No correspondence has been received regarding this item. Respectfully submitted, er City Planner BB:DC/mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Planning Commission Staff Report dated March 11, 1997 Exhibit "B" - Planning Commission Minutes dated March 11, 1997 Exhibit "C" - Planning Commission Resolution 97-14 Ordinance CITY OF RANCHO CUCA,MONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: March 11, 1997 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 96-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOGNA - A request to amend the satellite dish antenna regulations in all zones to be consistent with Federal Communications Commission recent regulations. (Continued from October 9, November 13, and December 11, 1996, and February 12, 1997). INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 96-04 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the satellite dish antenna regulations in all zones to be consistent with Federal Communications Commission recent regulations. (Continued from October 9, November 13, and December 11, 1996, and February 12, 1997). SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 96-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the satellite dish antenna regulations to be consistent with Federal Communications Commission recent regulations. (Continued from October 9, November 13, and December 11, 1996, and February 12, 1997). BACKGROUND: As a result of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, The Federal Communications Commission adopted new regulations affecting municipal regulation of satellite dishes and other antennas. Essentially, the Federal Communications Commission rules preempt local control of satellite dish antennas 2 meters or less in diameter in Commercial or Industrial Zones, and 1 meter or less in diameter in Residential and all other zones. Also, the Federal Communications Commission rules allow limited "reasonable" local control of larger antennas. A "reasonable" regulation is one which "has a clearly defined health, safety, or aesthetic objective without unnessarily burdening the Federal interests in ensuring access to satellite services and in promoting fair and effective competition among competing communications service providers." The Federal Communications Commission has indicated that aestfietic concerns alone, or fear of electric and magnetic fields "EMFs" does not constitute a reasonable basis for regulation. Local regulations may not favor one type of television reception over another. ANALYSIS: The City Attorney's office has drafted an Ordinance consistent with the Federal Communication Commission's recent rule making. The Ordinance is a comprehensive set of regulations for all radio, television, and satellite dish antennas, excepting amateur radio and citizen's band antennas. The Ordinance establishes the rear yard as the preferred location for such PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DCA 96-01, SPA 96-04, SPA 96-01 - CITY OF RC March 11, 1997 Page 2 antennas, with the side yards as the secondary choice, and a permit process (Minor Development Review) where it becomes necessary for an antenna to be mounted in a front yard or on a roof. Screening requirements are imposed, excepting satellite dish antennas 2 meters or less in diameter in Commercial or Industrial zones, and 1 meter or less in diameter in residential and all other zones. The attached table summarizes our current and proposed regulations (Exhibit "A"). ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The amendments are exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15061 (b)(3). CORRESPONDENCE: This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution recommending approval of the Ordinance. Brad Buller City Planner BB:DC:mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Table of Current and Proposed Regulations Resolution Recommending Approval Ordinance SUMMARY OF ANTENNA REGULATIONS Residential Zones Maximum Antenna Height 50 feet when in use 10 feet above peak roof line (35 feet when not in use) Maximum Size 1 meter if roof mounted; 10 feet 6 inches in diameter Unlimited if ground mounted Maximum Number Unlimited Unlimited if antenna is < 20 s.f. in area; Two if antenna is > 20 s.f. in area Location Not allowed in any setback 1. Not allowed in any setback area area (front, rear, or side) (front, rear, or side); and 2. Antennas <20 s.f. allowed in rear or side yard or on roof. Allowed in front yard with permit *; and 3. Antennas >20 s.f. allowed in rear yard. Allowed in front or side yard or on roof with permit * Screening Required? Yes if antenna is >1 meter dia. Yes if antenna is > 20 s.f. in area or in front yard Permit * Required? Yes if antenna is >1 meter dia. Varies (see Location above) Commercial i Industrial Zones Maximum Antenna Height 55 feet (40 feet within 100 feet 10 feet above peak roof line of residential zone) / 75 feet in industrial unless approved with CUP Maximum Size Unlimited 10 feet 6 inches in diameter Maximum Number Unlimited Unlimited Location No limitation 1. Not allowed in any setback area (front, rear, or side); and 2. Antennas <20 s.f. allowed in rear or side yard or on roof. Allowed in front yard with permit *; and 3. Antennas >20 s.f. atlowed in rear yard. Allowed in front or side yard or on roof with permit * Screening Required? Yes Yes if antenna is > 20 s.f. in area or in front yard Permit * Required? Yes Varies (see Location above) · Permit means approval of a Minor Development Review application. Exhibit "A" /_7// ~-xx-~"~ / arker indicated he had heard there may be additional information made available to the Planning Co ' ' the matter. He supported the request for a continuance. It It It It It B. DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 96-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the satellite dish antenna regulations in all zones to be consistent with Federal Communications Commission recent regulations. C. INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC P!,.AN AMENDMENT 96-04 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the satellite dish antenna regulations in all zones to be consistent with Federal Communications Commission recent regulations. D. SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 96-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the satellite dish antenna regulations to be consistent with Federal Communications Commission recent regulations. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Bethel asked if dish antennas can be radio transmitters. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, confirmed they can be. He indicated that in non-residential areas they also are used as up-links to allow inventory tracking, etc. He stated that was the principal reason the law calls for allowing antennas up to 2 meters in non-residential areas while allowing a limitation of 1 meter in residential areas. Commissioner Bethel stated that it appears cities cannot prevent such antennas merely on the basis of aesthetics. Mr. Hanson confirmed that was correct. He said that the Federal Communications Commission has also extended the rules so that private developments cannot prohibit them even if they violate CC&Rs. Commissioner Bethel asked if the proposed regulations will help in keeping out huge dishes. Mr. Hanson observed that antennas cannot be more than 10 feet 6 inches in diameter and cannot be located more than 10 feet above the peak roof line. Chairman Barker opened the pubiic headng. There were no comments, and he closed the hearing. Commissioner Bethel stated he wished the City had more control over dishes because he feels visual pollution is as bad as other types. He thought the proposed regulations would help control the problem. Motion: Moved by Bethe! ~'~econded by Macias, to adopt the resolution recommending approval of Development Cc -~nar' .:t 96-01, Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 96-04, and Subarea ~ 3 Specific :--., Amenciment 96-01. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: ~ .... :2,~, BETHEL, MACIAS NOES: :4ONE ABSENT: MCNIEL, TOLSTOY - carried Planning Commission Minutes -2- March 11, 1997 /FJ /T RESOLUTION NO. 97- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT 96-01, INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 96-04, AND SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 96-01, PERTAINING TO THE REGULATION OF RADIO AND TELEVISION ANTENNAS, INCLUDING SATELLITE DISH ANTENNAS, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for the amendments described in the title of this Resolution. Hereina~er in this Resolution, the subject Development Code, Industrial Area Specific Plan, and Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendments are referred to as "the application." 2. On the 9th day of October, and continuing to November 13, and December 11, 1996, and February 12, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga continued said hearing. 3. On the 1 l th day of March 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga concluded said hearing. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on October 9, 1996, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to prope~y located within the City; and b. The proposed amendments will not have a significant impact on the environment. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. These amendments do not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and b. These amendments promote the goals and oDjectives of the Development Code; and ,, /,-/Z % \T C" PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. -~7-!4 DCA 96-01, ISPA 96-04, & SUBAREA 18 AMEND. 96-01 - CITY OF R.C. ,March 11, 1997 Page 2 c. The proposed amendments will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and d. The subject application is consistent with the objectives the Development Code; and e. The proposed amendments are in conformance with the General Plan. 4. This Commission hereby finds that the project has been prepared and reviewed in compliance with the Califomia Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, and further, specifically finds that based upon substantial evidence, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the proposed amendments will have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, the proposed amendments are exempt pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061(b)(3). 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1.2, 3, and 4 above, this Commission hereby recommends approval of Development Code Amendment No. 96-01, Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 96-04, and Subarea 18 Specific Plan Amendment 96-01 as shown in the Ordinance attached hereto as Exhibit "A." 6. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF MARCH 1997. PLANNING HE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: avid ~arker, rman ATTEST: ng Secretary I, Dan Coleman. Acting Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced. passed. and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 1 lth day of March 1997, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, BETHEL, NC, :ES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE A-2, UriNT: COMMISSIONERS: ~',ICNJ:EL, TOLSTOY /fly ORDINANCE NO. .-.Dr 7 _:~ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 17 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL CODE; PART III, SECTION IV.A.5 OF THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN; AND SECTION 5.4 (PAGE 5-30) OF THE SUBAREA 18 SPECIFIC PLAN, PERTAINING TO THE REGULATION OF RADIO AND TELEVISION ANTENNAS, INCLUDING SATELLITE DISH ANTENNAS. A. Recitals. 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has heretofore conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on March 11, 1997, as required by law, and has recommended the adoption of this Ordinance as set forth below. 2. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has heretofore conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing on April 17, 1997, as required by law, with respect to the adoption of this Ordinance. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the Cjty of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby find and ordain as follows: SECTION 1: In all respects as set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance. SECTION 2: The City Council hereby finds and determined that the adoption of this Ordinance is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of Division 6 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. SECTION 3: The modifications to Title 17 and various specific and community plans, as set forth herein, are in conformance with the City's General Plan. SECTION 4: Section IV.A.5 of Part III of the Industrial Area Specific Plan is hereby amended by deletion of the words "satellite dish antennas," wherever the same shall appear. SECTION 5: Section 5.4 (Page 5-30) of the Subarea 18 Specific Plan is hereby amended by deletion of the words "satellite dish antennas," wherever the same shall appear. SECTION 6: Section 17.06.020.C.5 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended to read, in words and figures, as follows: 5. The construction and/or placement of silos, antennas not regulated by Chapter 17.26, water tanks, roof or ground- mounted equipment visible from public view, or similar structures and equipment as determined by the City Planner; / CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DCA 96-01, ISPA 96-04, & SUBAREA 18 AMEND. 96-01 - CITY OF R.C. April 17, 1997 Page 2 SECTION 7: Section 17.08.060.1.4. of Chapter 17.08 of Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby repealed. SECTION 8: A new Chapter 17.26 is hereby added to Title 17 ofthe Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code to read, in words and figures, as follows: Chapter 17.26 REGULATION OF TELEVISION, SATELLITE DISH, .d.~VD RADIO ANTENNAS IN ALL ZONES Sections: 17.26.010 Purpose. 17.26.020 Definitions. 17.26.030 Antennas less than 20 square feet in surface area. 17.26.040 Antennas 20 square feet or greater in surface area. 17.26.050 Screening required. 17.26.060 Conditions and restrictions applicable to all antenna installations. 17.26.070 Antenna permit application. 17.26.080 Antenna placement in non-residential zones. Section 17.26.010 - Purpose. Consistent with applicable federal regulations, including the limited preemption created by the Federal Communications Commission as to local regulation of satellite dish antennas, this Chapter is designed to provide local regulation of television, satellite dish, and radio antennas in order to promote and protect the health, safety, and welfare of the people of the City by minimizing significant visual impacts resulting from, and reducing safety hazards associated with, the size, height, and placement of such antennas. The standards set forth herein are designed to balance the City's concern for public safety and aesthetic interests, with each person's right to transmit or receive radio and/or television signals without imposing unreasonable limitations on antennas, or preventing the transmission or reception of radio and/or television signals, or imposing unreasonable costs on applicants seeking to install such antennas. Section 17.26.020 - Definitions. For purposes of this Chapter, and except where otherwise indicated, the following terms shall be defined as set forth in this subsection: A. "Antenna" shall mean any antenna. together with any associated support structure or related equipment, used for g~urposes of transmitting or receiving radio, television, and/or satellite broadcast signals, and not otherwise subject to the sole / CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DCA 96-01, ISPA 96-04, & SUBAREA 18 AMEND. 96-01 - CITY OF R.C. April 17, 1997 Page 3 regulatory authority of any federal agency or authority. "Antenna" shall not include any antenna used solely for amateur radio or citizen's band radio purposes or equipment for cellular communications, personal communication devices, or similar wireless communication equipment. B. "Antenna Permit" shall mean an approval of a minor development review application as provided for in Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.06.020. For purposes of utilizing the minor development review process, the provisions of this Chapter shall prevail where inconsistent with any provision of said Section 17.06.020. C. "City Planner" shall mean the City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or a designee thereof. D."Planning Department" or "Department" shall mean the Planning Department for the City of Rancho Cucamonga. E. "Surface Area" shall mean the sum of that area existing between the outer dimensions of such antenna, as measured in three · dimensions. Surface area shall not include surface area of any antenna support structure. Section 17.26.030 - Antennas less than 20 square feet in surface area. A. Any antenna less than 20 square feet in area may be mounted in the rear or side yard, or on the roof of any structure if the rear or side yard prove unsatisfactory, subject to all conditions hereinafter provided. B. Any antenna less than 20 square feet in area may be mounted in the front yard of any residence, subject to conditions hereinafter provided, upon receipt of an antenna permit obtained in accordance with the provisions of Section 17.26.070. Section 17.26.040 - Antennas 20 square feet or greater in surface area. A. Each antenna, 20 square feet or greater in area, shall be installed in the rear yard, except as hereinafter provided. B. In the event overall quality of reception in the rear yard is not at least equal to that received by cable, or other circumstances preclude such installation, a permit may be obtained, in accordance with the provisions of Section 17.26.070, authorizing the antenna to be located in a side yard, on the roof of a structure, or in the front yard, subject to conditions hereinafter imposed. CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DCA 96-01, ISPA 96-04, & SUBAREA 18 AMEND. 96-01 - CITY OF R.C. April 17, 1997 Page 4 Section 17.26.050 - Screening required. A. Each antenna visible to the public which has a surface area exceeding 20 square feet or greater, or which is permitted by this Chapter to be mounted in the front yard, shall be screened to the satisfaction of the City Planner, unless otherwise screened from public view by existing structures, landscaping, or topographical features. If such antenna is to be mounted directly, or through a supporting structure, to the ground, then such screening shall be accomplished through the use of appropriate plants, trees, or shrubbery or a combination of such plants, trees, shrubbery, and wood lattice or other material compatible with the residence or other adjacent structures. Plants, trees, or shrubs to be utilized for screening purposes shall have a minimum container volume of 10 gallons at the time of planting. All such screening shall be sufficiently high so as to screen at least 90 percent or more of the antenna from public view. B. Each antenna with a surface area 20 square feet or greater, which is permitted by this Chapter to be roof mounted, shall be · screened with materials compatible with the structure upon which such antenna is mounted and shall be screened to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Such screening shall be sufficiently high so as to screen at least 90 percent of the antenna from public view. C. This Section 17.26.050 shall not apply to satellite dish antennas, 2 meters or less in diameter in commercial or industrial zones, or 1 meter or less in diameter in any other zone. Section 17.26.060 - Conditions and restrictions applicable to all antenna installations. A. The preferred order of placement of any antenna is rear yard first, then side yard, roof, and finally front yard. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the prefen'ed location shall be that location which results in the greatest screening of the antenna from public view by existing landscaping, structural, and/or topographical features. B. No antenna shall exceed 10 feet in height above the peak roof line of the structure upon which such antenna is mounted o'r height of the peak roof line of the closest building or residential structure if such antenna is not to be roof mounted. C. No antenna shall be installed in any required setback, within 5 feet of any property ~ine, or in any other location which would impede emergency access to any portion of the subject property. CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DCA 96-01, ISPA 96-04, & SUBAREA 18 AMEND. 96-01 - CITY OF R.C. April 17, 1997 Page 5 D. No satellite dish antenna shall exceed 10 feet, 6 inches in diameter. E. Each satellite dish antenna exceeding 5 feet in diameter shall be earth-tone or neutral in color and shall be constructed of a "see- through" mesh or open grid design. Solid surface receive-only satellite dish antennas, such as solid, white fiberglass designs, are prohibited. F. Nothing herein shall excuse any person from obtaining all permits otherwise required or from complying with any and all applicable local and state codes, laws, and regulations pertaining to the installation of antennas and/or antenna support structures. G. No more than two, receive-only antennas 20 square feet or greater in surface area, may be installed per residential lot or parcel. Section 17.26.070 - Antenna permit application. A. Where a permit is required, or application therefore is authorized, under any provision of this Chapter, each person desiring a permit shall apply to the Planning Department and shall submit a non-refundable processing fee in such amount as set by resolution of the City Council and a completed application on a form provided by the Department containing at minimum, the following: 1. Name, address, and telephone number of the applicant; 2. The specific location where the applicant proposes to install the antenna, including a detailed description of the antenna design and any supporting structure proposed to be utilized, including size, weight, and such other information as the Department may require; 3. A statement as to why the proposed antenna may not be satisfactorily installed, or will not satisfactorily function, in a preferred area, as prescribed herein; 4. A description of the screening proposed to be utilized by the applicant, or facts establishing that screening is not required; 5. A sketch or other drawing, satisfactory to the City Planner, showing: (a) Location of physical features on the subject property; CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DCA 96-01, ISPA 96-04, & SUBAREA 18 AMEND. 96-01 - CITY OF R.C. April 17, 1997 Page 6 (b) Approximate dimensions (plus or minus 1 foot) of the subject lot and physical features thereon; (c) The specific location where the antenna, and screening if required, are proposed to be installed; (d) Any other physical features in the area of the subject property which applicant feels would adversely affect reception on those areas set forth herein as "preferred;" and (e) The design of the antenna and proposed support structure. 6. If applying for a permit pursuant to subsection C, below, a statement setting forth what the applicant contends are exceptional circumstances justifying a waiver of any of the requirements of this Chapter. B. All applicants for an antenna permit may be required to show, to the satisfaction of the City Planner, that circumstances preclude installation in a preferred area, or that reception quality in the preferred area or areas is insufficient, as herein prescribed. C. Any person aggrieved by any provision of this Chapter because of exceptional circumstances may apply for an antenna permit in accordance with the provisions of this Section. D. The City Planner shall provide the applicant with a written decision approving, denying, or conditionally approving an antenna permit application within 21 calendar days following submission of a completed application pursuant to this Chapter. The City Planner's decision shall contain findings in support of the decision. The City Planner's written decision shall be final and shall become effective with 10 days following the date of said decision unless, during such 10-day period, an aggrieved applicant files a written appeal with the City Planner. Upon receipt of a written appeal, the City Planner shall cause the matter to be placed on the Planning Commission's agenda for public hearing and consideration by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall decide the appeal, with written findings, within 60 days of submission. The Planning Commission may sustain, reverse, or modify the City Planner's decision and its decision shall be final unless appealed. E. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Chapter, ,no antenna permit shall be required a.s to any satellite dish 2 meters or less in diameter in any commercial or industrial zone or 1 meter or less in diameter in any other zone; however, such satellite dish CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DCA 96-01. ISPA 96-04, & SUBAREA 18 AMEND. 96-01 - CITY OF R.C. April 17.1997 Page 7 antennas 2 meters or less in diameter in commercial or industrial zones shall be subject to the provisions of Section 17.26.060, subsections A, B, C, D, F, and G. Section 17.26.080 - Antenna placement in non-residential zones. Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, all provisions heroin, including, but not limited to, permit and screening requirements, shall be fully applicable to placement of antennas in non-residential zones. The preferred order of placement shall be rear setback areas first, then side setback areas, roof, and finally front setback areas. SECTION 9: Preemption of inconsistent Municipal Code, specific plan, and community plan provisions. The provisions of this Ordinance shall preempt and supersede any and all provisions contained in Title 17 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, and in any specific plan or community plan in effect, as amended from time to time, which are inconsistent herewith, provided, however, that the enactment of this Ordinance shall not be deemed to excuse any violation of any provision of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code, including Title 17, or of any provision of any specific plan or community plan, occurring prior to the effective date hereof. SECTION 10: Penalties for violation of Ordinance. It shall be unlawful for any person, firm, partnership, or corporation to violate any provision or to fail to comply with any of the requirements of this Ordinance hereby adopted. Any person. firm, partnership, or corporation violating any provision of this Ordinance or failing to comply with any of its requirements shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding $1,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each and every person, firm, partnership, or corporation shall be deemed guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or any portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this Ordinance is committed, continued, or permitted by such person, firm, partnership, or corporation, and shall be deemed punishable therefore as provided in this Ordinance. SECTION 11: Civil remedies available. The violation of any of the provisions of this Ordinance hereby adopted shall constitute a nuisance and may be abated by the City through civil process by means of restraining order, preliminary or permanent injunction, or in any other manner provided by law for the abatement of such nuisances. SECTION t 2: Severability. The City Council declares that, should any provision, section, paragraph. sentence, or word of this Ordinance be rendered or declared invalid by any final court action in a court of competent jurisdiction, or by reason of any preemptive legislation, the remaining provisions, sections, paragraphs, sentences, and words of this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DCA 96-01, !SPA 96-04. & SUBAREA 18 AMEND. 96-01 - CITY OF R.C. April 17, 1997 Page 8 SECTION 13: The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published as required by law. /5o2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT / DATE: April 17.1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council '~"~ Jack Lain, AICP, City Manager FROM: Brad Bullet, City Planner BY: Thomas Grahn, Associate Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 97-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to change the zoning from Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) to General Commercial to be consistent with the General Plan for approximately 4.34 acres of land on the east side of Archibald Avenue, south of Arrow Route - APN: 209-041-27, 41, and 47. Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impacts for consideration. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommends approval of Development District Amendment 97-01. BACKGROUND This application proposes a change in the land use designation from "Low Residential" to "General Commercial" to bring the zoning for the project site into conformance with the General Plan, as required by State law. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Parts I and II of the Initial Study have been completed as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. The Initial Study determined the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration should be prepared. FACTS FOR FINDING Based on the facts listed above and the attached Planning Commission Staff Report, staff believes the City Council can make the following findings regarding this application: A. The property is suitable for the uses permitted in the land use and development district designation in terms of access, size, and surrounding uses. B. The proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties as evidenced by the conclusions and findings of the Initial Study, which indicates that no significant impacts would be expected as a result of this land use change. N, CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DDA 97-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA April 17, 1997 Page 2 C. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan and Development Code due to the site's ability to promote the goals and objectives for the General Commercial District. CORRESPONDENCE This item was advertised as a public hearing in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin newspaper, the property was posted, and notices were mailed to all property owners within a 300-foot radius of the project site. Respectfully submitted, ,,~ller City Planner BB:TG:taa Attachments: Exhibit "A" o Planning Commission Staff Report Dated March 11, 1997 Exhibit "B" - Planning Commission Minutes Dated March 11, 1997 Exhibit "C" - Planning Commission Resolution 97-16 Ordinance Approving Development District Amendment 97-01 / CITY OF R_ANCHO CUCA_.\,fONOA -- STAFF REPORT x,/~ ~ ~ ~'~ DATE: March 11, 1997 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Bullet, City Planner BY: Thomas Grahn, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTALASSESSMENTAND DEVELOPMENTDISTRICTAMENDMENT 97-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to change the zoning from Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) to General Commercial to be consistent with the General Plan for approximately 4.34 acres of land on the east side of Archibald Avenue, south of Arrow Route - APN: 209-041-27, 41, and 47. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Surroundinq Land Use and Zoninq: North Commercial Center and Rancho Cucamonga Senior Center; General Commercial and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) South Elementary School; Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) East Rancho Cucamonga Senior Center and single family residential; Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) West Industrial Complex; General Industrial District, Subarea 3 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan B.General Plan Desiq_nations: Project Site - Commercial North - Commercial South - Elementary School East - Civic Community West - General Industrial C. Site Characteristics: The preiect site is located cn the west side of Arch iDald Avenue. south of Arrow Route. The east side of ~ne project site wraps around the southwest corner of the intersection of Malvern Avenue and Salina Court. The project site consists of three parcels, two of which are currently developed. The third parcel is vacant and vegetation cons:~sts of grasses and weeds. ANALYSIS: A. General: The project site contains three separate parcels that totaf ap,Droxir'natety 4.34 acres of land (see Exhibit "D"). Parcel "A" contains 0.97 acres of land. fronts onto Archibald Avenue, and contains an office building that was previously occupied by the Chino Basin Municipal Water District. Parcel "B" contains 1.23 acres of land, fronts onto Arohih..aiC Avenue, and contains an off'ice building currently occupied by a dental clinic and The Assistance League of Upland. Parcel "C" contains 2.14 acres of land, fronts onto Archibald Avenue and Malvern Avenue, and is currently ,vacant. B. Consistency with the General Plan: The 1981 General Plan identified the land use designation for entire frontage along Archibald Avenue from Arrow Route south to the existing Cucamonga Elementary School site as "Commercial" (see Exhibit "B"). The Commercial Land Use designation has not changed in the General Plan. The current proposal to change the land use district from "Low Residential" to "General Commercial" will bring the zoning into consistency with the General Plan as required by state law. C. Land Use Com:aatibilitv: The current off'ice land uses are considered legal non-conforming uses existing within a Residential District. If this request is not approved, these uses would not be allowed to expand nor would they be allowed to continue if discontinued for more than 180 days. The change in the land use district from "Low Residential" to "General Commercial" (see Exhibit "C") will be consistent with existing land uses as various office uses are permitted within the General Commercial District. Office use on these parcels has existed since the City's incorporation without complaint or evidence of incompatibility with the surrounding uses. The off'ice use serves as a transition of land use intensity from the fast food restaurant and shopping center to the elementan/school. D. Environmental Assessment: Parts I and 11 of the Initial Study have been completed as required by the California Environmental Quality Act. Under the Environmental Impact Rezon for the 1981 General Plan, the site was planned for commercial development. The curren~ aroaosal to change the zoning designation from Residential to Commercial would not appear to in[roduce any greater impact not previously analyzed. The Initial Study determination is that 'h-' proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration should be prepared. FACTS FOR FINDING: Based on the facts and conclusions listed above, staff believes t~.e r:anning Commission can make the following findings regarding this application: A The property is suitable for the uses permitted in the [and use and development designation in terms of access, size, and sun',.ounding ,~and use. B. The proposed amendment would not have signi'fisant ,:mpac:s on the environment ~s' surrounding proper, ies as evidenced by the conclusions and findings of the !lDj.t, fai which indicates that no significant. :rapacts would be expected as a result .of t:ms fanC change. C. The proposed amendment is in conformance with me General Plan a. :' ~,,ze[oorfient C~de due to the sito's ability to promote tt',e gaa~s and object(',,~es fcr :;-' .:!:-:~:"ai District. CORRESPONDENCE: This i:em was adve.,'tfseC as a z,; ~.z.,c "'aa,:ng :r, t'.",e ':'::ar:: "ja';z.e'," 2.~;'v B,.z;!et{n news.saner, the property was Dosted, anc no:ires were ma;';'a"/co art pra;;et-.y o'~.,,'ne,'s a '~^l~-;.-'~.' radius of the projec: si~.e. ...,,..,../ 1,.,.~,,.,.~. z_:,,NN!NG SO,t!" ~'SSiCN ST,.z,.F.-' ,R=DrmD~- ,~1~ ~ ,....~ \ ~ ZS,-z', }7-.2;i --,T-v O.: P,.z.,NCHO CUCAMCNGA 'lots:" I ' i ,~a~e 3 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that me Planning Commission adopt the attac:ed Resolution, thereby recommending that the City Council issue a Negative De,c~ara:ion and approve Development District Amendment 97-01. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:TG/mlg A:achments: Exhibit "A" - Applicant's Letter dated Januan/31, 1997 Exhibit "B" - General Plan Land Use Map (Excerpt) Exhibit "C" - Development District Map (Excerpt) Exhibit "D" - Assessors Map Exhibit "E" - Initial Study Part 2 Resolution Recommending Approval :.:....v.~:.:: >[=. Dave 3a_-T<e:- C',?: C..= :~:.~C.~.~-' :j:"-:":'~'-"' ' · .,-- , ;. ~ .... ~ , __~.~,,;.~.~ ......... ~.-"~.',:'-'i-'-'~.~<r~..::.e i 500 Civic C=~:= '..'::=:i=:.~::=, Ran.cho Cucar, on,:a, CA 917'~,'~ ---- :-',.::..<::=.::: ' ?,am S~ & ~593 Arzhils~_lf Avenue --~ [' : ':'_'_- L: : '.' : .<~C~ ,%.::,: Cc::cr .z. ssis:a:ce Lea,ru=_ o: Us/g:f re.rue~t~ ~!.at the ~'_': :..'.,~.: . __;..;_ .-~ ........... ini=iate an amendmen: :.3 a-l just the zonin~ .-.,aDs of '~:.-.:... !i:.:.:~ to correspond :o the z~nin~ of these DrOD Cccmmerziai) as ~:== ou~ ~ the Ci~v's G ..... ~ .......... Ch~.-.::"--': :-:~:.<:!:i'.::: _r: has been brought :o our a:tention the: :,'hen the l.'u~,=r-,;~::4 ~enera! D'_,an ~.;as adgD:ed .... e a_~ us:men: L'h--,i:.u::, ._.`aDs for this DrO~e::~,' ~'aS o:,'eriDoked. L,=i,'.j: ,::;i:::._,:,. :.~ be : - corn-"' ~ ~-'-= :.'i:]. -':.e General 3: ~- as i: "as ........ s.....: ori:Zina/!v ~e~ -'o _ Cl:~=...,~ S i :.Ce: e" v ~'21 L._.:.". :: :.::U:: Z-'-':',"_' r~L,"": .... (j ::_, : . .-=. ..: :: -- ~ ,,..' . " --'-."~?.':ne :,;allin :.!.::::. c:: R=_.-.=:-.O C'::amDn:-a C; :-,' ::':::i _ _ ........ . . . _:_.'.2. .'..::~ ::.:::_r': ~ ~.:. ':u:.?.. ' ::_,~n; ', ,./.,. ~_,:::.:~.. I:\TOM\PC\DDA97-01.PT2 City of Rancho Cucarnonga ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM INITIAL STUDY PART il BACKGROUND 1. Project File: Development District Amendment 97-01 2. Description of Project: A request to change the zoning from Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) to General Commercial to be consistent with the General Plan for approximately 4.36 acres of land. 3. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga 4. General Plan Designation: Commercial 5. Zoning: Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre)- 6. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: North - Commercial center and Rancho Cucamonga Senior Center, General Commercial and Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) South - Elementary School, Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) East - Rancho Cucamonga Senior Center and single family residential, Law Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) West Industrial Complex, General Industrial District, Subarea 3 of the Industrial Area Specific Plan 7. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 8. Contact Person and Phone Number: Thomas Grann, Associate Planner (909) 477-2750 9. Other agencies whose approv" :s required: None. ',."::iai St, '-~" for . .-..-.y Ci.'.,./of Rar~cno Cucamcn.ga Development District Amendment 97-01 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at !east one impact that is "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ( ) Land Use and Planning ( ) Transportation/Circulation ( ) Public Services ( ) Population and Housing ( ) Biological Resources ( ) Utilities and Service Systems ( ) Geological Problems ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources ( ) Aesthetics ( ) Water ( ) Hazards ( ) Cultural Resources ( ) Air Quality ( ) Noise ( ) Recreation ( ) Mandatory Findings of Significance DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: (v') I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepa;'ed. ( ) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project, or agreed to, by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ) I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) 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 upon the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ) I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment. there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects 1) have been ana.yzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Signed: ~G~rah~~.A./~ Associate Planner February 25, 1997 ir:,:;ai Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Oevelocment District Amendment 97-01 Page 3 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Pursuant to Section 15063 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, an explanation is required for all "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation incorporated," and "Less Than Significant Impact" answers, including a discussion of ways to mitigate the significant effects identified. The proposed project is a zone change to bring the project site into conformonce with the General Plan. Under the Environmental Impact Report for the `198'1 General Plan the site was planned for commercial development. The subject property has been used for offices since before the City's incorporation in 1977. The current proposal to change the zoning designation from residential to commercial would not appear to introduce any greater impact not previously analyzed. As development occurs on the project site each related application will be subject to a separate environmental analysis to determine specific project related environmental impacts. Palenlially Un,ess Than . '1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? () ( ) () c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? () () () d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community? ( ) ( ) ( ) (/) ~m~ss 2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. VVouJd :he proposal.' a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? () ( ) ( ) (~) b) Induce substantial growrth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)9 c) Disl:Dl: e existing housing, especiaily affordable hous :~? { ( ) () (~) i~,i:ial Study for Cjty of Rancno Cucamonga Development District Amenclment 97-01 Page PD[en:~ally 'jn,ess T~an . 3. GEOLOG{C PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result/n or expose people to potent/a//rapacts invo/v/ng: a) Fault rupture? ( ) ( ) () (,/) b) Seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢) d> Seiche hazards? <> < <) e) Landslides or mudflows? < > ( ( ) (V) O Erosion, changes in topography, or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( ) ( ( ) (V) g) Subsidence of the land? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') h) Expansive soils? ( ) ( ) () (v') i) Unique geologic or physical features? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v') [m~,a~ Less Po~enYlalty Un,ess Than 4. WATER. W/l/the proposal result/n: a> Changes in absorption rates. drainage patterns. or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? b> Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,/') c> Discharge into surface water or other alteration of surface water quality <e.g., temperature. dissolved oxygen. or turbidity)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) d> Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? () () () (,/') e) Changes in currents. or the course or direction of water movements ? < > < > < ) (,/') O Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations, or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability.'? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/'.1 initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Develoement District Amendment 97-01 Page 5 g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater othe~ise available for public water supplies? () () () Im~a~ L~sI P~ten[~811y Unless 5. AIR QUAL!~. Would the proposal.' a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) d) Create objectionable odors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) Im;~ Lel$ , , ,+ , 8. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. ~o~/d ~ro~osa/res~/~/n: a) Increased vehicle trips or tra~c congestion? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~) b) Hazards to safe~y from design features sharp cu~es or dangerous m~ersect~ons) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ( ~ ( ) ( ) (~) c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? () () d) Insu~cient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢) O Conflicts with adopted policies supposing alternative :tanspotation (e.g., bus turnouts, ~ ~ racks)? () () () (¢) g) Rail or air franc impacts? ( ) ( ) ( ~:::a; Stucv for City of Rancho Cucamcmga Sevelcsment District Amendment 97-01 Page ,mDac't, Less P~:er't:ally Uniess T~an :,,,., 7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened, or rare species or their habitats (including, but not limited to: plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees, eucalyptus windrow, etc.)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., eucalyptus grove, sage scrub habitat, etc.)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and vernal poo.)? () () () (¢) e) ~ldlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢) Po(enhally 8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conseNation plans? () () () b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and ine~cient manner? ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢) c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State? ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢) Jm:a~ Less Pocent:al,y Umess Than 9. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve.' a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil. pesticicles, chemicals, or radiation)? ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢) b) Possible inte~erence with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ( ) ( ) ( ) ',ni:ial Study for City of Rancino Cucamonga ~ ,, ue,;eloOment District Ame~.dment 97-01 Page 7 Less c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? () () () (/) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? ( ) () () (V) e) Increased fire hazard in areas with ~ammable brush, grass, or trees? () ( ) ( ) ImD~ Less P~cenl~ally Unle~ Than 10. NOISE. ~11 the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) Im~l~ Palenlillly Un~ss 11. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon or result/n a need for new or altered government se~ices in any of the following areas.' a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (~) b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢) c) SchooSs? () () () (~) d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( ) ( ) ( ) e) Other governmental se~ices? ( ) ( ) ( ) ;~le~t~lly Un~ss 12. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS, Would the proposal result in a need for new systems or suppries or substantial a/terat/ons to the fo//ow/ng ut//ities: a) Power and natural gas? ( ) ( ) b) Communication systems? ( ~ t , initial S~uCy for Ci:y of Rancho Cucamsnga Development Dis:r:ct A, mendment 97-01 Page ~r"'.?.ac~ Less .~.~:en:,aIly'Jn,ess T~-an :ss..es and S~.;ocnzncJ tnfDr"'na:~on Sour~.s' S,:.. cant c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? () () () (¢) d) Sewer or septic tanks? ( ) ( ) ( ) (./) e) Storm water drainage? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) f) Solid waste disposal? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) g) Local or regional water supplies? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) ~o(en~a,h,, LJniess Than lss-es ant S,,~nlng ,n~oma;,on Sourc. s: S,gr,?nc_,r: 13. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal.' a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ( ) ( ) ( ) (..,,) b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? () () () (V) c) Create light or glare? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) ~ ='~en::ally~ n.ess T~-an S ,~ .,t car 14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal.' a) Disturb paleontological resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢) b) Disturb archaeological resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) c) Affect historical or cultural resources? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? () () () (...) e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? ( ) ( ) ( ) (./) Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga Development District Amendment 97-01 Page · ~cer':laily PJmess T~an 15. RECREATION. Would the proposal.' a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) b) Affect existing recreational oppo~unities? ( ) ( ) ( ) (1) Less MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Potential to degrade: Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community. reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate impo~ant examples of the major periods of California histo~ or prehisto~? ( ) ( ) ( ) (V) b) Sho~ term: Does the project have the potential to achieve sho~-term. to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A sho~-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time. Long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) () () () (V) c) Cumulative: 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. ) ( ) ( ) ( (~) d) Substantial adverse: Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? ( ) ',n'.:ial Stucy for City of Rancho Cucamon;a Deve{ooment Distr!ct Amendment 97-01 Page !0 EARLIER ANALYSES Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration per Section 15063(c)(3)(D). The effects identified above for this project were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in the following earlier document(s) pursuant to applicable legal standards, and such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. The following earlier analyses were utilized in completing this Initial Study and are available for review in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Planning Division offices, 10500 Civic Center Drive (check all that apply): (v') General Plan EIR (Certified April 6, 1981 ) (v') Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update (SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989) APPLICANT CERTIFICATION I certify that I am the applicant for the project described in this Initial Study. I acknowledge that I have read this Initial Study and the proposed mitigation measures. Further, I have revised the project plans or proposals and/or hereby agree to the proposed mitigation measures to avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant environmental effects would OCCUr. Print Name and Title: Trim Gr~hn A_~_~nni~t_~ Pl~nn_~r / 7/ irman Barker said the issue before the Commission was more limited than what had been brc forth. He stated it was premature to discuss the techhical aspects of a crematorium, parkin traffic and those issues would be addressed when a conditional use permit application is conside He indicated he was not prepared to try to determine if the proposed site is the right place for this of an operation. He observed the question in front of the Commission was if it is possible that th, 's a parcel within Subarea 8 which may be appropriate for this type of use. He said approval of th~ ~endment would only give an applicant permission to ask, and if an application is submitted, the issu~ ht forth tonight would be addressed. He remarked that projects are often dropped once the finds out what will be required. He acknowledged that the applicant's interest in one cular site motivated the request for an amendment, but said the request for amendment could I: ade without any property in mind. Motion: Moved by Macias, seconded to recommend approval of Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 97-01. Motion carried I: following vote: AYES: BARKER, BETHEL, MACIAS NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL, TOLSTOY - carried Chairman Barker observed that the recommendation would be ed to the City Council for final action. Mr. Coleman stated that the item would be re-advertised and notices would out again to announce the headng before City Council. Commissioner Bethel asked that those individuals who spoke this evening receive a F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 97-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to change the zoning from Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) to General Commercial to be consistent with the General Plan for approximately 4.34 acres of land on the east side of Archibald Avenue, south of Arrow Route - APN: 209-041-27, 41, and 47. Tom Grahn, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chairman Barker recalled that'the Assistance League of Upland approached the City many years ago and they have since provided a great service to the community. He thanked them for their work. He opened the public hearing. June Wallin, Assistance League of Upland, P. O. Box 927, Upland, said they are trying to prepare the back building for an Operation School Bell project and they have tried to be a good neighbor. Chairman Barker closed the public hearing as there were no more comments. Motion: Moved by Bethel, seconded by Macias, to recommend issuance of a Negative Decl,afation and adopt the resolution recommending approval of Development District Amendment 97-01. Motion carried by the following vote: Planning Commission Minutes -7- March 11, 1997 AYES: BARKER, BETHEL, MACIAS NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL, TOLSTOY - carried adding regulations to allow the identification of sub-tenants within service stations. Nai Senior Planner, presented the staff report and indicated that two letters had been received the applicant requesting two signs per subtenant. She stated that staff recommends only one si! subtenant because they typically occupy only a small area. She stated that Texaco had also indic~ the subtenants could not meet the proposed minimum 33 percent of gross floor area and they re ested the floor area criteda be revised. She explained that staff suggests a minimum floor are equirement so that an ATM machine or one small counter could not be considered a with rights to a sign. She showed the elevations of the building and indicated the signs sho~ the elevations had not been approved. She also noted that Texaco had indicated it is common service station owners to own and operate the subtenant franchises and therefore the applicant ..d that the definition of subtenant be revised to allow the separate franchise to be considered a st ~nant. Chairman Barker did not feel it make any difference who the owner is if the products are entirely different. Commissioner Bethel concurred. Chairman Barker asked the reasoning for the 3 ercent minimum floor area per subtenant. Ms. Fong replied that staff was trying to limit the ~er of subtenants and not allow someone to sell dell sandwiches over a counter and call that use ubtenant. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Richard Tait, Vice President, Tait & Associates, Inc. 1100 & Country Road, Suite 1200. Orange, stated that Texaco is purchasing franchises from both Ta Bell and A & W. He suggested adding franchisee in addition to subtenant under the cdteda for allow subtenant signs. He agreed with staff that there should be a minimum amount of floor space and derstood the City's concern with not wanting to allow every shelf to be allowed signage. He that the two subtenants combined be required to occupy 33 percent of the floor space. le disagreed with staffs recommendation of only one sign per subtenant. He appreciated the that the staff and the Commission recognized the unique use they are proposing. He stated that ~ple normally do not associate quick service restaurants with service stations and said they ne to have potential customers identify the building with the restaurant in addition to the gasoline s ,s. He said they therefore requested two signs per restaurant use, one to address the street and other to face the shopping center interior. He said they do not want to confuse customers by dra' g them onto the site and then not having them be able to find the use. Ms. Fong suggested that the definition of a subtenant be changed to indicate that it is a ;iness that is owned or operated by the station and/or the franchisees of the station. She also su, ~sted that the minimum floor space be changed to 20 percent of the floor area and that an proviso be added that them could be a maximum of two subtenants per station. She indicated t the floor plan submitted by Texaco would meet the 20 percent minimum requirements. Mr. Tait agreed those changes would be acceptable. Planning Commission Minutes -8- March 11, 1997 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING CCMMISS~ON OF THE CiTY OF P-,ANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 97-01, A REQUEST TO ,AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS MAP FROM LOW RESIDENTIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL FOR 4.34 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE, SOUTH OF ,ARROW ROUTE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 209-041-27, 41, AND 47. ,A. Recitals. 1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for Development District ,Amendment No. 97-01, as described in the title of this Resolution. Heroinafter in this Resolution, :no subject Development District Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On March 11, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. 3. Resolution. NOVV, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby saecifical~y finds that all ,.of the facts set fo~h in the Recitals, 2'a'-' ' of this Ress. luticn are true and correct. 2. Based uson substantial evidence oresanted to this Commission during the above- re:'erenced public hear{rig on Mar:n i 1, 1997, including written and oral staff re.sons, together with sualic testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 4.34 acres of land, basically a rectangular :onfiguration, located on the east side of Archibald Avenue, south of Arrow Route and presently :.sntains both deve!oped and vacant land. Said property is currently designated as Low Residential: b. The property has been in use as off. toes since befDre the Ci:y's incorporation.: and c. Th"' Cjt's ._ y' 19,'31 General' ,D~an ~es2g:"a'.ed the srs se.":.y as General Corn. marc:a:'. said land use des,:,gnation has not cnan~e~: and d. The pr...Qpe,'?/ta :m,e nor't.h of the s'uCie:: sire is ~esiLz'nated GeneraZ Co~,-....me,."clal and ds "'eveloped as ~ :ammercial center. The p,'ope,':..y .'s :;"re ,was..' .;s ~es,;gr.::a.'.e,~- General Industrial Zs Caveloped as an industrial com..ste×. The proSemy .'.o the east :s des/.E~.:e:e.,:'t 'La,,~..r ,=,.=..siden':,{,al and !s '~"'v"'los"'d ~s the R~ncho "" =--"'r-~ S=.,",is: "",','=' The sro:-=-.,"t.y [~ :.'to :,'.-.,:,~..;':.~ Ls,N ResidentiaZ and is deve[c,-..,e: as C'.::.smsr'.i-.a E~.e:'me:::ar./!School. "C," / 7 9' e. T;nis amendment does not conflict wfth .'.he Land U'se Policies of the General Plan and ',,vi~l orovide for development, within ~he district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related Ce,,,elosment; and f. This amendment promotes the goals and o~jectives of the Land Use Element; and g. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 3. Based uoon the substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced pubiic nearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the suaject. prope:y is suitable for the uses permitted in the srocosed district in terms of access, size. and compatibility with exisdng land use in the surrounding area. b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties. c. That the proposed amendment is in conformonce with the General Plan. 4. Based uPOn the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the Planning Commission finds that there is no suPstantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and recommends that toe City Council adopt a Negative Declaration iaased upon the findings as follows: a. 7hat the Negative Declaration has been prepared in comsiiance wi.tn toe California Environmental Q,.:ality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Dec',aration and toe initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission; and, further. this Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In considering the record as a wnote. the initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed aroiect ,..viii have potential for an adverse impact uson wildlife resources or the habitat upon ,~.nl'ch 'wildfire reDends. Further. based upon sub, szantia{ evidence sonrained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reoor't,s and exhibits, and the information oro,.,iCed to the P[ann!ng Cammiss/on during t,~.e :.uDlic hearing. the Plar, ning Commission hereby rebuts .'.;~e presumption of adverse effect as set f'-'_rt.n in __~ on 753.5(c-i .d) of Title 14 sf :he Californi~ Cc e of ~e~u{ations 5. Based u:on the findings and conclusions set fo~h in Daragraph. s 12.3, and 4 above. :his Commission hereDy recommends a.~proval of .~eve!oament District Amendment No. 97-81. 6. The Secretary t3 :nfs Commission s~a[[ :or. if/:o t~e a.doetion of this Resolution. ".:'A 97-01 S;T":.' S.F .%-',: ,,., _.., - ,, HO ""Lj V""'NGA M:-"" i i 1997 Pa,;e 3 APPROVED AND ,ADOPTED THIS 11TH DAY OF ,M,-:, F, ;S H 1997. PLANNING CO ,~'* ..... --, i OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: "'~. ~'Gi~kLtBarker, Ch ;" an ' TT D~'frC"51e~an, Acting Secretary A , . I, Dan Coleman, Acting Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duty and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 11th day of March 1997, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, BETHEL, I, IACZ.-,'S NOES: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: blC,'l[ EL, TOLSTOY ORDINANCE NO. 5 7/_~:p AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 97-01, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT MAP FROM LOW RESIDENTIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL FOR 4.34 ACRES OF LAND, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE, SOUTH OF ARROW ROUTE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -APN: 209-041-27, 41, AND 47. A. Recitals. 1. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has filed an application for Development District Amendment No. 97-01, as described in the title of this Ordinance. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the subject Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On March 11, 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed_public hearing on the application. 3. On April 17, 1997, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application. 4. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred. B. Ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and ordained by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing on April 17, 1997, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows: a. The application applies to approximately 4.34 acres of land, basically a rectangular configuration, located on the east side of Archibald Avenue, south of Arrow Route, and presently contains both developed and. vacant land. Said property is currently designated as Low Residential; and b. The property has been in use as offices since before the City's incorporation; and c. The City's 1981 General Plan designated the property as General Commercial and said land use designation has not changed; and d. The property to the north of the subject site is designated General Commercial and is developed with a commercial center. The property to the west is designated Genera/Industrial and is developed as an industrial complex. The property to the east is designated Low Residential and is developed as the Rancho Cucamonga Senior Center and single family homes. The property to the south is designated Low Residentiai and is developed as Cucamonga Elementary School; and /77 CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. DDA 97-01 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APRIL 17.1997 PAGE 2 e. This amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan and will provide for development, within the district, in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development; and f. This amendment does promote the goals and objectives of the Land Use Element; and g. This amendment would not be materially injurious or detrimental to the adjacent properties and would not have a significant impact on the environment nor the surrounding properties. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above. this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. That the subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed district in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and b. That the proposed amendment would not have significant impacts on the environment nor the surrounding properties; and c. That the proposed amendment is in conformance with the General Plan. 4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Negative Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Negative Declaration based upon the findings as follows: a. That the Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the State CEQA guidelines promulgated thereunder; that said Negative Declaration and the Initial Study prepared therefore reflect the independent judgment of the City Council; and, further, this Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with regard to the application. b. That no significant adverse environmental effects will occur. c. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 753.5(c) of Title 14 of the Carffornia Code of Regulations, the City Council finds as follows: In considering me record as a whole, the Initial Study and Negative Declaration for the project. there is no evidence that the proposed project will have potential for an adverse impact upon wilsliife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends. Further, based upon substantial evidence contained in the Negative Declaration, the staff reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council during the public hearing, the City Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-l-d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations. 5. Based upon the findings ann conclusions set forth in paraqrap,hs ,'., 2, 3, and 4 this Council hereby approves Development District Amendment No. 97-01. 6. The City Clerk shall cert/fy' the adoption of this ord}nance and s~,a~i cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage at least c. nc..e ,!n the m. ranc~ Va~'ley D~rify B,u'['~e't.'~n a newspaper of general circulation published in the C/ty o~, Ontarfo, California, and crrculated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. California. /' CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~MONGA ' STAFF REPORT DATE: April 17, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 97-01 - TEXACO - A request to amend the Sign Ordinance by adding regulations to allow the identification of subtenants within service stations. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends approval through adoption of the attached Ordinance. BACKGROUND: At its March 11, 1997, meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed regulations for the subtenant signs. After receiving public input, the Commission recommended approval. The Commission believed that the proposed sign regulations would address the new market trend of combining uses within a service station. The new regulations define a subtenant, establish a maximum number of signs and the sign area, and require a Uniform Sign Program for a service station that has subtenants. The purpose of the Sign Program is to ensure that the design and the placement of the different types of signs for the services stations and the subtenants relate to and are compatible with the building design and the site improvements. The proposed change is shown in the attached Ordinance in bold italics. Copies of the March 11, 1997, Planning Commission staff report and minutes are attached for Council review. Respectf .y submitted, BB:NF/mlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - March 11, 1997, Planning Commission Staff Report and Minutes Exhibit "B" - Planning Commission Resolution No. 97-17 Ordinance CITY OF P~&\'CHO CUCA~'vfONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: March 11, 1997 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Nancy Fong, AICP, Senior Planner SUBJECT: SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. 97o01 - TEXACO - A request to amend the Sign Ordinance by adding regulations to allow the identification of subtenants within service stations. ANALYSIS: A. Background: On December 11, 1996, the Planning Commission reviewed a request from Texaco to allow the identification of subtenants within their new service stations that would be built in the future. At the meeting, the Commission determined that there is a need to respond to the new subtenant market trend and directed Texaco to submit an application for amending the Sign Ordinance. Attached for your review is a copy of the December 11, 1997, staff report and minutes. On February 4, 1997, staff received the Sign Ordinance amendment application from Texaco. B. Proposed Siqn Regulations: Staff created a subtenant sign category under the service station classification. The new regulations define a subtenant and establish the maximum number of signs and the sign area for them. Another new regulation would require a Uniform Sign Program for a service station that has subtenants, which would apply to new stations that have received Commission approval and existing stations with subtenants or plan to have subtenants. The purpose is to ensure that the design and =,~e p/acement of the different types of signs for the sen,ice s~ations ant the subtenants relate to and are compatible with the building design and the stte improvements. The proposed change is shown in the attached Exhibit "D" with new sign regulations in bold italics. C. Other Siqn issue: At the meeting on December 11, 1996, staff reported that the ma.rke~. trend of combining uses under one roof extends to banking services within supe,,rmarkeZs. Staff did not address this issue because the amendment was fiJed anticipates that the issue of subtenant signs will surface again in other s;l,t,uatior~s suc:h as -~L~NNiNG COM,MISSION STAFF REPORT SOA 97-01 - TEXACO March 11. 1997 Page 2 D. Environmental Assessment: The proposed new sign regulations are categorically exempt per Section 15061 (b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed Ordinance. Respectfully submitted, City Planner BB:NFImlg Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Applicant's Letter of Request dated January 28, 1997 Exhibit "B" - Planning Commission Staff Report dated December 11, 1996 Exhibit "C" - Planning Commission Minutes dated December 11, 1996 Exhibit "D" - Existing and Proposed Sign Code for Service Stations Resolution Recommending Approval Proposed Ordinance if'7 '.~,T ~,~SSOCfATES. :NC. CC,';SL,.LT,'NG ENG,'NEERS C,:v.,l. ,mfan,".'r2. Sun'ey,?; · E."wrsrm. Januar.' 28. 1997 Nls. Nancy Fong Senior Planner Ciw of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Dr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Re: Letter of Justification Sign Code .Amendment Proposed Texaco Facilities Rancho Cucarnonga, CA Dear Ms. F ong: On behalf of Texaco Refining and Marketing Inc., we respectfull.,,, request an amendment to the Citv Sign Code (code section 14.20.100) to allow ,.,.'all signs for quick ses'ice restaurants (QSi:Ls) at ses'ice stations v,.'ith food marts. The marketing of gasoline has become increasingly competitive over the past .,.'ears. Additionall.,,'. the cost of land. construction and labor has been increasino_. resultinc, in the profit margin on gasoline being very narrow. As a result. our client is required to find new revenue streams for their gasoline sales facilities. Texaco is proposing to construct a convenience-oriented food mart at both locations. In addition. the.,,' are proposing to install QSRs in the food marts. The QSRs are nationalix' recognized fast food operations, and v,,-ill run in the same manner as a stand-alone fast food restaurant,. except on a smaller scale and the emphasis ,.viii be on off-site consumption. \x,'e must stress that the QSR.s, as ',,,'ell as the food mart. are distinct business oDeranons vdthin a single structure. As distinct business operations. the',' must retain their own mdividua1 external signage in order to attract customers and to sup,'ive as business entities. Texaco's QSR partners require their corporate identities to be represen~,ed on ex-terior faces of the building as well as on other signage ,-.i~.:Yz. l-~.'ili identify. their product to potentin! customers. With the advent of credit card and debit c~d readers at the rue! dispensers, at majorit',' of those purchasing fuel never enter the building and remain unaware of an,,' additional business inside the buiidin_~. Unless these customers Z~a~,'~ - 1100 Town ~, Co,.'ntr7 Road · Suite '1200 · Orange. CA028~8 · (7*. .z) ~$0-8200 · (7~) 580-82~1 O:'er tzca: ct, s San 2:e;'a 'SA · Cc":s'C. CA · Saz'ar-e-:a SA · z-ze^.~ AZ · '...csc'~. ,~Z / Established knowledge or' the additional facilities within the building. these businesses will not be able to sustain sufficient sales to sustain operation. Currently, the code allows for only one ,.,.'all sign per frontage with a maximum of two wall signs, and does not allow tbr an.',' ,.,.'all signage for other distinct business operations within the building. As previously stated, ,.,,'all signage is essential for the sustainability of the proposed QSRs. \Ve recognize that the city is allowing QSR identification on the Texaco monument signs, tbr which v,'e are greatly appreciative. However, monument signage alone does not accomplish the signage needs for the QSRs. The average customer does not normally identify fast food with gasoline service stations. Once the customer is attracted off the street by the QSR monument sign, he/she is likely to become confused by lack of wall signs to identif2,,' the location of the QSRs. The customer needs the ',,,'all sign to direct hirrb"her to the desired services. If you have any questions or comments regarding this correspondence, please feel free to contact me. Very truly )'ours, K. RICHARD TAIT Vice President cc: D.C. Markins, TtL\II EL, MACIAS G. SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 97-01 - TEXACO - A request to amend the Sign Ordinance by adding regulations to allow the identification of sub-tenants within service stations. Nancy Fong, Senior Planner, presented the staff report and indicated that two letters had been received from the applicant requesting two signs per subtenant. She stated that staff recommends only one sign per subtenant because they typically occupy only a small area. She stated that Texaco had also indicated the subtenants could not meet the proposed minimum 33 percent of gross floor area and they requested the floor area criteria be revised. She explained that staff suggests a minimum floor area requirement so that an ATM machine or one small counter could not be considered a subtenant with dghts to a sign. She showed the elevations of the building and indicated the signs shown on the elevations had not been approved. She also noted that Texaco had indicated it is common for service station owners to own and operate the subtenant franchises and therefore the applicant asked that the definition of subtenant be revised to allow the separate franchise to be considered a subtenant. Chairman Barker did not feel it should make any difference who the owner is if the products are entirely different. Commissioner Bethel concurred. Chairman Barker asked the reasoning for the 33 percent minimum floor area per subtenant. Ms. Fong replied that staff was trying to limit the number of subtenants and not allow someone to sell dell sandwiches over a counter and call that use a subtenant. Chairman Barker opened the public hearing. Richard Tait, Vice President, Tait & Associates, Inc. 1100 Town & Country Road, Suite 1200, Orange, stated that Texaco is purchasing franchises from both Taco Bell and A & W. He suggested adding franchisee in addition to subtenant under the criteria for allowing subtenant signs. He agreed with staff that there should be a minimum amount of floor space and understood the City's concern with not wanting to allow every shelf to be allowed signage. He recommended that the two subtenants combined be required to occupy 33 percent of the floor space. He disagreed with staffs recommendation of only one sign per subtenant. He appreciated the fact that the staff anct the Commission recognized the unique use they are proposing. He stated t. hat people normally do not associate quick service restaurants with service stations and said they need to ha,,,e potemial customers identify the building with the restaurant in addition to the gasoline sales. He said they therefore requested two signs per restaurant use, one to address the street and the other to face the shopping center interior. He said they do not want to confuse customers by drawir~g them onto the site and then not having them be able to find the use. Ms. Fong suggested that the definition of a subtenant be changed to indicate that it is a business that is owned or operated by the station and/or t-' .~ franchise,'-:s of the station. She also suggested that the minimum floor space De changed to 20 percent c-: "'e floor area and that an additional proviso be added that there could be a maximum of two su! ants per station. She indicated that the floor plan submitted by Texaco ,-,,- : meet the 20 pe ,t minimum requirements. Mr. Tait agreed those changes would be acceptable. ,..~'5'~ ? 7-""..¢ / Planning Commission Minutes -8- March 11, 1997 Chairman Barker closed the public hearing and asked to see the site plan and the location of the proposed signs. Ms. Fang showed the site plan and indicated the location of the subtenant signs proposed by Texaco. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, observed that the ordinance permits subtenant signs on the monument signs. He said that would allow additional signs. Ms. Fang indicated on the site plan the location of two proposed monument signs. Chairman Barker asked for confirmation that the applicant would be allowed two monument signs with identification of the subtenants on both monument signs and an additional building sign. Mr. Coleman confirmed that was correct. Commissioner Macias commented the applicant was requesting two monument signs and two building signs, one on Foothill Boulevard and one facing the interior of the center. Ms. Fang pointed out that Texaco is proposing its main sign plus the two subtenant signs on one area of the building whereas other service stations may propose to separate the signs on one side of a building. Chairman Barker asked if the Sign Task Force had discussed anything like what Texaco is proposing. Commissioner Macias said the Task Force has not progressed that far as yet. Chairman Barker asked if the Commissioners agreed with Ms. Fong's suggestions regarding the other two issues raised by the applicant. Commissioners Macias and Bethel confirmed they did. Commissioner Macias felt comfortable with permitting two monument signs and the building sign on Foothill Boulevard. He did not see any hardship. He thought the two monument signs allow ample notice of what is going on in the building so long as the signs are designed appropriately so that the names of the quick service restaurants are large enough to read. He noted that the Church's Chicken logo at the service station at the southeast corner of Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue is very hard to read. Ms. Fang indicated the monument sign could have three signs of equal size for Texaco, Taco Bell, and A & W. Mr. Coleman observed that the service station at Foothill Boulevard and Vineyard Avenue chase to use the logo for Church's Chicken instead of spelling out the name and the logo is too hard to read. He stated that was the applicant's choice. Commissioner Macias felt applicants should work within the confines of the sign ordinance as it has been developed to this point. He thought the Church's Chicken sign is a real pro~tem but agreed it is a design problem, not an ordinance problem. He suggested staff help applicants by making sure that monument signs will be discernable from a distance. He supported two monument signs and the building signage on Foothill Boulevard with no building sign on the back. Commissioner Bethel felt the two monument signs and the one building sign would be sufficient. ,5'a,,f Planning Commission Minutes ~9- March 11, 1997 / Motion: Moved by Macias, seconded by Bethel, to adopt the resolution recommending approval of Sign Ordinance Amendment 97-01 with modifications refining the definition of a subtenant, requiring a minimum of 20 percent of floor space per subtenant, and permitting a maximum of two subtenants. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: BARKER, BETHEL, MACIAS NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL, TOLSTOY - carried ,/' i, ~' il 'I' H. USE PERMIT 91-24 - MASI - A review of the car wash facility for the Mobil gas st ,n within Masi Plaza, located at the southwest comer of Foothill Boulevard and Masi Drive - AP :9-011-36. Ms. Fong obs, ed that the applicant was not present and she asked if the Commission wished to continue the ite~ Motion: Moved b, ;thel, seconded by Macias, to continue Conditional Use Permit 91-24 indefinitely. Motion ca d by the following vote: AYES: BARKER, L, MACIAS NOES: NONE ABSENT: MCNIEL, - carried DIRECTOR'S REPORTS I. REQUEST TO INITIATE AN AMi NT TO THE SIGN ORDINANCE WITHIN THF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL TO ADD AUTO CENTERS AS A CLASS OF SIGNS WITHIN SECTIONS 14.20.100 SIG COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE ZONES AND SECTION 14.20.110 SIGNS -INDUSTRIAL S. Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff re, It was the consensus of the Commission to direct staff to initiate amendment regarding signs for auto centers. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. COMMISSION BUSINESS Chairman Barker suggested ttnat t~e Co,,'- :~on hold a workshop regarding the Auto Nation p ;ct following the March 26 regularly scheduied meeting. 5'a4 ~ 7--d/ Planning Commission Minutes -10- March 11, 1997 RESO LUTI C N :'~'O. '97 - :. 7 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOM~IENDING APPROVAL OF SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 97-01, AMENDING TITLE 14 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING NEoN REGULATIONS FOR SUB-TENANT SIGNS WITHIN THE SERVICE STATION CLASSIFICATION, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF. A. Recitals. 1. Texaco has filed an application for Sign Ordinance Amendment No. 97-01, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereina~er in this Resolution, the subject Sign Ordinance Amendment is referred to as "the application." 2. On the 1 l th day of March 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga concluded a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above- referenced public hearing on March 11 1997, incluCing written and oral staff repo,:s, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds and concludes as follows: a. The Amendment will provide for development of a comprehensively planned urban community within the District that is superior to development otherwise allowable under alterhale regulations. b. The Amendment will provide for development within the District in a manner consistent with the General Plan and with related development and growth management policies of the City. c. The Amendment will meet the pu.rpose and intent of Title 1~ of the Municipal Code. d. The amendment ,,,.,ill not have a si:ni~cant imaact on the environment. 3. This Commission hereby finds and determines that the proposed amendment is from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section i5061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines. Z-. Based upon the findings and conclusions set fo~h in parat':jraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, Commission hereby recommends the City Council a:.2rove Sign Ordinance Amer',dment No. e7-,:l to modi~ the Municipal Code per the attached O."~.~anoe. ~.~ ~:~l 5. The Se.sretar'y to this Commission sha~l semi~/to :~e a~ostion of this Resolution. z'_AN:.,i;~S CS.'.!.NIZSS:CN .~ESQL~T ON .NC. SO.-,'. 97-2,'i - TE;C:,.SS ,N. larcn 11.19S7 APPROVED AND ADOPTED TH S 11TH DAY OF MARCH 1997. PLANN NG c E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY: q , Barker, Chair n ATTEST: Dan' Col'~m'a"nn, A~tin~r~'ary" I, Dan Coleman. Acting Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced. passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 11 th day of March 1997. by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: BARKER, BETHEL, MACEAS NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE .ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: HC~'I [ EL, TOLSTOY ORDINANCE NO. ~ 7 27 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 97-01, AMENDING TITLE 14 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY ADDING NEW REGULATIONS FOR SUBTENANT SIGNS WITHIN THE SERVICE STATION CLASSIFICATION. A. Recitals. 1. On the 1 lth day of March 1997, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing with respect to the above-referenced Sign Ordinance Amendment. Following the conclusion of said public hearing, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 97-17, thereby recommending that the City Council adopt Sign Ordinance Amendment No. 97-01. 2. On the 17th day of April 1997, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing and concluded said hearing prior to its adoption of this ordinance. 3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Section 14.20.100 Permitted Signs - Commercial and Office Zones is hereby amended as shown in the Exhibit "A." SECTION 2: The Council hereby finds and determines that the proposed amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines. SECTION 3: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage at least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~'IONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: April 17.1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack [,am. AICP, City Manager FRONt: William J. O'Neil. City Engineer BY: Mike Olivier, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 93-01; MASI DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve creation of Assessment District 93-01, Masi Plaza at the Southwest Comer of Rochester Avenue and Foothill Boulevard; Approving the Report of the Assessment Engineer, determination that majority protest does not exist by ballot count, Order acquisition of Improvements, and Confirm Assessments. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: On February 19. 1997. the City Council approved a Resolution, passing on the "Report of the Engineer", establishing guidelines tbr "hearings" and "ballot procedures" which comply with the most recent interpretation of Proposition 218 in regards to assessment districts. The time and place for the second Public Hearing is April 17, 1997, in the Council Chambers. The ballots ,.,,'ere mailed according to instructions received from 'Bond Council' and are required to be delivered prior to this meeting. At this meeting the ballots can be counted and protests received. The Council may then act to approve the District, having followed guidelines established by Proposition 218. In 1993 the CiW Council received a petition of property owners requesting that the City Council form an assessment district to finance the acquisition of certain public improvements which pertains to the Masi Plaza. The City Council subsequently approved an agreement with the o~Tters of Masi Plaza by which such owners would advance all preformation costs of the assessment district. The City Council also approved a second agreement by which the City agreed to acquire the public improvements upon completion by the owners, provided that such acquisition would be paid solely from the process of bonds issued tbr the assessment district. The City Council also adopted a resolution of intention to tbrm the assessment district. This resolution was subsequently rescinded at the property owner's request. Since then, the public CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT ASSESS,x, IENT DISTPdCT 93-01 ,N. 1AS[ DEVELOPMENT April 17. 1997 Page ~ improvements have been installed. The o~,mer now wishes to revive the assessment district funding mechanism. Of 26 plus acres, less than seven have been sold. Therefore, the petition received from the owner constitutes more than 66 percent of the ownership requesting the assessment. Respectfully submitted. Wi~ J. O'Neil City Engineer WJO:MO:JM:ls Attachments pdsot, u'no No. 7' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COD~CIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUC,~LMONGA, CALIFORNIA. DECLARING THE RESULTS OF THE BALLOT TABULATION, CONFItLMING THE ASSESSMENT. ORDERING THE ACQUISITION OF IMPROVEMENTS, TOGETHER WITH APPURTENANCES, AND APPROVING THE ASSESSMENT ENGINEER'S REPORT WHEREAS, the CITY COUNCIL of the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOPuNIA, has previously adopted its Resolution of Intention and initiated proceedings for the acquisition of certain public works of improvement, together with appurtenances and appurtenant work, in a special assessment district pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Municipal Improvement Act of 1913", being Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California (the "Improvement Act"), said special assessment district 'known and designated as ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 (NIASI PLAZA) (hereinafter re~rred to as the "Assessment District"); and, WHEREAS, pursuant to said Resolution of Intention, a report of the Assessment Engineer (the "Report"), as therein ordered and as required by the Improvement Act and Article XIIID of the Constitution of the State of California ("Article XIIID"), was presented, considered and approved; and, ~7-{EREAS, the Report, as preliminarily approved, contained all the matters and items called ~br pursuant to the provisions of the Improvement Act and Article XIIID. including the following: 1. Plans and specifications of the improvements proposed to be acquired; 2. Estimate of cost of acquisition of the improvements proposed to be acquired; 3. Diagram of Assessment District identifying all parcels which will receive a special benefit conferred upon them from the acquisition of the improvements and upon which an assessment is proposed to be imposed; 4. An assessment proportionate to the special benefit to be con~rred upon each parcel to be assessed; 5. A description of the works of improvement proposed to be acquired; and, Wt-IEREAS, notices of said hearing accompanied by ballot materials were regularly mailed in the time, lrbrm and manner required by the Improvement Act and Article XIIID and as evidenced by a certificate on file with the transcript of these proceedings, and at this time all written protests submitted in accordance with the Improvement Act have been heard and considered and all ballots submitted pursuant to Article XIIID have been tabulated. and a full hearing has been given, all in the manner provided by the Improvement Act and Article XIIID; and, RESOLUTION NO. .4. SSESSMENT DISTRICT 93-01 APRIL I 7.1997 Page 2 WHEREAS. at this time this City Council determines that: i. the owners of one-half (1/2) of the area assessed for the cost of the project did not file written protests pursuant to the Improvement Act against the said proposed project; and, 2. the ballots received by the City in favor of the proposed assessment and weighted as required by Article XIIID exceeded the ballots received in opposition to the assessment and similarly weighted and, theretbre, a majority protest pursuant to Article XIIID does not exist; and WHEREAS, this legislative body' is now satisfied with the assessment and all matters contained in the Assessment Engineer's Report as now updated and submitted. NOW, THEREFORE. the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucarnonga does hereby resolve as tbllows: RECITALS SECTION 1. The above recitals are all true and correct. WRITTEN PROTESTS PURSUANT TO THE IMPROVEMENT ACT SECTION 2. All protests and objections of every kind and nature submitted pursuant to the Improvement Act be, and the same hereby are, overruled and denied, and it is further determined that said protests and objections are made by the owners of less than one-half of the area of property, to be assessed for the acquisition of the improvements within said Assessment District. BALLOT TABULATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE XtlID SECTION 3. The ballots submitted pursuant to Article XIIID in favor of the assessment and v,'eighted as required by Article XIIID exceed the ballots submitted in opposition to the assessment and similarly weighted and it is theretire determined that a majority protest pursuant to Article XIIID does not exist. SPECIAL BENEFITS RECEIVED SECTION 4. Based upon the Assessment Engineer's Report and the testimony arxd other evidence received at the public hearing. it is hereby determined that: RESOLUTION NO. ,-XSSESSMENT DISTRICT 93-01 APRIL 17. 1997 Page 3 A. All properties within the boundaries of the Assessment District receive a special benefit from the works of improvement as proposed to be acquired ti3r said Assessment District; B. The proportionate special benefit derived by each parcel proposed to be assessed has been determined in relationship to the entirely of the cost of the acquisition of the works of improvement; C. No assessment is proposed to be imposed on any parcel which exceeds the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit to be conferred on such parcel; D. Only special benefits have been assessed; and E. There are no parcels within the proposed Assessment District which are owned or used by any agency as such term in defined in Article XIIID, the State of California or the United States. PUBLIC INTEREST AND CONVENIENCE SECTION 5. The public interest and convenience require the acquisition of the improvements, and therefore it is hereby ordered that the improvements be acquired, together with appurtenances and appurtenant work in connection therewith, in said Assessment District, as set t~3rth in the Resolution of Intention previously adopted and as set forth in the Assessment Engineer's Report and presented and considered, and as now approved. ASSESSMENT ENGINEER'S REPORT SECTION 6. The Assessment Engineer's Report, as now submitted. updated and amended as appropriate, is hereby approved and said Report shall stand as the report as required by the Improvement Act and Article XIIID for all future proceedings tier this Assessment District. CONFIP~MATION OF ASSESSMENT SECTION 7. The assessments, as now filed in the Assessment Engineer's Report and diagram for the improvements to be acquired, together with appurtenances and appurtenant work in connection therev,'ith. are hereby confirmed. The assessments contained in the Assessment Engineer' s Report are hereby levied and approved as foilova's: RESOLUTION NO. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 93-i)1 APRIL 17. 1997 Page 4 A. The final assessments to represent the costs and expenses to finance acquisition of the works of impro,.'ement, as authorized tbr these proceedings. B. The annual assessment to pay for administrative costs in an amount not to exceed the maximum a~mual assessment as set forth in the Assessment Engineer's Report. RECORDATION OF ASSESSMENT SECTION 8. That the City Clerk shall forthwith deliver to the Superintendent of Streets the assessment. together with the diagram attached thereto and made a part thereof. as continned, with his certificate of such confirmation attached and the date thereof, and that said Superintendent of Streets shall then immediately record said diagram and assessment in his Office in a suitable book to be kept for that purpose and attach thereto his certificate of the date of such recording. COUNTY RECORDER NOTICE SECTION 9. Upon confirmation of the assessments and recordation of the assessment roll and diagran~, a certified cop.,,' of the assessment diagram shall be immediately filed in the Office of the County Recorder. Immediately thereafter, a copy of the notice of assessment shall be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder in the manner and form as set forth by law and specifically Section 3114 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of Calitbmia. MAILED NOTICE SECTION l 0. That upon recordation of the diagram and assessment, a notice shall be mailed to each o`.vner of real property within the Assessment District at his last known address, as said address appears on the last equalized tax rolls of the County. said notice to set forth a statement containing a designation of the property assessed, as well as the amount of the final confirmed assessment, and further indicating that bonds will be issued pursuant to ~he "Improvement Bond Act of 1915" PUBLICATION SECT[ON ll. That notice shall also be given by publication in the designated legal newspaper. said notice setting tBrth the amount of the final assessment and indicating that said assessment is no,.,,' due and payable. and fi.~rther indicating that if said assessment is nor paid within the allowed thirty (30) day cash collection period. bonds shall be issued as authorized by law. No publication shall be required if all (100%) of the assessed property. owners have timely filed a properly executed waiver of the cash collection period. RESOLUTION NO. ASSESS.x, IENT DISTRICT 93-01 APRIL 17. 1997 Page 5 ASSESSMENT COLLECTION SECTION 12. The County Auditor is hereby authorized and directed, in accordance with the provisions of Section 8682 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, to enter into his assessment roll on which property taxes will next become due, opposite each lot or parcel of land affected, in a space marked "public improvement assessment" or by other suitable designation, the next and several installments of such assessment coming due during the ensuing fiscal year covered by the assessment roll and that said entry then shall be made each ),'ear during the life of the bonds l:~ar the proceedings for the above-relr~renced Assessment District. This authorization is continual until all assessment obligations have been discharged and the bonds terminated. As an alternate, and when determined to be in the best interests for bondholders of the Assessment District, this legislative body may, by Resolution, designate an official other than the County Tax Collector and/or other agent, to collect and maintain records of the collection of the assessments, including a procedure other than the normal property tax collection procedure. In accordance with the provisions of Section 8685 of the Streets and Highways Code, if any lot or parcel of land af~r~cted by any assessment is not separately assessed on the tax roll so that the installment of the assessment to be collected can be conveniently entered thereon, then the Auditor shall enter on the roll a description of the lot or parcel affected, with the name of the owners, if knovYrt, but othervise the owners may be described as "unknown owners", and extend the proper installment opposite the same. ASSESSMENT VERIFICATION STATEMENT SECTION 13. The County Auditor shall, within 90 days after any special assessment installment becomes delinquent, render and submit a detailed report showing the amounts of the installments, interest, penalties and percentages as collected, for the preceding term and installment date, and from what property collected, and further identify any properties which are delinquent and the amount and length of time tbr said delinquency, and further set tbrth a statement of percentages retained for the expenses of making such collections. This request is specifically made pursuant to the authorization of Section 8683 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FU,.'NDS SECTION 14. The Treasurer is hereby authorized at this time, if not previously done, to establish the following funds as necessary. ~rbr the payment of costs and expenses and administration of the proceedings for this Assessment District: /9/ RESOLUTION NO. ASSESSNIENT DISTRICT 93-01 APRIL 17. 1997 Page 6 A. IMPROVEMENT FUND: All monies received t?om cash collections, proceeds t?om the sale of bonds and applicable contributions shall be placed into the Improvement Fund. B. RESERVE FUND: All monies as designated to assist in the payment of delinquencies shall be placed into the Reserve Fund. C. REDEMPTION FUND: All monies received from the payment of assessments shall be placed in the Redemption Fund. For particulars as to the administration and handling of the Funds, the specific terms and conditions shall be set t;3rth in a Bond Indenture to be approved by the subsequent adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of Bonds. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED this__ day of ,1997. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. ASSESSMENT DISTRiCT 93-1)l APRiL 17, 1997 Page 7 I. DEBRA J. ADAMS. CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the t~regoing Resolution ~vas duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the Cit~' ofRancho Cucamonga, California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the day of , 1997. Executed this day of , 1997. Debra J. Adams, City Clerk CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA / STAFF REPORT DATE: April 17, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Shintu Bose, Deputy City Engineer SUBJECT: ROUTE 30 TASK FORCE UPDATE On April 8, 1997, the Route 30 Task Force convened in the Tri-Communities Room at City Hall. l'hl staff from SANBAG and CalTrans updated the members on the status of the design and construction for the freeway. CalTrans is scheduling to start construction at I- 15/30 interchange by February of 1998. This reach of the freeway will take approximately three years to complete. During that time, contracts for other segments of the freeway will be let out. The new accelerated schedule of construction as set by SANBAG envisions completion of Route 30 from Cherry Avenue in Fontana to Route 210 in Los Angeles County by May 2002. SANBAG staff also informed the Task Force that some of the bridge structures and stretches of soundwalls may be constructed prior to start of freeway to lessen adverse traffic and sound/dust impact to local residents. Within our City, construction for Haven Avenue and Milliken Avenue bridges may start as early as October of 1997, provided this schedule is approved by the SANBAG Policy Committee at its next meeting. The Task Force discussed future meetings and agreed to have meetings on as needed basis. The Task Force also requested as information is available, it be provided to the Task Force and the staff not wait for the next meeting to provide them with this information. Staff will continue to provide the Task Force with information on a timely basis. Respectfully submitted, Willia~~Neil~(.,~/) City Engineer WJO:SB:dlw TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Ddve Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Curtalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 909- 477-2700 Fax: 909477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are oooosed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral" & Crematory Services. Company: Continental Flooring, Inc. Address: 10763 Bell Court Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 ( 909 ) 941-8305 Phone: sio.ed: ~ Date: Signed: Date: ~ s,g.. D.,.: · : Date: 1~'X'7~"7 Signed: Date: ~-/' Signed: Date: (-/ s,, o.,.: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Apr-lG-g7 0S:SOP MERCURY UNITED TEL (g0g)4 P.01 TO: City of Rlncho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diana Willlame, Mayor ~ Tern 10500 Civic Center Ddve Paul Biane, Councilmeml3er Rancho Cucamonge, CA 91730 James V. _CurtaiD, Councitmeml3~,r Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 90g-411-2100 Fax: g0g-417-2849 Subiect: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Deer Councilmembers: . We the undersigned are oe~o=ed to the proposed zoning change for 9ubaree 8 to Allow Funeral & Cremetory Services. Company: Mercury United Electronics, Inc. 10823 Edison Court Address: Rancho Cucamonga, CA g1730 Phone: (909) 466-0427 . .... - -~..~ , ~ , , SiGnS: Date: SignS: Date: S~n~: Date: SignS: ..... Date; SignS: Date: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Ddve Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Curtalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 909- 477-2700 Fax: 909477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are oooosed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: DE'VONS PRODUCTS INC. Address: 10823 Bell Court Rancho Cucamonea CA91730 ' Phone: 9 0 9 - 4 6 6 - 4 7 0 0 s, n .... , ? Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: . Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Ddve Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Curtalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 909- 477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are oooosed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. co~...y::/-/'2. ,J./_,~ :":/~z · .-- / .... ,, . Signed: ,~<~vj]o.. '~~_, ~ D · ZT-') _ _ _ -, _ . ,:/I, . ~ _'-._(~,~' Signed' ~ ~ Date' s, ' ~ D.te: '~- ~ 3' ~"~ si _ _ , ~~- Date: Ii1~ I19T 18:2T FA~ 909944~3 Kenne Bell Inc ~902 TO: City of Ranclio Cuca longa William J. Alexander, Mayor C~ty Council Membel I Diane Willjams, Mayor ~ Tern 10500 Civic Center !: rive Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730 James V. Curtalo, Councilmeml~r Rex Gutierrez. Counciimember 909- 477-:2100 FU: 909-471-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zonir 1 Ammendment Deer Councilmembers: We ~e undersigned am ! ~ to the proposKI zoning cl~ange for Subarea 8 to Allow FunsPa] & Cmmatoty Services. Company: Phone: SignM: D~e: SIgnS: SignS: D~e: signe~: Die: SignS: Dine: SignS: Dine: SignS: SignS: Dine: SignS: Dine: SignS: Dine: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Ddve Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. CurtaiD, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 909-477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are oooosed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. co..,r,.,',~,: O~L,'~,,',-,;~ ~r,~'~--. r-X~,2,.,;,% Address: F)(~) i(~,O~/-, ~ "~gj l C)") ~,,,~ t"~rfrOuJ ~ d' ] C) ~ Pho.,,: ct e q- ~t ~'e - 5 / t '7 Signed: ~ Date: Signed: ~/;'t,~L ~"~_(:],(~,/f- Date: 'fi/'/,5"9'7/ Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: · We the undersigned are oODosed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Sen/ices. !c°"':'~"~¢.~.,,....d.. &- I~ ....... ~,~,,,-,i,-,~ co,.,.,,-,-,i.,,,o,,:.,,,;-..oz..." :" ~ City of Rancbo Cucamonga i""" ' { "* ¢,y',.~"-,,2~/~,' , P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91729 ' " ' ' - ....."' ': Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammenclment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are ~ to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Cremetory Services. Company: .. ~/A cc L: .~ ~, ., ,./ /v r:,.~ ,~, H(,, Address: Z b ~ a3 _ <~m/~o~ d~ .. Phone: . ~']~ ) ..... Si~ned:__, . _ Date: .,....: " ,-~ Date: Signed: . _Date:_ Ma~-lO-97 04~48P P,O1 TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P, O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: Sul~Area 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucsmonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are ~ to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. t TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Cremat0ry Services. f Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Address: / o 9 ~] ~~'~ ~ Phone: ~ c ~ - ~ ~ ? - ~ ~ ( C Signed: .,~{--,~- F_/,. Date: _:1'--- ~ -- ~/7 / Signed: ,_:-2~ Date: 3- {~'f':7 Signed: ~ ~ Date: 3 - -7--- ~ "7 Signed: ~ Date: ,~-.- 7- f ~-- Signed: Date: TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: · We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Signed: ~ - Date: ::3 · Signed: Date: - Signe '.~~-,, ~~:)/-~--/~ Date: ~' 7 - Si,gn~' Date: ~ · Date: Signe . - ~.7.~7 TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company:.~ ' Address: I ' Signed: ~ate:. _..,2,,~ ,~ 7 Bigned: Date: Signed: , . Date: Date: Signed: ..... Signed: , Date: ... 12:53 809-g80-8622 TRI BEST PRODUCTS ~AGE Oi TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucemongs P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArel 8 Zoning Ammandment Deer Rencho Cuclmo~e Planning Commission: We the undersigned Ire ~ to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Creamtory Services. Cornpiny' TRI-BEST VISUAL DISPLAY PRODUCTS ~drelt: 8620 RED OAK STREET. RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CAL. 91 730 :: ' : 3/6./9~ . E E CLYDE HET;TON, PR SID NT ' Signed: _ _ -_ _ -, ....... Date: .... Signed:_ _. ..... Date:_ _;- _ ,. Signed: L -_ - _ . _ Date: Signed: L - Date: IT APPEARS THAT THIS PROJECT WILL B~ LOCATED NEXT TO A RESTAURANT CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.'WHAT INPACT DOES THIS HAVE ON OWNER? 'T'O: Plening Commiseion City of Ranoho Cuc~amonga P.O. Box 807 Rmncho Cuc~monga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear R~ancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are ooposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services, Signed: Date: Signed: __~ Date: Signed: .... Date: Signed: Date: MA~-OB-9? 14,SB FEOM,J&J INT/DEFLOODMASTEI~ INC ID,8089440069 PAGE 1/1 TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned am ~sed to the proposed zoning change for Subares 8 to Allow Funeral & Cramstory Services. Compeny:..j a J interiors../DeFloodMas. ter Address: 106.81 Pu].].man Cour..t . Rancho Cuc.amonga, CA.. 91 730 Phone: _( 909 ) 944-7925 Signed:~ Date:. Die: ~ _ . . Signed: [~~ Date- Signed: _ ' ! __ Date: _ MAR-- 1 I -~7 T!_IE 1 e,: ~ 1 AM wERO--FAB .. I N_r:.. 'BO'B 'B :'_-4 0 ~ 'B 4 :B P . 8 TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cuc~monga P O. Box 807 Rencho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Sul3Ject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: . We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. ~ ~ ' ' ~ ' F ' Signed: ~~ Date: / . Signed: ~~ ~, ~ Date: TO: Praning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P. O- Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are 9.j}l}~ to the proposed zoning change for SuDarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. ~ ~ ' u" ' ~ ' . :~g)ne: ., / - - , t ned:, ...... _ ~~ ~ . .._ ~ ? ~ Signed:- ~~~ ~ . ~ate:' ~ ~.//- ~ ~ Signed: V~~ ~~ .... Date: S-~t- fT_. .. Signed:~~-~, --. Dste:V ~//~-~  ~ ~ / TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. U // . FROM: INLAND EFFIRE BUILDERS I~ NO.: 909 945 2450 Mar. 10 1992 01: 16PH PI 1/24/t$$e ~st2t, PWOH TO 94a?*.,t.~ P 82 i '-:; TO: PInning Commissle~n ~ .. City uf Rert,e.,ha CUcemonge }. i P.O. Box aOT" ~; ... tlenchu 13UP~monge, CA g'172g ..:._ '.::.. ....:...: '.. "',r] :. . ,,, '.' '~ ,i 8ub,jeeh 8ubAtlm e Zanlng Ammendmenl '. · , · ... !~:'!:."·:' ' :7:' :" !: · . , , ~": ' Dee-. R.snd"m 13uuemunga Planning Commlmeion: ..~.i'..":.' '-'.: .2',.... · ". . ~ . . ," · . . · . . . i t We the Urtder~lgn_ed ire u_.P,p_9,tW~ to the proposed. z;onlr~ cheng~ '~':"' "..'.to AIIc~ Funerel & Cremetory $erv o.. ,. .. I : , .,. ,..'.,: "~:! ;': ,'.'. :/i .~. ., , · '~iil:" ~ '~ !!"':::':."" ' .~ ..'.. '.~CO..~..~: '. ' "":"'.,';'~i'..'..: :' ' '::'.':i"'.: ": "" :' !!~~ii~ !.' ~,: 'C:::..., ..,........-:..........:..::!.:. . . .. ;~j :~:::.. . .. , . '. ' '.~r~.. ':" , '.:""'. ......': i.:i. :'.'~'~:' :...: '... ,.: ... . .......:..., .'.., .. ,.:. :,: '.~..: ..'.. :;.i! ..'.'....: ;.'. .,. . ' ".: :;, ,, ,.!::: ., ., 1 "f'7'.' ' · , · , ... ':..:I. - . . ~r.'. """':"' ...-., "';" ::'.:.' .'i',.":'::' '.. ;,.. ~.' .. ~! ":': ':::..!',... D ! ': ~.' ;-.._; ,___,_ :::~._: ;7 ."" ~.:.~!.~:!,. :-":""~.,"~ :~! ,. · . . · · '. ,,..'o "'"""': ::.,ea.~.:.:.. .................,"e:!.:':.":-;!-:i,.'.;.!;" .... i' ': ':': ' ' ' · ::!~:,.,..,'..: ',.". '.':..~.....";:'~ ::.::.. . :?...:..ragned:,, ....'Dele! ': '., _ ':: ':'"' · ,.--. :..... i.":' .... .::.'::' .:.' ....::'I' ..~,;.: : ...:,. .: /i::.:", . . ·,. . · . .11 _,. · :, ...')...:..~... .... ..; .. ,. · . · , "' ' :i. ~. · t" ' ..:.;...~ , ·. ·.: : ; i' * I'IR~. i0. i997 2: d6Pl,! P 1 FROH t HRSTER Fi:~I COB3 PHEI, E HO.: 9e9 987 5657 TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are ODDOSed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company:/,,(er[~ry ~t~,'~/ ~ . / Signed: "/~'~'~~ Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonge P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga,. CA 9172.9 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Amrnlr~ment Dear Rancho Cur.,amongl Planning Commission: We the undersigned ere ilgii!to me proposed zoning~hsnge..for Suberas '8 to Allow Funeral & Crem~ 8i~lces. ": Company; ~_-,~4//.'/~ Address: 70 0 '\ ' ?':' ' ' '" ' " ' ' '~'.. · "' , ~"., ;.'. ' '." ..... -. ...... . . .:. .' ~ - . , ,, . ,,.,,, + ' +. ~'-~. : ", .. .' =, :. , . · . ~-. ,..... ,. =.. '..:.~. ~., ...'~"' ,...:: ..... .~,.:.,, . . .. :~:,'~..:: "' . . ....:.. -.:.. J '.,.~ . .. : . .. '...',. - ,: · .:. .. ,.. .~. . . . · ·: ."':" ., : · . . :. · .: ... ~', .: '- .,.. '. ; : , . ., ,,, ?. . ~ , ~. . : . . ..... ~ . .. , - 7 ..... . · ... .:. '.:. . ., & .~..:~ . . .~. := ',' . .: · · .: :. . - . . ,' ~'. ...:.' ..~ · . .,'.. , .. . ,.. . : .. . .:.... . ; · · :,: ... ~.: ; .,~ .:.t. .'. ,;, .. · TOTAL P, e2 p.o.'~'~~-'' ".-".,-::.~ "" '.' '-':."i ~.. Ctx~..~:~ga CA ' = ' · ~ , 91729 ',..'...:: . "... · .~. . ;, ,- · ~,.,.,, ;'. .:: ..... .. ;' : "'~f ; :. :~ . ';~' '~. 'Sub~ ~~.8 Z~t~ ~t '" .' .. ;.; '..;.... ;. :~.~:,~.~,- .,,:... ...... :":' "'~ e "' ' .". . .'. , .,. -...: .;, ;.' ..; ~'~" '.. ;'~""'.".to~~~&-Cremat~S~s. . . ..:~.-<..., .' ~'.~;.=,~;:.~ f. , .:. ..;' .'. . .:.., -..... .~..., . .,..;. ';. .. ~..:.'~ .-."-.:~ ... :- ~ ~;.'~;;~'..~..-;: ;.' ...-,_. .... ., ~..~-... ,:.. ..: .'.. ,. . ~ , : · . .. ... :,.. . ,~ =,' .. ;~ .. ..... .~.:, ~ ~,,.. ~.'~.' ~ . .~ · ~.. ·. · . . , .*s.. :.':' · ~;.' ...'. :.' . . .~. ..: . ;J .'.............; · ,~= ....~ ;.~ . : :':; ::'~. ~.~;-.~ .... ::... ;..,,..; :.~ ::~:,.: :..~, ...,:~.. ,,.... :....~ :"'~ .,... · .' .': .; '~. ~ .,~ :~'~'; ...; ~.' :~ :... ..." .. :....~;:f~'-..~.:~:'~.. :,~-...,,.; ...; .' ':. ~.'.' ;; .; : ..........,,- ....,,.,.... ~;~.:~::~-.,...,.... .-.. ............~.:.~:;.~ .....~....;, ,.;.'..~ :" . :.,.? ..., .:, .... ~.' '..:" ";~%"-"'~.~: ;. 7"""' ~:: ='= ':=~"' "~' = . .'.' .: :... .' ...~ . . .;-. .. ...... : ..,.. ,. ~ .. ;.~ .. :. ,,' ,:~ . .~'~ ~ ; ,. ·. · ' :.~ .- ~ . .....~ ...:. ~ ~' ;.'.. . .~ ,:.. .~ ~-,' · .....~ .':,. '.~ TOTRL P, e2 ,... .,.*, : -~ , ', TO: Plel~lt~gl tl:Jl~lts~tllSl~n -:" ~ .. . ~ ,. ;.. ": City tit Iqdlfll~ha ~Utr, Jamohg~l .: ... .: .... . · P.O. Box Nt)t' .. .. :'. llsnchCi (:}Uedmt}ngtt0 CA 9t 729 , :.. · ,' .. .. .':,.. ;:.. ; .. 9 bJed ~tubArmt ~ Z ntug n| ' · u : o Ammemdme ;,. ... "' . . . ;: .......... ~; .. I " . "','.. Deer Rtatlche. QMcalin~t Plarlftlng Geminiastral:, :..' ... ,: :.' E::!.'!..;..... : We {he .unde.rSt~ ate smmtalsl t~ the pt'opl:tSlld zonlfld ,ehpl~. tee, 84~blCee 8. .:' ~. '..:.'{ct Alli3W..PUllll'id!&.nj, l'.ltTsslory IJervlcel, '' '.:.' .....- ..... ", ..,.:. ,.:.... '...". "'. ,,, , . . , ,: ..; ..' ,'.~ .,... . ...., , .,. .. . ,..;..... ; ,.rz .... ' ' ~. . . . . . :...." ....~... -- ---~ ......... ......{.. .'"e .: .. i~ "' ' ~""' i:'.:.-...' "- ,.~, ..... fit[ .t · '~' . ;, .... ........ ;';t " . . : ' :' ': """"";' . .'.' ' .... ""' ': .. ~ :. ';:;' P'~-f~~-o~- ~ .L~, .."'.~..'l'~.~7..~."':': '' · · ......: '::..;... .. ,: .._ ...., ;~;.~.'. ... ,,,:, . ...'. . ~ ~' .' · . . · ._... _..'.'.,; ~ ~*' .;.... ..~ ;.... .. .;~.~ " ...~ ' · . , .,, ,.' .:' .....' '..: ....... . .... · . . ! ": .. .. Ostei ' . ."' ' ;-,.'. . -- . -. i; · " ....'~ .' ' ..:?: . '"~.' '.~ '.,· . · " ' · ' · ,~i,"~' :~ ...... . · . .' . : . .. .: .;.... ... balii':.~_!_',~' . !:i'::; .' .'.; "~:~l~f~.d~; · :"' '" "' "' o..,. ."..; : ':':~' .... _ ........ :- I .....~ .....,_ . .." .. :.~... .:: ... :. ; - · : ,.. , ~ . · i~'~' .. ':'. '..~'; ......' .' .' ', ." ~ ;.,; ;t r :,." !., . . . :'i ~ :~.: ., : · · , , ' . .... . u,t , ' " '. i · , .. .: · · · ..: 1~~s, ,_: ' · ~,~.. " : " ': i;t-"* * - s, s -- ~.~ · ~ , . , I';.~ II · ~,e .. * *'~, ; ,, · * ot . f ., :.t' · , ,...,,. ., o "'"': :'., '~ .. Date:""~ ""' ' ·-. ... , ' . ,. _ _.,. , - . ~.-;-- '~;-.:,.__.';. ,' · ' .,o ,,' ' I ~ ,, * , , ' ' .' ,. ., | . *,.-'. . ~, o. .. o s , .~= .. . , ~ . ::..... "' "" " : bale:':'"':' "": ""' · ' "' .~tgn..kl.: ' ' · . . .. · ' "1' ' ...... , · . ~ .... , -;--~...... ~;-. ~ !'% .: . .,. '~ ".';"'.:': ::." ';"i~.,:~:~' ~.'. " "'~'.: t,' I. :. .~: .. :.;...,"..'...:...:...~.. .... "',. '~ .. .. ~: " . · ...,~ . .. ..";.*.. · · .-:.'.""."'::.'. """; '....'.',".'"""""" f'! ~ .:.' ,.. . . , . ':'. .* , !~'.:.. · ...., .. .' :. ', .: ........ . :;:.'!.'!' .. ;..:' .. ..:: , -. · : '.- ; ;. ~ .' :."'.,°""':t".=.; ..'.. · . .:~' ~ , · , ., . .,., , .'~': .... . .!:,~-.?.'...;-:;. : ..... · .-. .,,. · . · · "*".;' "i · · '~' i"" ' : .... '~"':;: ';:"' ' :' ' .... ,: .. . ,.: . . , '. ,.,~ ,. .t . . . '... ::~. · .. .. ;. . . .....'. '., .,~ .. .,. '1 · · . : · ~ i'. *"o'* ' "** · · , . , · · · · , ,,, . . e ,. ,.., , J , ,. ,, . ,, : . k. , ,. . .- , ~ , , 'e , * ~ J .. TO: Pl~l~g ~~lnloft " ...,. ,'.. ~;:. , ,,~ , ~ '. P.O.. go~ 807 ',' '. ;' :;i ' "' " ,. R~~ CUMmonge, CA g4 ~2g :,.... :,' ': "-'. ,..: .. ' , ;~', , '~'· ,~,~i .:', ' .' : " . : ~""' aubJl: ub~ea 8 Zoning ~mendmont .: , -, . ~....,. ' ' .'... ,. ' . * ' ' *' ' v ' ;,, ' , .. , :, & i... . . t "'~ "'' Dea~ ~en~ ~U~ongs Planning C~mmte=ton: :'.... ;...... '::.. :-'. · , ,',:..;,,,., ...... . ., :., ,:-, ~ ';~'~' , .....~... .,....;.. ;.. .:. ~ . ..;:, .::.".:..:'~. '.~.~:.':~.~,.~,...... . "* ' * ' · * * ' · ' '~ ' ' ' "'" &"- ~ ...... --' ~- ':~ * 'l I . ....,..~-.~' :.,.;,....::. ~,... '... :. .. "-...:.~::~.-:,.-:..~ ~.:~.-r;.;;~-; .-~;~.:;; :..;.. ...:~'~'....'¥~.......~ ..:". ~. .,.. . ..;~.-:. , TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cuc, amonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Ranc~o Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are ~ to the proposed zoning change for SuDstea 8 SignH: ~ Date:~~Z~ 7 -- ' I s~,~...: '' ~ D,t,: ~ '-/./' ~ 2 . : ,- ,,_ : ~//-~~ S~gn Date . L].~ I.~~ 97 08:43 FAX 909 944 7386 FLE.VI.I,NG 7I'G " TO: Planing Commission ,' City of Rancho Cucamonga // P.O. Box 807 , Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 SuDject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are Oppo. sed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea'8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: · '10722 Address: _ ...R,tn.~.hq C:!n.q.menOR CA ...Q17~n Signed: .... - .- _ Date: .... - Signed:, ......_ ........ _ 'Date: ___. ..._ - TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: . We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Phone: ~'<~ '/-~""- ~ r Signed: : Signed: Date: Signed: ~ Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: . TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea '8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: ~ ,,~/A,/Z ~j'.~//~2',,'V' ~ . Address: /~27:5;z _~ ~'-~/7 L-~-~ r/' ' ,~q ,,,'c /f ,~ Phone: Signed~ Date: Signed: ' ' . ~ - · / - Signed: Date: O3/lO/9? 12|24 9~ ?14900513e , , . ' '.' . · ,. .. d Re~ CU~mong~ . P.O; BoX e01 .. R~U ~m~ge, CA g} 729 ". ;...~.........-. . ,, SubS: S~t 8 Zoning ~mendmnt . .'. ::..,..... .. , Dear R~U.CU~ge Planning C~Iet~: ,. I We the ~Un~telg~ e~ ~ t~ ~e ~e~ t~g ~ t~ ~eee 8 · 9l'0,: ""* ,. . . ' .: .. .. : .,.~.. · ~.. . ..~.: .., , , ~:... . *' . t.', " .. ~"' f,~ t, * ", " · ....... .,,~' · ' ,* :. ;'~.".~ . . .'. : ' ~::, ; . , ,. , · .. . .'... ,t . .:. :..~ , · . ...:: ~ .... , , .,~. ;' - . .. . .}'- Ode: .... · . . .,..,. ..' , ; ,., ..., .. .. . , . . Slpd~' Ode: '. , , .*l..~:" ' -' * '~' *: ':" .... · , . ' e · ., ~ . . . $tffi: ~._,. Oei';: ~"~" *' : .: ..... .. : ,, , I . . . . .. ' .,,:. .... . :. . .. el~'.' ~a~.; ' . . . . . , · e " ':- '. ~ ',e ' ,, ~.~ , ,, . ..... ., , ..*, .... . ~ .-" · . . .... . . ........ . , , ., ""* "' ~" · ' .,....":.-.,..)~ '. , , , ., , ..::....' . . . ;.,.... ,.:'.. .. 7., " · . ..:....~ .:. ..~. .. , , . ~... . ...'....,..,... .,..~.~ · -.. , , '~:. '; . .. ~ '-, . , ., .: . TEL No. ~',tar' :].0,92 :-j ::.~ :'~,: . i ] L : . .. TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are OnDOSed tO the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crernatory Services. '/2, d ¢'4, S' ' ' Date: ~'//~~//?~ ~,,,: -~/,o1~7 ,,,,: '-- // ' Signed: ..... Date: Signed: ........ Date: TO: Planing Commission ~' ity nf Rancho Cuc~monga 0. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonge, CA 91729 Subject' SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dtqar Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: W~q the undersigned are ~ to the proposed zoning char~ge for 8uDarea 8 tO Allow Funeral & Crematory Rervicee~. Signed: J, Date: Signed: _ _ Date: .... Signed: _ , Date: Signed: .... Date: -, ._ ___. 03/10/1997 12:54 9099890225 ELITE SUR~LIES INO P~GE 01 · .t ~ . . ..: ,' .'.... ~..: i~lentr~g Cornmteslo, " TO: :" : "" ' '. * , i Olty bf Rlttd'to C~monga :.. , · :. :., ~.'.... ~ · .'.: . P.O. ~x 901 '. .. .' '., , ; Rental ~U~Os~ CA · . . .. · . . ,.. .. . . , , ., , . , , .. ' Sub~s 8 Ing ~m dine t · .'.· .:. '; "" 9Ub~ Zon en n ";"' " "~' ' I 'l'-" ', " · .' .,'~ , '. ~; ' :' i .~... Oea~ R~ CUdrandI Planning Co~lsslon:.... :.~:.,,...'. ,. ...... ::~., r'; .., , ~ s ~. , . . I ·' . · ':"~ ~"='~' '; t~ At~ ~~ &.cm~et,~ s,-i--,.' .' 'S.'-,.:" '.~ "~.;' ::..>';~;:':~.'~: ~". "' .:' . . ,' , ,,.... . t :. ~, , .., . , . ......., . .::~ ~ ;-'~'.;~: ~L.'.... ,· . · ~ ~' ".~' f: · i ... ., ..:...... ~ . .' ',,~ .'. ,: .... ~; '. . . .' ;>; .... . . ., ...,,~.... L.;.M.;~. '/~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~....: ;,:...:~ ~ >> ..'.'~. '..: .... . .... ~.,,, ~ f/~ .,. . ,, . '.:.... ..... . ~ · . .,' . · , ~;.'~'."~ .:. -,... ·. 1' " .' ~'.'. ,,. .:,.,,. , · · .~ . ..~.., .. . ~ ,.- · .~.: .:,, , ......;'..'~..;., ;~>.;'.'.~ ~.~ :, .. :.~= ,,: ;"p~~:......:.:... ~.,'.,.,..' ~':~':';,.. :...:::~;:~ '~~;;' . ;. .... , · .~ "' . . · ::.':~:.'..'.......~>,::.;=.....; .:'; .::;S;'·;" '~ ~"'~"~ ';': ' ' "';" . ;':"': ·..,: · . '.;:. ,'~ ~ . " ~ . . . ... .. ~ '. . . .* I * t*' , · . · .. ._1 -. : '. ,.~, :. . : '. .,: . .... . , .-: ~.:, :. . ,. "" ~"r '"' ' .. . .7'.'.~.....' . .;,, , ~. , ~ If , . ' ..I '.. ... 'Z '. fl~.. . · .. · ~ . ~. , .. : . . . .. ~: .. "t" '~' :' "' ' ~lll~ ..... ~,: '~:' .~ " '~!; .... .-~ .. . ...... ~ ....... .,..... . " :~.;.:~~ ~ , ~.-., ........ '~., ,.~ .. . . v. . .: . ~. ; . . · . : · .. ~' .. . '; ..... :. · , . . ...- , ~ · · .~ ~..- -' · ~ . . . ......'.'.'.";,' .... · . ~: ?',.. ':.; >.~:. s~~~~ ~Z ;~'~, ::.:. ;-~ ::-;-~ "' ~ /.~' ·;' ', '. '. .-.'.~>.,~:,:.~...'.'....~,':,:'.'.:-'~,,'. . ~ . . ·,::;'. . , . . , ' ~te , "~. · ' · ;I'*.' s" ".' ! :. '~:~ ..'..: .. ,.~.' .. ., ... . ..~ :.. . ; .'. ., . , .... ,. ;~ ~:'L..: . . .,. , ' ' i. · :"" ' · ' : ' · .. ., !.' ' ". .. '.,' ' ~;.,.: :4>. ;. ,' .. .;'~ '. .. '. ~ ~'L ' ' e ...,t., , , , : ,t . e ;: ,.r', .' ·· , ~..v :., . .' . . -~ · . , . . . , ..... · '..'~ ' '.' :'. ..,". I ~..;............,... , . . ... .~ · ',,, .,. . .. ,.,., ~: '~ . ~ · ; :' ';. I .... . .. . . " .. , . .: . ' ' · '~ "~ e · · 4 · ~ ~ ', , .' ' .. ,. .. '~.. ;,..'; · . . . · .. , · ..... , , .". .;;, ~ :;' ~.~ · ... .'.. ..' ,, ...: · . . ,. '~ '-., ..,.~,... .;.~'-~ ~ .. · ,.~, ~..- ..: ~'.. · . . · ..~ .. , :.; · I~ ' ' ' ' · '* ' ' ' ' ' ~ ' ' ,'.:~· "" .~. :'t. · · ' · :. .,., : .~..:;., . ~ . t . ,. ..... ,.. · · . .. . , · . , · ,. , ,. · ..;,.-. . ,' . . ,-, · ' '.,.: ~ .':": ,' · . Ma~-06-97 02:09P NUGEN INS. SEa. 909 941 9453 P.01 TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho CuC-,emonga P.O. Box 807':~ :.""" Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea'.8 ZOning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamoqga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are 9,~ to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral &'.Cre~atoi'y:Services. Phone:, ._~,,/ TO: Planing Commission .City of Rancho Cucsmonga P-O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamongs, CA 91729 Subject: SulkArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are ~ to the proposed zoning chsnge for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Cramstory Services. Company: c 3 ~N/IN C i A (.. Address: / o ? 2 2- _R../t~o,..J/~,, re .~.2__e Phone: (/0 ~'- q Y ~" 22 0 ~ si.. ',.:/.__~~ o.t.: "/"/'~ Signed: ~ Die: Signed' - Date: L3,/Io ] cJ "1 Sign '' ' Date' S~gn Data' ' .% .: : P~wP-I~-9?..TU~ I0:0~ AM M~TALLIC O~TIC~ INC 1 ~09 9451965 F.~,L TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucsmonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned ere oos~osed to the proposed zoning ~ange for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & CremEtory Services. sio...: D,t,:.-7- ~-~7_ . Signed: Date: ~ Signed: " Date: ~X~/~7 Signed: Date: "Sig0ed: ........ Date: ,',l~P-11-1997 10:10 =. C1 TO: Planing Con ~mission City of Ranc 'to Cucamonga P.O. Box 80 ~ Rancho Cuc amonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubAre, 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rencho C~ ramonga Planning Commission: We the undersigr led am 9.~ to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral r, Cremetory Services. Address: Phone: Signed)ate: Sign~ SignS: ate: Signed: TO: Platling Commlsslort City of Reucho Cucamonga P.O. Box 907 Rancho Cucamonga, CA g'1729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: , We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Suberas 8 to Allow FUneral & Cremetory Services. Company:/r~ ~_ % ~ r~ · -~ ,-'F Address: "7,,q, ~ q "P)o ~ v,,,.,-, r t'_ ~ (- 0 -- ! Phone: (qc3ct~ ~c~q o,G,,.A~ .. Si Date: ~ '-/~ - c), --7 , g SIgned: . . Dale: . signed: . . . Date: . . signed: ...... Date: .. SIgned: . Date: . Frc~ ~ CONS~qIEI~ HEDICrt_ ENTERF~IS~ES PNONE No. ~ S~JgE~i367 Mar, i0 i~7 ' ' , I ''':j . .. .. .. TO: Pls~hg ~~tsMnn ' ' ": R CIty ~ '~ ~Umongs P.U. ~O~ ~t "~ ':" R~ ~~s, ~A S~ r~$ .': .. .; .. , .. 'i' "'~'~" ' ' ~:::' e ~...:. .. .. . . . . . , : . ~' ': ..'. I~ .~1~ ~~. & ~st~ 8~tMs. "' .. "' ' : ,.' . .~ ... . ,,. ':~ ,".' .. ;~ '. I.~. ' ' ' ' ' · : . .= ~__~ ~ ~r. , . .. ... .. ~.,'.'......,...'.~~~.~~' ~ '~'....,....... · . " .,' , , · ,. ~,:,ll .',~ . ,. ..... . . ....~'..... '~. ....· .. ......... ... · "~:..,.';;..':; ' ........:,:~..-......... . , . ~ ~ ..... · , .... · . ~ . , ',::.. , .. . . . . . , · :...: ,~ , ,.,. "" . .. . *. i i . · .':1 .. · ,.* .. '.'.0 · . , ' I · , . , . , ...~ · J TO: Mlarlln~l C~olTtmlsslort CIty of i:tltlicho Cucam0nge P.O. Box 1301 Rarlcho Cucamonge, cA 9t 729 Subled: subArea 8 zonlrlg Ammandinah| Dear Rancho Cucamortga Planning CommlsStott: We the undersigned ere opposed to the proposed zoning mange for Subares 8 to Allow Furlstel & Cremetory Services. Company: Addms.: .ho..: gel' ?f/z/ SIgned: Date: ~/~/~ ' / ../ TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Signed: ~~ Date: Signed: / ~'- ' ' Date: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Curtalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 909-477-2700 Fax: 909477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. , ,.. ,..,.>. 5:.',../_,'/~t6 /:xdi, 1.',,:,, :;?,.,. ~ ." J Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tern 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V: Curtalc, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 909-477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Phone: q ~ ~ Signe~~~ '. - ~' Date: d:"' Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Advanced Coating Par)'lene Cottfi,'~nal Coatin,~, Sl,~ecialisLs' 10723 Edison Court · Rancho Cucamonga, California · 91730 Phone: (909) 481-1400 · Fax: (909) 481-1427 TO: Planning Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Amendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: As residents, property owners, and voters, we are strongly opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. We have received a tremendous amount of support in our position from our business neighbors in the area. Enclosed are letters and petitions from 42 companies with over 150 signatures opposing the subject zoning change. Our reasons for opposition include the following: 1. The City zoning currently has provisions for Funeral & Crematory Services within sub areas 4, 6, and 16. There is no pressing reason to amend zoning for another area. 2. Subarea 8, especially the proposed site on Arrow Highway, is a light industrial area with a professional atmosphere which is conducive to all of the businesses currently located therein. A Funeral Home & Crematorium does not fit in with the neighboring businesses. 3. Amending the zoning could have a negative impact on property values in the immediate area. 4. We purchased our property on Edison Court in August 1996 after a lengthy search for the ideal location. Part of our selection process was based on the types of neighboring businesses in the area and the strict zoning parameters that we believed to be in place. Amending the zoning completely subverts our selection and purchasing process. 5. A Crematorium located in Rancho Cucamonga would possibly be providing cremation services for a wide area of Southern California based on the extremely limited number of Crematoriums within the area. This could mean a very large amount of business activity with regard to the delivery and cremation of bodies. 6. The proposed site location is in an area we feel is "The Heart of The City" (i.e. The Courthouse, City Hall, High Profile Office Buildings and Quakes Stadium etc. ) and as such should be afforded extra scrutiny in the development and planning of future growth. 7. A funeral home at the proposed site would create traffic, parking and police enforcement problems. Arrow highway is a major artery for the area and would be adversely affected. 8. A funeral home & crematorium would have an undesirable environmental impact on the area due to odor, air emissions and waste water emissions generated from both cremations and embalming. In addition, there would be additional hazard of explosion and fire with the chemicals involved in embalming. We hereby urge the planning commission to disapprove the subject amendment and any future like proposals. Thank You, ~ ~.~ Steven J. Doltar James M. Doltar Rudy J. Doltar TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucemonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammandment Dear Rancho Cucemonge Planning Commission: We the undersigned are ~ to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Ctematory Services. Company:. :ga.~amount: Nad'Ltne Do., Znc. Address: ~ o824 ~~. ~ . . _ _ .... ~ ~, ~ 91730 P~ne: ( 909 )_ 48~T360~ ...... __ __ . Signed: Date: I/~ ? - IIIf I " Sign~ Dite: ~ ~l [~ 2 Sign Date: I . Signed: ~ Date: .. ~ ~/-~ . TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: Lowell S. Hill Enterprises Address: 8555 Red Oak Street Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Phone: (909) 941-8785 Signed: Signed:~ Date: TO: Planing Commission · City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Address: Phone: Signed~ Si _ _ Date: Signed: Date: ~OWLER PROPERTIES 909 94~ 8765 P.01 TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P, O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA g172g Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rand'to Cucamonga Planning Commission: ., We the undersigned are _o~!;mosed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Address: ./O7~/~_~j~ ~ ~ ............. Signed: ~ Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: OUNURI , April 13 1997 : ' - . ·., .. ~, ~. , ;,,. · 2,,DMONA,~'.:BANCL-IIi. CUCAMONGA .,...c,~ ' .,,~,~..,..: ,=-- .-,.~ ~,~,,~-."'~"'~ ' . .'L'~'~.~'~.~:~;, ;:~.::,.':', ~;,i~"~::~;,,7;:i,.~ '!""'~:"~i: "'~"~ '~..~ ..,'.' ........ .. pl ann s' ~'~=At le~t ~at's ~ a ~'~p of7' . =e sang a~ut ~d m~s~ st~Ction of a mo~ nd c~:;.. ma~ ~ the~ neigh~rho~. ·. j' 'Miller' Family' '& '.~sociat~b~ ~' w~ch owns tua~in Corona, is p~rchas~g-~-~ 3-acre; site': s0uth'~...of A~roW . ~ Cbe~een Utica Avenue nd ~d: .~ .",~ - ........... .~: ~mday. ~ .renew ~e~s appH-' negative ' ~ec~ it may'Ca~e o n ~ cation ~ ~end ~e zo~g for ~e. o~ningffie ~st mo~u~ ~d~~W~o~e~d" cho C~c~onga .:! ' ~e Plmg ~p~!o s .p-: l~ationb~a~e ~y oth~ p m the r~ues~. :". :'. :' .~"~ ""' '~'~ ~e dty where a ~er~ home'~ ~out 150 bus~"~ ~e~.' ~d: ~ow~ by ~ning wo~d ~e~ amploy~ ~e~p~ a'~-~ ,near homes, caus~g ." ~g a ~e~.~'~o~u~ to' a ~omm~nity ~ a h0spi~ o~ ne~ door:to:"his fatt-f0bd ham: ch~ch. , · ~ burger restaurant m~e. Pete 'It's ~otl~ing to fe~." ~ue~r ~1~~ ~W~o~ble: ' .: ~ ~"'~ ~ s~d." ': ' .... '~l~s :i~ b~lag a cow~y "But you c~'t fight emotion~ Burger at ~ow ~d ~d O~. %en I ~ught mysi~ ~e pro~ ~ues. A lot of~ple ~ ma~ ~e ~ey saw..Sa~dle~ e~ o~er pmmi~ ~;offi~ b~d~ ~g ~ the back., s~d ~lads List. It'S not ~e ~t t~ay. who om other ~b~ ~s~U.. ' B~ic~y it's edu~afi0~.~of pubHc t~t ~ sway sup~ ."'~I ~ew (a mogul) w~ corn-' Accor&g ~ Hue~er, a ~g, I wo~'t b~ld it? ". - "- " "~", ~ ~o~d p~u~ l~s ~ ~HU: ~ ~n comsponden~ ~ ~b' tion ~ Cow~y B~er~~d city, offier bus~ess owners have the mogua~ ~ght actuall~ s~d ~e ~ller F~y Mogul. ~sC ~la' b~ess ~~. wo~d r~uce ~ea pro~ v~ues;~' more people will frequent the discourage ~vestment ~d crea~ ~d~ ~ea ~ ~e everag wh~ ~ ~e~thy bus~ess ~d physi- the streets are traditionally calen~ronment. '- :, -. dese~d. ~ ~ea... should not have ~' Katela~s 'emphatically"'. ~lerate a facility wMch ~ ~tr~ a~eed that his business mi~i duce ~ ~e 1~ atmosphere ~e ~eed help to attra~ ~me~.~ odor ~d other produ~s of corn'- 'Ih~ve ~s~me~.~me'~~ bustion associated. ~th ~e ~re- ~ five 'miles away be~e of mationofhum~ rema~."~ote' quality of my' food ~d 'p~ce~ w~lace Schultz, president-of City 'Katelaris said of his Commercial M~agement Inc. resta~ts. "I think I ~ do vQ~ Marc Hue~er, a spokesm~ for web at night." '-" , ~ /, i, " -, .... """- " ' · ~ tln -- ': .......... - ~ - · I - r~,-- -- .... ~ ...- -. - *'-:-':~ ~.-:.'~: :'_ .L-..,-.-:-:._- - : ...... - ,:'_'- -' -- - . ,- " ~fO~ f{~ rYloFh(ar;e~ ~e A.H. REITER DEVELOPMENT e~c~/v~D - C,t~. o~ April ~ 4, ~ 997 Arm: Pl~ing Division City o~ R~cho Cuc~onga P. O. Box 807 R~cho Cucsonga, CA 9 ~ 729 Re: Notice of Public Hearing . Consideration of Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment 97-01-Miller Family and Associates Gentlemen: This letter is to state my objection to the above-noted project. I own the building at 10825 Arrow Route and Red Oak (occupied by the Department of Public Social Services). We oppose the construction of a mortuary and crematory directly across fi'om my building. I do not believe it will provide the type of business environment I had envisioned for this location. I plan to attend the meeting Thursday to support rejection of tbjs zovjng change. ~-L-~SincerelY, A. H..R?it6r Dev Co. ,/' ". · ,/ /lt WP/AHR/city doe/4-14-97 9650 Business Center Drive · Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 · (909) 980-1643 · FAX (909) 989-0446 RECEIVED TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem APR ::L 6 1993 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Biane, Counciimember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Curtalo, Councilmember City of Rancho Cucarr~rrg Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember Planning Division 909- 477-2700 Fax: 909477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are oOOosed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: ~_0641 FULTON COURT Address: ~, ~ ,.,r-~n Ol ]OAMONGA, CA 93.730 Phone: q'e::~ ~ '~ ~z9--~,,,~,Pol Y S~;~ Date: Signed: ~~~ Date: Signed:. Date: Signed': ';~~~,, Date: Signed: , ~~ ~ D.te= Signed: G D~te: Rancho Cucamonga City Council Civic Center Drive ,:~ancho, Cucamonga, CA Dear City Council: I would like to express my support for the allowing of the crematory on the Arrow Route site. I was mailing my tax returns (with a check enclosed, unfortunately) at the Post Office on Arrow, and saw the property where the mortuary and the hambuger stand is being built. The area appears to be mostly strip mall type offices, and industrial park type buildings further down. My first thought was that a mortuary would bring a lot of class and beauty to the street, and the Welfare office nex~ door is also a nice building. I think a burger bar is going to cheapen the area, and besides, the guy comes across like an egotist on TV. Please, iet's keep moving in the right direction. Lets build the mortuary and make sure it's as nice as they plan to make it. And lets send the Health Department out to keep tabs on the Cowpuck Buger. Sincerely, 11 31 0 Delaware Street Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730 ~/16/97 At 2.2:Sa:lO Froms Gar~fl(]nser Page lOll Rancho Cucamonga City Council Rancho Cucamonga, CA RE: Funeral .And Cremator-y Zoning Dear Council: I have been following the sto~ of the pending mortuar).'/~.Temato~' in the nev, spapers, and tonight on TV. Let me clearly state that this to~vn needs a mortuary., and the}' have to put it somewhere. I think dozen in an industrial neighborhood is just free. Those idiots next door who are afraid of their O~TX shadow ought to be the ones looking else~.vhere. This is an up-scale town. and I think a modem funeral home will be a big improvement for that area. I support your allo~ving the mortuar).' to go ahead with their plans. Joel Bruns 8251 Lemon Avenue The Great City Of Rancho Cueamonga FROM: LDP RHOHE t,~O. : 'BE~98891898 Apt. 1 ? 199? O~: 25FM P 1 Fax To: Rancho Cucamonga City Council (909) 477-2846 From: Fr. Patricio H. Guillen (909) 889-3895 Fax Re: Mortuary and Crematory Date: April 17, 1997 FRgr,l: LDF FHOIiE NO.: 9098893395 Apt. 17 1997 O4:Z~PM P2 LIBRERIA DEL PUEBLO, INC. "LA VERDAD NOS HARA LIBRES" April 17, 1997 Attention: Rancho Cucamonga City Council Members Honorable Mayor and City Council Members: My name is Patricio H. GullIon. i live at 2002 S. Magnolia Avenue, Onstio, CA. 9176Z-6033. I nave Deen a Roman Catl~olic Prles~ for ~ne DIoceses of San DIego ancl San Bernardino for 40 years. I was the Associate Pastor at St. Edward's Catholic Church from March 1958 to June 1962 and returned as pastor of St. Edward's Church from July 1995 to June 30, 1981. I halve kltow~l Mr. Rudg~l Millet rui 39 u[ lily 40 yU~l~ gr p~iu~tly ~l~i~ti~tly. Hu i~ honest, respectable and a very sensitive person who cares for persons who have experienced the loss of loved ones. I believe that the Rancho Cucamonga community would be greatly biess~ by approving the Mortuary and Cremespry. Despim the opposition to this project, I believe that with Mr. Rodget Miller's business reputation of loyal and honest service in Corona, the Rancho Cucamon~a community would greatly benefit by the City Council giving its approval. If you need more information, you can call me at (909) 888-1800 from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Thank you for considering my remarkS. Sincerely, Fr. Patricio H. Guiilen Executive Director PHG:rr RO. Box 7366 Centto Quetzal Calpulli Muxer 972 N. Mr. Vernon 18886 Valloy BIrd, San Bernasdino, CA 92411 Bloomington, CA 92316 U88-1800 Fax (909) 88~-389~ (.909) ~204642 Fax (909) 820-2816 10783 BELL COURT · RANCHO CUCAMONGA, Ca 91730 · (909) 987-3966 · FAX (909) 989-2365 RECEIVED April 8, 1997 Planning Division ~1~ ]' 0 t997 City Of Rancho Cucamonga ~nc~ PO Box 807 CA~V ~ Ra~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: ADDITION OF FUNE~ AND CREMATORY IN SUBAREA 8 Dear Sir: We the undersigned from Rancho Technology strongly object to the addition of Funeral and Crematory services in Subarea 8. We are located at 10783 Bell Court. We moved here from Archibald Avenue location In 1993 because of growing business in the Rancho Cucamonga Business Park. We were assured by the builder that this area, including Subarea 8, will remain strictly industrial and "regular" business area. The Funeral and Crematory services are not industrial and "regular" businesses. We consider the addition of Funeral and Crematory services a clear violation of City ordinances, codes, and regulations. This must be stopped even if it requires legal action. Again, we strongly object to the subject addition. Sincerely, Signed by, H. ]~Gupta ~~~en Ravi Gupta . , / CITY OF RANCHO CUCAlvlONGA ~ ~ ,, DATE: April 16, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lain, AICP, City Manager FROM: Kathy Scott, Deputy City Clerk SUBJECT: OPPOSmON TO C:rff ~OUNCIL ITEM F,1, CONSIDERATION OF INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC pLAN AMENDMENT 97-01 - MILLER FAMILY AND ASSOCIATES This date, Rick Fletcher, President of Arrow Business Condominiums, stated his opposition to the above-stated City Council item on behalf of the owners. of the Arrow Business Condominium Association. He stated the Association represents 75 business parcels which are directly across the street from the proposed funeral and crematory site. ks Rick Fletcher (909) 980-3555 , / CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: April 17, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jerry B. Fulwood, Deputy City Man~ FROM: Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk SUBJECT: ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARING ITEM F1 INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-01 MILLER FAMILY AND ASSOCIATES Please be advised that I received a phone call this date from Mrs. Karon McClendon stating she supported the above subject public hearing item. PLEASE FORWARD CITY COUNCIL April 17, 1997 Mr. Mayor and the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga, According to the Citys Planning Department, the Commercial Zone includes the north and south sides of Foothill BIrd. and the section north about a block. The Professional Zone from south of Foothill BIrd. to the south side of Arrow Route and the Light Industrial Zone continues south of Arrow until Jersey acting a "transitional" zone between the Professional and Heavy Industrial which begins on the south of Jersey. The mortuary and crematory operation that is looking to locate to this city, seem to have the right vision and understanding of the master plan of this community to have selected the south side of Arrow Route. The Light Industrial Zone with Professional across the street seems to be a perfect location for such an operation. Permittable emissions, if any from the crematorium, are addressed in the intended uses of this zone. We are quite confident that the govemmental agencies that regulated these operations have the facts for allowing such operations to exist. The South Coast Air Management District does not mess around. If crematodes were not in compliance they all would be shut down and would appear on every newspaper and television station. Rancho Cucamonga is in need of services to support the community that we have built. That includes Mortuary and Crematory Services. Why should we look to other communities to service our needs? We must focus on the fundamental services of our community that do not exist, and death is one of life's basics. I have met many funeral director through out my career. They are professionals that are active in the community that they serve. We have lived in Alta Loma for 20' years. We were here before the Incorporation of Rancho Cucamonga in 1977. We are happy and pride to say we live in Rancho Cucamonga and try to educate fdends, neighbors. We are in Support of the Mortuary and Crematodum on Arrow Route. Mr., Mrs. John & Nancy Reece 5458 Jesper Rancho Cucamonga, CA 909-481-4668 cc: Rancho Cucamonga Planning Daily Bulletin Advanced Coating Parylene ConjOrnzal Coating Specialisz,s' 10723 Edison Court · Rancho Cucarnonga, California · 91730 Phone: (909) 481-1400 · Fax: (909) 481-1427 April 17, 1997 TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William 3. Alexander City Council Members Diane Williams 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Biane Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Curtalo Rex Gutierrez 909- 477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: Zoning Change - To Allow Crematorium City Council Meeting April 17, 1997 7:00 PM Dear Council Members: Our trusted servants on the planning commission showed a complete disregard for public opinion during the subject public hearing on March 11 th. We collected over 150 signatures and had numerous business owners present in protest. However, the planning commission decided to forward the resolution to city council for approval. During the March 11 th hearing the only party in favor of the change was the applicant (Miller Family). The only reason provided for implementing this change was that the applicant didn't find a location in an approved zone at the price they wanted ! Consider the following: 1. Miller Family & Associates operates a funeral home in Corona without a cremat0rium. Why? 2. Funeral and Cremation is already zoned in Sub Areas 4, 6 and 16. On what grounds does the City justify changing Area 8 and the Industrial Specific Plan? 3. There is no positive reason for neighboring businesses or the City in general to put a crematorium in the middle of town! This project will cause nothing but problems: traffic, parking, foul odor, air quality, waste water, and DEVALUATION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY ! 4. Rancho Cucamonga is a big City with plenty of open areas. If the City leaders are intent on having a crematorium (for unknown reasons) then put it in an appropriate place! 5. We all bought our property and set up our businesses in a certain area with certain expectations as to what types of operations we would have as neighbors. Is the City willing to disregard the damage to several hundred tax paying existing businesses for one new business ? We are outraged by this ludicrous proposal and are asking for your NO VOTE on this matter. If you would like any additional information or details on our position, please call us. Thank You, Rudy J. Doltar TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Willjams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Ddve Paul Biane, Counciimember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cuctalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 909-477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are ol~13osed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: Certified Leasing & Financial Services Address: 10722 Arrow Route, Suite 306 Rancho cucamonga, Ca. 91730 Phone: ( 909 ) 980-3555 Signed: {,j Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: - =--:j-Ap';.-. i?. '_.97 13:56 XRA INC .... -: .TEL 1-714-.S8'7-2778 .... :- - '~-"P. -'7-1 .............................. _ _'. _ %7'7'7 _"':_2 _~-_ %- - _-: _ . "'.i~---~-- --_. %=. .~: .... _.,-. - -:' ........ ....--- -' ....=: ................................ = - ' ' =:--"' ' ' ' -=- -_= - _-_ _..__~ ....... ,. . ...... ~_ . j -_-=:_ ='- __--- ~ · ~r:',"aew,.--'qr ....... .":=: -~'- 2- .... :? ......... '_ : .... 1' '_ ...... _% :__ 'L " ' .,_ ' ~-',r,iz _':_*_ .... =:-' .... '~' " .... "~-R ':" ......"""" - .....' .... _, =X ~*A~n"C. ...... · '*:; '*:; *-= 10722 ARROW ROUTE. SUITE 602 · RANCHb*'*C*DTC),MONGA,*' CALIFORNIA'e1730 · , April 17, 1997 Council Members William Alexander, Mayor City of Rancho Cucamcnga Diane Willjams, Mayor Pro Term ]0500 Civic Center Dr. Paul Biane, Councilman Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 James Curatalo, Councilman Rex'Gutierrez, Councilman Rc: Opposition to the proposed Amendment to the Specific Plan, Subarea 8, allowing Funeral & Crcmatory services Dear Councilmembers, i want to voice my oooosition to the proposed amendment allowing funeral and cromatory services as explained in the letter from our president, Richard Fletcher, of thc Arrow Owners Association. Sincerely, George W. Primeau Pros ident/Owner GWP/sf - ',* - TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Biane, Counciimember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cu.i;talo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Counciimember 909-477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are ool3osed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. t si~.~: ,~'~ ~~ s,te: ~. I ?.g ~ Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. AJexander. Mayor City Council Members Diana Willjams, Mayor Pm Tern 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Biane. Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V'. Cu~alo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez. Councilmember 909-417-2700 Fax: 9o9-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammenclrnent Dear Councilmembers: We ~e undersigned are o__p~}osed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. 8~n~: Date: SignS; . . Date: S~n~: . Date: SignS: . D~e: _ $~n~: __ . D~e: S~n~: Dine: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Willlares, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Ddve Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cuctalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 909-477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are oOOosed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral . Phone: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Ddve Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cu.Llalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 909-477-2700 Fax: 909477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company:/g/~~ 1'~~-~'/~ '~ Address:/~_~ ? 2 )_~ ./--~/ZJ2<j~ .~ i~'_~ 7"~. ~ '~ ~/-~ Signed',/,~~//~~ Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: SignS: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. CuCtalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, CouncilmemDer 909-477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning.change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Address: i'~) Phone: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Willjams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Ddve Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cu~alo, Counciimember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 909-477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company:.-~~ ~ ~ hone: ', · _ 5 / - Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Willjams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Ddve Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. CuCtalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 909-477-2700 Fax: 909477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company:~ ,j,T"n,.~d~/~/::::~( ¢,, ~ . Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J, Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Willjams. Mayor Pro Tern 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cu,ctalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez. Councilmember 909-477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammenclment Gear CouncilmemlDers: We the undersigned are ol3posed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: RAY 'S IBA]:L BONE3S Address: 'f078~ ARROW RTE RANCHO CUCAN1ONGA ~CA 91730 Phone: ( 90cj ) cj44-4855 Signe ...... Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Gate: Signed: Date: Signed: .. Date: Signed: _ Date: TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rancho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are oDDosed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: T'0()LIIg Signed: ~~'/~ ~/j Date: Signed: ~j Date: ~ - Sig Date: / TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Ddve Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cu.ctalo, Counciimember Rex Gutierrez, CounciimemDer 909-477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoninc~ change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Cremato~ Services. Company: '7'7~o~,= , ,flrcf ([Q ~,., "["'- Address: (~ ~ ~rc~ ~ ~~ Phone: ~_~firoorC ~ k~-' __- ~/ Date: . Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: SignS: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Willlares, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cu~alo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 909- 477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: Phone: ~O 8i~ne~: Date: $i~ne~: Date: 8i~ne~: Date: 8i~neU: Date: $i~n~: Date: $i~ne~: Date: 8i~n~: Date: 8i~ne~: Date: 8i~ne~: Date: ~l! I I i I: <' 3 <' =:-,: I iF F" .' H T ~li 9 9 0 1 ,~t 2 i P TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor k2ity Council Members Diana WilliNns, Ma.y~r ~ Tern · ~" 10500 Civic Cerrter Ddve Paul Biane, ! ' Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V, Cudale, '! ~i Rex Gutien'e..z, C~ i' 909- 417-27ee..Fa; subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment : .~ . .. We the undersigned are ~ to the proposed zoning change ~ Subarea 8 |o Allow Funeral ':~' :' & Crematory, Services, 4:.. . . ?.,,:.~ .. Company:, ,.,. ACTION SHOPP~- iN~Ft;t;~;: ,~.!,_.~E_----_'-~ ',:'-. .... . ..... '- Address: 10722 f~ROW R0~j~, S..~. #816 .: .:.. . RANt;fiG Ci~A{;G;;;A, C-" ........ '- ... ::: . : (909) 980-0038 · . ........ · · -....' :P...one: _ ,, ..: . ,. '.'.'- ,s~..: >,- ., D.t.: Y__ ::/./~_ :.?,, '.... . ~.1:,, ... ...... -Signed: ./Z~ ate: - .Signed.: .. Date: , . -, .......... '~!:i-., ,. . . - ' s~.e.~/ '~,.~: .,.~//6./~7 ' Signed: Date: -,,.,..: .... "" '~' . Signed: Date: Signed: Date: .. = . · Signedi' Date: ...: """ . '" :' ,-:-:~.~{:,-::':3,.~.., ,~ .. ""?: .... Signed:'. Date: .........,. . -. .... - ......,..:.==..-. .1:!~ ,. :. Signedi ...,..... Date: ;' "' -: i . , ' , .J: . t~ !';i ,... Signed: Date: ,.. ..:..: :.i:!!~.~::: Signed: Date: .... . _ ~z... .. · . :Signed: ._ Date: ....... ' ' -... '.: .. : 84.."17/'i~7 07:26 - ~0~8~0225 EL~ITE 5UPPL, IE5 INC PAGE TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Biane, Councilmeml~er Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cu.ctalo. CounciimemDer Rex Gutierrez, Counci/memDer 909-477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are oooos_ed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Signed: . Date: ~'/~* ¢7 8igne~: Date: __ Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: ............................ Date: ...........___ SignS: D~e: ..... SignS: Date; Signed: Date: Signed: ._ Date: Signed: _ Date: Signed: ....... Dste: SignS: Dlte: Signed: D~e: Signed: _ __ Date: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Willjams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Ddve Paul Biane, Counciimember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cu.L'talo, Counciimember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 909-477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Phone: QO~ d J -a - _ S]gZed: ~,~ ~ ~ ate: ~- / 2- ~2 Signed: ~;~~~. ~{~~ate: ~- /7- ~ 7 Sign~~~~/~~ate: q'- /7- ~ 7 Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. ISPA 97-01 - MILLER FAMILY & ASSOC. April 17, 1997 Page 2 glare which cannot be mitigated sufficiently to meet the Class A standards." These standards are designed to protect uses on adjoining sites from effects which could adversely affect their functional and economic viability. In addition to compliance with Air Quality Management District standards, all Funeral Homes and Crematories shall be operated so as not to emit odors, heat, particulate matter, or air contaminants which are readily detectable without instruments by the average person beyond any lot line of the lot containing said uses. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above- referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: a. The application does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the Industrial Area Specific Plan or the General Plan and will provide development, within Subarea 8, in a manner consistent with the Industrial Area Specific Plan and the General Plan and with related development, and b. The application promotes the goals and objectives of the Industrial Area Specific Plan; and c. The application will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or. materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity; and d. The application is consistent with the objectives of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, and the purposes of Subarea 8; and e. The application is in conformance with the General Plan; and 4. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the amendment identified in this Ordinance is not defined as a project and is therefore exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Sections 15061 b.3 of the State CEQA Guidelines. 5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Council hereby approves Industrial Area Specific Plan Amendment No. 97-01, amending Table II1-1 and Part IV, Subarea 8, Conditional Uses listing as attached. 6. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this ordinance and shall cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage at least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. terf}/l 8580 oakwood Place, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 (909) 483-1382 · Fax (909) 483-1383 HOUSEWARES INC RECEIVED APR 17 1997 April 11, 1997 City of Rancho Cucamonga City of Rancho Cucarnonga Planning Division P.O. Box 807 P,.ancho CucarnonBa, CA 91729 · Attn.: Plannin~ Division Dear Sirs, Re: Industrial area specific plan amendment 97-01-Miller Family and Association A request to add funeral and crematory services as a conditionally permitted use in Snbarea 8 (General lndnstrial) of the industrial specific plan ~ ' ,' :'.'-'~;~ I,' .' ,'..." ' This letter serves as our NOTICE OF OBJECTION to the above project based on the following reasons:- (l) It will create air pollution to the surrounding area. (2) It will create traffic problem during funeral ceremony. (3) It will create a strong uncomfortable feeling to the residents and tenants in the surrounding area. (4) It will make some customers do not drop by the retail shop in the surrounding area due to the sad atmosphere of this industrial, We are looking forward to hearing the cancellation of the above project soon. Thank you for .~our kind attention. &ASSOC~T~S. ~NC. COI~UI, TING ENGINEERS Civil. Ptenntn~ · SuryeyinO · Envlronmen~ April 17, 1997 Ms. Nancy Fong Scnior Planner City of Rancho Cucamonila 10500 Civic C~tcr Dr. , Rlncho Cucamonga, CA 91729 Rc: Sign OrcL Amend. #97-01 Proposed Texaco Facilities TX356A Dear N~rne. y: In regards to the proposed Sign Ordinance Amcndmcnt #97-01, the proposed verbiage of the ordinsn_ce in your April 17, 1997 staff report is satisfaaory to Texaco Reiing and - Markcling Inc. (TRMI). On behalf of TRMI, wc concur with the staffsport and request the City Council to approve and adopt Sign Ordinance Amendment #97-01. If the City Council objeas to the Sign ~cc Amcndmcnt, we request that thc item be continued until the next City Council Hearing to givc us an oppommity to address the Council' s concerns. Thank you for your time and considerazion on this man~. Very truly yours, TAIT &: ASSOCIATES, INC. K. RICHARD TAIT Vice President cc: Jack Ayers, 'Itt.MI 1100Town & CoUntry Road , Suite 1200 · Orange, CA92868 · (714) 560-8200 · (714) 560-8211 FAX O~hmr Locations: Sara ~sgo, CA - Corlcord. CA , Sscramenlo, CA , Phoerdx. AZ · Tucr, on. AZ TOTAL P. 01 TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Ddve Paul Biane, Councilmember Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Curtalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember 909-477-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are oooosed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Si, " Date:= ' Sk Date: Si Dat~,~ ~ Da~ SignS:' ~~.~ Signed: Date: s,o.-: D.,.: ? ? SignS: Date: L Signed: Date: SignS: ~ ~.- SignS: Date: I Number of pages including cover sheet 13 TO: Mayor William Alexander FROM: RICH FLETCHER Diane Wiiliama i ! ! CERTIFIED LEASING Paul Biane ' ~ 10722 Arrow Route, Suite James Curata/o 308 Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. Rex Gutierrez 91730 Phone 909-4T7-2700 Fax Phone 909-477-2849 Phone (909) 980-3555 Fax Phone (9092 980-79~6 I RE: Zone Chan~.,..Subarea 8 REMARKS: !"1 urgent I)<3 For your review D] Reply ASAP E] Rease Comment Please be certain that _e _eCh council member receives of copy of this correspondence, I am a 16 year resident and business owner in Rancho Cucarnonga. I am opposed to the proposed zone change in Subarea 8 to allow mortuary and cmmatory services, I am also strono_ty opposed to the manner in whK:h the Planning_ COmmission ai~'oved this. The following 12 bumnesses and 32 indWiduals am also opposed to this. I will bdng the originals of these to you tonight at the Public Headng. i will also be present tonight to voice opposition to this on behalf of the Arrow Owners Association, a business condominium complex representing 75 individual properties. Since the majority of business owners in this area am opposed to this, I suspect that we should have a full chamber hall tonight. The Planners have infuriated the business community in the area with their lack of forethought, their. lack. of orooer notice to proDarty __owne_.__m, and their toll dis _reg~_ for Dublic. inDutjnto. this matter. They made no comm..ents as to why a crematory and mortuary in ~is area would be beneficial to anyone except the applicant. They made no comment whatsoever and then voted yes. If them is a councilmember who intends to support this decision, I would like them to explain publicly, In {letall, why they am doing So. If there is a 'burning' need for this serve I'm sum it can be satisfied in a less developed area or in existjng areas already zoned for this use. TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Meml3ers Diane Willtams, Mayor Ro Tern 10500 Ctvlc Center Dnve Paul Biane. CouncilrnemDer Rancho Cucamong8. CA 91730 James V. Cu.ilalo, Counc#memOer Rex Gutterfez, Councitmentber 909- 471-2700 Fax: $09-477-Z849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are 9.gL0.!!g to me proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Cremetory Services ..... Company: Certii:ied Leasing & Yinancia3 8errices Address; 10722 Arrow Route, Suite 306 Runchu cucamonga, Ca. 91730 Phone: ( 909 ) 980-3555 ' ..-' Bigned: Date: Signed: Date: Signed:, , Date: ' Signed: O~te; Signed: Signed: Date: _ _ SIgned: .... Date: Signed: Date: Signed: , Date: Signed: Date: 6iOned: , Date: Signed: __ Date: TO; City of Rancrio Cu{;;among, t William J. Alexander, Mayor City Courtall Members Diane Willjams, Mayor Pro Tern 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Biane, Counc#ntemOer Rancho Cucamonga, CA ~1730 James V. CuGalo, Councilmember Rex Gutierrez, CouncilmemOer $09- 471-2700 Fax: 909-477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Am nendment Dear Councilmeml~ets; We the undersigned are ~ ,~1 to the I~roposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Cremetory Services Company: Address: Phone: Signed: .. . Date: Signed: Dale: Signed; Date: Signed: ___ Date: Signed: Date: __ Signed:, , Date: Signed: _ Die: Signed; .. Date: Signed: --. Date: Signed: . Date; Signed; _, Date: Signed: .., . Date:___ TO: City of Ranclqo Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Meml~ef'S DIana William, Ma3lor Pro Tern 10500 Civic Center Ddve Paul Biane, Counei~mber Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cu~falo, Counclnemb~ Rex Gutierrez, Councilmeml:wr 909- 477-2700 Fax; 909-4T/'-284g Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmcmbera: We the undersigned am ~ to the proposed zoning c,13ange for SuMme 8 to Allow Funeral & Cremetory Services. company://~'~. Z~'~S,J~, ~ t Sign Date: Signed; ........ Dote: . . , Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: ..... Date: _ , Signed: ...... Dme: , , Signed: . Dale; ,., Signed: , , Date: , Signed: .... Date: _ Signed: ... Date: Signed: ..... Date: , Signed: Dam: , ,, Signed: .... Date:, Signed: ....... Dee: Signed: ,, Dee: TO: City of Rancho Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Council Members Oiene VVilliams, MayorPro Tern 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Biane, Coufic#memiX,~' Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cu.ctalo, Counc~Wnemoer Rex Gutlerrez, Cound/meml)et' $09-477-2700 Fax: 909477-2849 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers; We the undersigned am oop..qsed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Address://d'7~,. /A.r[,~.~/r.~(. ~/.,&. trY. C'. ,,. C,~......?/ 7~'d .... '""""" ! ~igned: ...... _._ D~te:, ~igned: ,. . Date; S~lned; Date: Signed: Date: Signed: . Date; _, Signed: ,. Date: ,, , _ --... Signed: Date: Signed: ...... Date: , Signed:, Dale: Signed: , _ _ Dale: ..... Signed: Date: Signed: Dale: Signed: Date: TO: ~lty of Ran~o ~u~monga William J. AlexanGer, ~ity ~ouncil Membe~ Dearie Willjams. Ma~ ~ Tern 10~ Civic ~emer D~e Paul Biane, Ran~o ~ucamonga, ~A 9~ 730 James Y. Cu~alo, Comc~em~r Rex G~ie~ez. 101- 4~-2700 Fax: 909~TT-Z849 Subje~: Sub~ea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned are OgDoled tO the proposed zoning change for Subarea 6 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. ' Phone' . ' Signed: Die; · Signed: __ ... Date: Signed; Date: Signed: Date: __ Signed: Date: Signed; · Dale: Signed: .... Date: Signed: Date: Signed:. . Date: Signed: .. Date; Signed: Date: Signed: Die: Signed:. __ Date: TO: City of Rancimo Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor . CIty Courtall Mealmars Diana Willtams, Mayor RO Tern 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Biane, Counc//~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cu.glalo, Counc/knember Rex Gutlerrez, Courgf/memOer goS- 477'-Z100 Fax: 109-417-2841 5ul~Ject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammenclment Dear Councilmembers: We time undersigneel ere Opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. SKj ate. ~ S'n ate: Signed: ...... Date: Signed: ....... Dale: . Signed: ...... Die: _ Signed: _ , Date; Signed: ... Dale: Signed: Date: .... Signed: .... Signed: ..... Date: Signed:. .... Date: . Signed: _. . D~te: .... Signed: _ . Dale:.. Signed: Dale: 1'O: Cily of Rancha Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor City CoUncil Meml~em Diana Williems, Mayor Pro Tern , 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Blanc. Councilmeal:or Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cu;alo, CounctlmemlJer Rex GutierTez. CouncilmemOwr 909- 477-2700 Fax; $05477-Z845 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammenclment Dear Councllmemlc}em.' We the undersigned are ooeos,ecl to the proposecl zoning cr~ange .for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Cremetory Sewices. Company: RAY' S ~ Z,L, BON, Q,,5, _ Aclaress: ~018Z AF'IR~.,W RTE..neo~ RANCH0 CUCAHONGA ~CA 9'~730 Phone: ( s0$ ) 944 gne .., Signed: Date: ~ ,Signed: Date: Signed:, . _ _,, Date: ,, Signeel: ...... = Date: _ _.. Signed:, , _ Date: ..... Signed: ...... __ _ Date: 6igned: .... IDete: Signed: == .... Dell; _. Signed: .... Date; ,Sighted: ..... Dale: Sagnee: ...... Dell;, Signed: ........ Data: ...... Signed: _ _ ....... Date: TO: Planing Commission City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rand'to Cucamonga, CA 91729 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Rencho Cucamonga Planning Commission: We the undersigned are opposed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Crematory Services. Company: Tt~U_U~-r, . I M6. Sign.:_ _ v -- ~ Date:' t J NI + m mmm ,, -*~mmmmmmmmmmm TO: City o{ Ranctto Cucamonga William J. Alexander, Mayor . City Council Members Diana Willisms, Mayor Pro Tern 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Biane, Cou, ctlmen~er Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cuq;talo, Councllmeml3er Rex Gutlerrez, Councilmember' 909-477-2700 Fax: 909477-2849 Sul~ject: SubA~ea 8 Zonfng Ammendrnent Dear Councilmembers; We the undersigned are oooosed to the proposed zoning change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Cramiron/Scrviceo. · Address:_ (o??,'z. y~....,.~../4..,/y, Phone: ., ~_t~fG~/-domrqr' SignS: Date: Signed; Oate; Signed: Date: · ,aligned: Data: Signed: .... Date; Signed: Die: ,, Signed: Date: Signed: Die: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: ~ . : _: Die: Signed: Date; Signed: _ Date: . '1"0: ~ of ~an~o ~u~mo~a William J. Nexa~er. ~ity ~oun~l Mem~ Diana ~llimms. Me~ ~ Tern 1 ~5~ ~ivic ~enter ~ve N Paul aiene. Ran~o Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cu~alo. Coun~em~ Rex Gmle~, Councl~emO~ , 909- 4~-27~ Fax: ~Tz-ze49 Subje~: Su~rea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dear Councilmembers: We the undersigned am ogDoSed TO the proposed zoning ~ange for SuBarea 8 to Allow Funeral & CrematoP/Services. Company:~~~_______~~ Signed Date: 'f l # /, ! q '7 .. Signed: Date: Signed: ...... Date: Signed: ....... Date: Signed: .......... . Date: Signed:. Darle: Signed: Dale: Signel: , Date: ~igned: _., Date; Signed: :__ := ,~_::_ Date: TO:' Ci~ of Randin Cu~mo~a Winiam J. ~~v ~ · ~ y Coun~.l Mem~ 0iane Wdim; ~.~' T~ ~:~ 105~.Civic Ceffi~ ~ve Paul .81~, ~..... ~o cu.mo~a, CA ~730 Je,n. V.,~. I Rex Gi~ · .'.. ". , , ' ,. , " .., . We the u~e~~ am ~ to the ~~ Z~ ~ ~ ~. 8 to. AHN Funoral ~~;' ~ ' ., . '.'.. . .. . , ~e~: ....... ' ' ~ 'L/. ': .... '.. ' .-'. "'/. :: · ~,__~ ........... ._ '.. ,: - ... . . '.' 4 ' . . -.- ., -~: ~..'~==.~:.:"' '..' ~ :' ....' : ~ Die: .' . . , · m ' ".'*' ' . ~ Dee: ..:.,:,::;.:.~..~ ~._ ~~~~..~.::..:~::~ ~...:;~,...:..... E.,. ;' _ ' _ ...... "'....:' ','-:.':'::."~.-~~ ~~~ ~,/~L.'~.:'.: '~ .'..: c.~'.,:.:":'~.'" ~ ~,.. ~ . , ~; .. , t , _ ~, . . '~'~" . ;.~ '-...... ,..... ''. .... / ~' - ,.. :...--,,.'~ .~;.~ ::....':. :... ~.; '.: ;....: "' .' .~ S~: -__ _ =- .... .', '._. . , -,. . ~ · : . ' ,., .. . , ~ .. ~. .~ ;..; s~: Din:,::,,;.. ,; ~..~~~~ :,.,~. _. :. ....,. .., ..~:.....::'.-.,: .....:.; ,.,...... ................. ; . :. ...: . ~ ...: .: -';.'.:'..,:.'......' ":"':' O~; ..~ :,... ..... ._. ;. . ...' ,..-::::~:~ . . :-- . ;...,.,. ...-.,.: ......: :: - : ... . ~.:,....-.;.~:..'-_.<.. ,; "S . ~._ . _._ ~0:_ '-; .... :'~ ~': . ' . ':, . .'. -. '-..";'.,. '~:..; ;.~: ~;= ~.: ' . , .... .;..S~:. ~:; _,,,- -_.,. ~. = :... . .-:.. .... '..:~.~ .... . .........7~.~ ~,. ' .. -. ,., a . ~": ':" · .. "~~ ~e: ' ,I. ' · ' ~;': . . .... . . -~- ~ __ : .~. - , .-~; .. - . . .... . .... -. "' ' ."' ~e: ........ :'.:. , .: .,...~; : . _. - ........... .. .,::;.' : ......,.: ,.: ......,... ~ - . .. .' -. .: · . . ; . , , ..~..-.'~ .-.: '-.. ., -. ~..'. .. .... . .- } .,. ,~' .. '.:. '- ]-... '. . · . '.. ~. .. .; . .'. . .. .. ~ -~ . : ~.".~ TO: City of Rancho CucamOnga William J. Alexander, Mayor City Coundl MemberS D|,lne Wiffiams, Mayor Pro Tern 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul 8lane, Coun=lmembet : Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. Cu~elo, Rex GuUeffeZ, Co~ml;et' 909-47'r4'/l)1) Fax: $0947'r-2149 Subject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendmenl Dear Councilmembers: We the unders/~ned am o_p,.E.~lLq to the proposed zoning change for 8ubarel 8 tO Allow Fur eel & Cremetory Services. Company:~' /'~.,~ Phone! ~ -- ' 3/~" Signal: ./"// Signea: ................. Dee: ..... Signed; ..... Die: ...... 6igned-- _. Date; r 8igne<3: · Date: Signed: ,, Dee: ,_,_ Signea: Dale: _ _ 81gned: ....... Date: , 81gned: , Die: ; Signed: ......... Die: ,, Bigned: __ , D/~ - 8lOne(l: _--._ _ DIe: _ _ Signed: .... Dee: .... t1:11~ $.'1!1t'..* ,, TO: City of Rancho Cucamongali William J. Alexander, Beyor City council Members :. Diana WilliNnS. Mayor Ro Tern 10500 Civk; Center Drtve :~' Paul Biane, Cour, clVRember Ranc.,ho CucarnonOa, CA 91730 James V. Curtalo, Rex GutierreZ, COLmCmmirda~ " ...... · , . ,. Subject: SubArea B Zoning Amrv~lmertt lOl- 4/7-$100 Fax: 90947/-2141 Deer Councilmembers: We the undersigned are to the proposal2 zoning ~ for SuMme 8 to Allow Funeral & Cremetoo/Services. ~. ~ Company: Continental Fl.o<,r~ng, rnc. 'A~lrm: =: 10763 Bell CuurL Rancttc, Cucamongu, C_'A 9[7.q0 C~()~) t. Jz, l-8305 Phone; ....... Signed: ~' Dete: ~ Signed: ' Dee: ~ :7 Date: 'H'/'~"7/~'~ s~aned: ome: q ' Bigned: DIre: //- ," see:. Dee: E'Uj, TO: City of Rmncho Cuclmonga William J. Aleunder, City Council Members Dlane Willjams, Mlyor Pro Tern 10500 Civic C~nter Ddve Paul Biane, Ram Cucamonga, CA 91730 James V. CurtWo, Rex Gutierrez, Ill- 4T1'-171t) Fax: ltt,4T/-II41 Subled: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Dew' Councilmembers: We the um:lw'igned are ~ to the propose6 zoning ctllnge for Sublima I to Allow Funeral Compeny:~~ Signed: Die: (/-/~ -Y 7 TO: ;City of Rancho Cuca longa Willie J. AlexWhaler, Mayer ,City Coun~l Meet.; DIana Williems. Mayor/~o Tern ;10500 Civic Center c .'ive PaUl Slant, Rlncho Cucamenl)a CA 81730 Jamee V, CurtNo, cout~ Rex 0utierrez, NIl- 4/'/47~ Fax: 101477-1141 ~lubMWCt: ~ubArll 6 Zonir..i Ammendmett Deer Coundlmembem'. We tlqe uneerm~n~ am _c ~ to the proposed zoning ~ange for 9ulyRa Ii to A|iaw FunemJ & Crem/m~/Stayices- Phone:~ ~ "~ Dee: ~ ': IS~ned,, ~,4' ~ m~n~: Din: Signeel: __ __ Date: _ , signeel: __ . _ .- DIre: ,__ Silleel: .,__,_ Dim: _ , - - 8i0nad.' _ . . Dale: _ . ..... , sNinel: ,, _ DN; , Signed: .... _ Deem: _ Bigned: _,____ Dim: . , "Signld: DIll: I. TO: Ctty of Rencho Cucamonge :;' !! WilliNn J. AMxender, Mlyor City Council Members ' Diene Williems. MeW Fko Tern 10500 CiViC Center Drive ~ Paul bane. Co~ Renctlo Cucamonga, CA 917'30 James V. Curtalo, Coun;inember ~ Rex Gutierrez, C~mber ! I01- 4/7-~M lea: 10147/-1141 SuqeCt: SuM, tee. Zoning Amnme~lm~nt Dear Councilmember: We the un~ierNgnml am the ~ zoniv~ change for Subarea 6 to Allow Funeral & Creme~ee/Services. Company' D~ ~ VO~.,~I~ODT3C'I'~ TNC Aclclmss: . 10823 13e~1. Court .. . Z~anchc~ C:ueam~nc~a CA917 30 Phone: 909-466-4700 /- Sign ""' . SIgned: ....... D~t~: ,,Signre:l: ............ D~te: ,,, Signed: _=.-. Die: Sigrmd: _, Date-. ,, Signeel: ......... Die: . . , ,,.Signed: ,. I:hlm; ....... Signed: ...... _ Date: .... · Sigeet. ...... Dale; ~ :_ Signee: ...... Dele: _ . $1gne6: _ . .. Dele: __ .. $igne: ............ Dete; _~ _ Signe: .. Dee: .._ ragheel: Oete: . = P03 TO: City of Rencho Cucemongs WIIliem J. Alexstaler. Meyor City Council Members Olame Willjams, Meyor Pro Tern 10500 Civic Center Drive Paul Siene, Counueem0er Rancho Cucamonga. CA 91730 James V. GunNo, Councfi~le113{~r Rex Gutierrez. CouncflmeflN;er I01-4TZ-2700 FIx: MI-4/7-2141 Sul)ject: SubArea 8 Zoning Ammendment Deer Councilmembers: We the unde~igne~ Ire ~ to the Ixolx~selt zomng change for Subarea 8 to Allow Funeral & Cremetory 8errlees. Signed Date: ,,,Signed: Die: Signed: Date: Signed: Die: Signed: _ _: ...... Die: $igmKl: __ Dis: .. Signed: .... Date: .. Signed: .... Die: Signed:. ;. Dale: Adwanced Coatrang P,~i C,n/br, mi C~li,g .~pet:idlLvt.v .' ~nl 17, 1997 TO: City of Range Cu Council Member; Diana Wii iams city Ran~o 9 i ~ Rex G~ie~ez t ~' 9~- 417-2700 FB: C ' SuNect: Zoning ~ - To Nlow Crematodum Ci~ Council Me~ng ~dl 17, 1997 1:~ ;M " Dear Council Members: '... , Our trusted savants m the planning ~mission showed a ~mplme disr~rd for public opinion during ~e su~ffi public hea~ng on Mar~ 11 th. We ~lle~ over 150 sign{ures and Md numerous business o~~ ~sent in priest. H~eve, the planning ~mmission deeded to fo~ard the reolution to ci~ mun~i for approval. '.; Oun~ the Me~ 11 ~ hearing the only pa~ in favor ~ ~e ~ange ~s ~e a~li~nt (Miller Family). ~e only resin ~ovi~ for implementing this ~ange ~s ~ ~ mNlicant idn't find pdee ev t Consider the foll~ing: 1. Miller Family & Associates operates a funeral home in Corona ~Bdjj39.tLg c~rrmt~od.um. Why? 2. Funeral end Cremation is already zoned in Sub Areas 4, 6 and 16. On what grounds does the City justify changing Ares 8 and the Industrial Specific Plan? P02 ,3. There is no positive reason for neighboring businesses or the City in general tn put a crematorium in the middle of town! This project will cause nothing but problems: traffic, parking, foul odor, air quality, waste water, and DEVALUATION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY ! 4. Rancho Cucamonga is a big City with plenty of open areas. If the City leaders am intent on having a crematorium (for unknown reasons) then put it in an appropriate place! 5. We all bought our prolS~[~/and set up our busin~SSg's' in a certain area with certain expectations as to what types of operations we would have as neighbors. Is the City is willing to disregard the damage to several hunclrecl tax paying existing businesses for one new I~usiness ? We are outragecl by this ludicrous proposal and are asking for your NO VOTE on this matter. If you woulcl like any aclclitional information or details on our position. please call US. ~ar Ru~J./~olta Date: 4-16-97 To: Council Members William Alexander, Mayor City of Rancho Cucamonga Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem 10500 Civic Center Dr. Paul Biane, Councilman Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 James Curatalo, Councilman Rex Gutierrez, Councilman From: Rich Fletcher, President Phone: (909) 980-3555 Arrow Owners Association ' 10722 Arrow Route Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730 Re: Opposition to the proposed Amendment to the Specific Plan, Subarea 8, allowing Funeral & Crematory services CC: Owners, Arrow Owners Association Dear Councilmembers, This correspondence is to inform you that the Board of Directors for the Arrow Owners Association unanimously voted to oppose the above referenced change to our City's Specific Plan. Our Board of Directors consists of five elected officers representing 75 developed business properties with approximately 65 separate owners. The properties, known as the Arrow Business Condominiums, are located directly across the street from the proposed Crematorium and Funeral Home. For various and obvious reasons, we believe that allowing such an operation would be detrimental to our businesses and our property values. Specific concerns expressed by our owners include traffic congestion, odors emitted from the crematodum, and the psychological and emotional stigma attached to such a landmark use. The City already has areas desiqnated for this type of conditional use and it is not necessary to change zoning for one business' benefit. This city has become a first class community because it had originally developed a very good plan to grow our city. We purchased our properties based on expectations of certain uses permitted by the existing plan. We expect that our present city employees should be "protectinfi" our "Specific Plan" and not trying to amend it, in a developed area, for one owner. In this instance, the Planning Commission, for some unexplained reason, "rolled over" to the request of one business owner that isn't even located within Rancho Cucamonqa. At the same time, they snubbed their noses to the voices representin~ over 250 businesses and residents located within our city that attended the Plannin.q Commission Public Headnq and unanimously voiced opposition to this proposed change. The Commissioner's "cop out" to the citizens attending the headng was that they were not "approving or recommending" a change but simply voting to have it "considered". This seemed both condescending and insulting to the intelligence of the attending Public. From documentation on file, the Planning Commission received a letter from the Applicant requesting a change to the Industrial Specific Plan on November 27, 1996. Exactly two short weeks later, in the City Staff Report dated December 11, 1996. Brad Buller, City Planner, recommends "that the Planninq Commission initiate the amendment upon receipt of an application for Specific Plan Amendment and payment of application fees". This sounds to us like this issue was predetermined long before the Planning Commission Public Headng held on March 11, 1997; three months later. This area is densely populated with small businesses. Many of us are actively supporting community functions. Many are active with the Chamber of Commerce. Some of us in opposition to this issue have worked for the City in the ' past, even on the Planning Commission. And the one thing that we all have in common, is that we support the City with business license fees, with sales taxes, with property taxes, and as you well know, with utility taxes. The City Planners, who are not elected, may not have any reason or concerns to listen to local citizens and local businesses if they choose not to. However, our Mayor and our City Council have an express obliqation and responsibility to listen to, to support, and to protect it's constituents. There is overwhelming local Rancho Cucamonga opposition to this change to our Specific Plan being proposed by one. out of town, business owner. The 65 plus business owners of the Arrow Owners Association located on the north side of Arrow Route, in conjunction with over 150 of our business neighbors on the south side of Arrow Route, and in conjunction with the management and owners of the business park east of us across from the Post Office, and in conjunction with the owners of the Cowboy Burger restaurant, who is our business neighbor across Arrow Route, adjacent to and downwind from the proposed crematodum, we all voice our opposition to this proposed Plan change. This is not an example of "planning', but is indeed an example of lack of planninq. We all collectively request that our elected council members listen to our concems and our views on this issue by exercisinq your obliqation to protect and support local constituents by voting NO on this proposed Specific Plan Amendment. Respectively Submitted Arrow Owners Association Richard B. Fletcher, President · ,/~November 2.6, 1996 Chairman and Planning Commission City Of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Subject: Funeral and Crematory Use Within Subarea Eight Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission: Miller Family & Associates is interested in establishing the city's first mortuary. We propose a 10,000 square foot mortuary on a 1.6 acre site on Arrow Route east of Haven Avenue. This location is within Subarea Eight of the Industrial Specific Plan, which does not currently reference funeral and emmatory services. The primary concern with mo/'tuary activities is typically related to funeral processions and the potential impedance of traffic flow. Not all services are held at the mortuary, and less than 30% of the families served will actually require a funeral procession. Further, these services are normally held between 10:00 AM and 3:00 PM, thus avoiding peak commuting areas. The use of traffic control escorts and secondary routes to access the freeways will sufficiently avoid any traffic conflicts. Any other concerns regarding the day to day operations of the mortuary can be addressed through the regulation by the Funeral Directors and Embalmers Law, found in the California Health and Safety Code. In the past year, there were 500 deaths in Rancho Cucamonga. As there 'are no mortuaries in the city, local citizens must drive to Upland or Ontario to obtain these basic services. The neighboring mortuaries, without exception, are all owned by large, out of state funeral conglomerates. We intend to be the only local, family owned and operated mortuary in the greater Raneho Cucamonga area. Mortuaries provide a basic service, integral to the daily function of any community, and are traditionally centrally located. This site, just east of Haven Avenue, which is serviced by an off ramp of Interstate 10, is ideal for our purposes as it provides a visible, easily accessible location not only to the citizens of the community, but their relatives and other visitors unfamiliar with the area. We ask the Planning Commission's support in amending Subarea Eight of the Industrial Specific Plan by allowing funeral and ere'matory services within this area. We wish to emphasize that this action will not initiate a proliferation of funeral homes within the area, as the population of most cities is not large enough to sustain more than one mortuary. This is evidenced by the many neighboring communities that have only one mortuary, if at all. We look forward to making our professional services available to the community. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at (909) 737-3244. Sincerely, Christopher B. Miller~ Miller Family & Assoc~li~l/ .... CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA" STAFF REPORT DATE: December 11, i 996 TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner SUBJECT: MILLER FAMILY & ASSOCIATES - A request to consider initiation of text changes to the .Industrial Area Specific Plan to add Funeral and Crematory Services as a conditionally permitted use in Subarea 8. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS;: Miller Family & Associates desires to open a mortuary within Subarea 8 on the south side of Arrow Route, east of Haven Avenue (see Exhibit "D"). They are requesting that the Planning Commission initiate an amendment to the Industrial Area Specific Plan to allow mortuaries as a conditionally permitted use. Mortuaries are classified as "Funeral and Crematory Services" by the Industrial Area Specific Plan: Funeral and CrematorV Services: Activities typically include, but are not limited to services involving the care, preparation, and disposition of human dead other than in cemeteries. Uses typically include, but are not limited to: funeral homes, crematories, and mausoleums. , Funeral and Crematory Services are currently a conditionally permitted use within Subareas 4, 6, and 16 (see Exhibit "B") which is essentially along Archibald Avenue and Haven Avenue. Subarea 8 lies generally along Arrow Route and is intended for General Industrial activities and to assure for a transition from the Heavy Industrial zone to the south (see Exhibit "E"). RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission initiate the amendment upon receipt of an application .fOr SiSecific Plan Amendment and payment of application fees. Respectfully submitted, City Planner BB:DC:gs Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Letter from Applicant Exhibit "B" - Subarea Map Exhibit "C" - Industrial Area Specific Plan Land Use Table Exhibit "D" - Location Map Exhibit "E" - Subarea 8 Regulations . SUNDAY April 13 1997 SERVING THE COMMUNITIES OF ~IONT · DIAMOND BAR · FONTANA ° GLENDORA · LAVERNE · MONTCLAIR ° ONTARIO · POMONA ° RANCHO CUCAMONGA · SAN DIMAS · UPLAND-' Fos raili' 'ij " "':""., ' against R.C. planners back proposal Death can be hazardous to your :~ ;: ~ a~ saying a~ut the proposed con- ' *~ *~"J,~t),:~ :. ' I~ ~ ~, snction of a mo~uary and cre- ~ .. [ ~ .~.~.~ ;.~ .~ ~.~ ~,~i~,: ,& 'Miller"Fa~nily & Associates~ '.. ~ % ~ ' , .., '~ary in Corona, i9 purchasin~ a ~;: ~;~. .'~" 3-acre site'south or Arrow between Utica Avenue and ~ed RIc~rd Haseld~DailyBul~hn ~,'.' ~ .., Oak Street. Miller ~ami]y & Aie~iatee, said The City Council i9 scheduled the company wants to limit : -'~ I ~unday ~ review Mille~s appli- negative affects it may cause b~ . ' cation ~ amend the zoning for the o~ning the tint moRua~ in ~ ~ . ' ind~tH~ ~ea ~ allow ~er~ ~d cho Cucamonga. · "' cremato~ seaices. The company chose the ArrOW . Tom Zasadzinski/Daily Bulletin ~e Planning Commission sup- ]~ation because any other a~a in ~han9 Lu wears a lioNdragon head Saturday before a peSofinance at the International Festival. ~s the request. the city where a funeral home is their employees have si~ed a ~ti- near homes, causing a bigger tion oppos~g the zoning amend- impact, Huefner said. ' ment. "A funeral home is as essenti~ Having a full?e~ice mo~uary to a community as a hospital or a next door to has fast-food ham- h h burger restaurant makes Pete q urc . ~ i C Among the perf~ers were the ~shino ~laris uncomfo~ble.. "[t's nothing to fear," Huefner Daiko taiko drummers representing Jap~. ~la~s is building a Cowboy said. The West Covina-based ~oup ~orm~ ~ Burger at ~row and ~d Oak. "But you can't fight emotional ~t numbers that require g~ physical , issues. Aiotof~plehe~s~a~ ~en I ~ught my site the prop- conditi,n in addition to ~Dusical talent, said e~ owner pmmi~ ~ office build- marry like they saw Schindle~s Steve Nakanishi, who performs and ~ the ing in the back," said Kntelaris, List. lt's not like that ~ay. troop's general m~agOr, who owns other hamburger ~stau- Basically it's education' of the' Taiwanese studen~ ~ ~n ~. ~ ran~ in I~indale nd Wes~in- public that will sway sup~rt for ~od dance afar ~ng ~d:.. s~r. the mortua~. :':' ~ of other props from the ~ "IfI ~ew (a mo~ua~) wu ~m- According ~ Hue~er, a crema- Economic Ex~u9 ing, I wouldn't build it.' tory would pr~uce less air ~llu-' ~k ~geles, said J~oo In writ~n co~es~ndence to the tion than Cow~y Burger will. ~d student at CI~ city, other business owners have the mortuary might actually ~e dance said the Miller Family Mo~uary "~st~ Ka~iaris' business ~e to is a traditional would r~uce area p~y values, more people will frequent the music 28, business smden~ 4 discourage investment and create ind~tdal a~a in the evening when Graduate Sch~l~','~ an unhealthy business and physi- the streets are' traditionally cal environment. dese~ed. 'Students, frequently~sq~'~olofful: ~n~ outfits, staffed ~ ~~~s of ~is area.. . should not have to Katelaris "emphatically~ dis- tolerate a facility which will intro- agreed that his business might nts. their countries' tra~i~ . duce into the !~al atmosphere the need help to attrnct customers. i ' ~ ' ' , odor and other products of corn- "I have customers come from up ~out boreki and Tur~sb b~Ve~e mong Claremont Graduate School student Jason mation of human remains," wro~ quality of my food and prices," ~y's the ~sty choices. ';' . Kao, wearing a mask symbolizing the god of Wallace Schultz, president orcity Katelads said of his two othe~ Se~ESTIV~A~ fodune, plays a ceremonial drum. Cornmarcia] Management Inc. restaurants. "[ think I will do v~ Marc Huefner, a spokesman for well aL night.' OFFICIAL BALLOT ASSESSMENT BALLOT PROTEST PROCEDURE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 93-1 (MASI PLAZA) Mr. Jack Masi Masi Commerce Center Partners 5416 Electric Avenue ' San Bernardino, CA. 92407 Parcel Identification: SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER: 229-011-35, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, AND 61 Total parcels owned: 26 Aggregate assessment for all parcels: $2,897,132.32 CERTIFICATION OF ENTITLEMENT TO COMPLETE AND SUBMIT BALLOT: To be entitled to complete and submit this ballot, the person completing and submitting this ballot must be (a) the record owner of the property identified above; (b) the person other than the record owner of such property who is directly liable for the payment of the proposed assessment against such property; or © the representative of the person or entity described in (a) or (b) who is legally authorized to complete and submit this ballot for and on behalf of the person or entity described in (a) or (b). The undersigned certifies under penalty of perjury that he/she is entitled to complete and submit this ballot. ~nat~e of person completing ballot Priht name of i~erson completing ballot THIS BALLOT WILL NOT BE TABULATED UNLESS THE ABOVE CERTIFICATION IS EXECUTED BY THE PERSON COMPLETING THIS BALLOT. ' BALLOT QUESTION: To complete this ballot, you must fill in only one of the squares below. Filling in both squares will void this ballot. Do you approve the assessment of the [~ YES above identified property as proposed? [55] NO Upon completion place the ballot in the return envelope and mail or deliver the ballot to the address shown on the return envelope pursuant to the instructions enclosed with this ballot. Annual Engineers Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General City) William J. O'Neil, City Er~'neer TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year1997/98 .................................. 1 Description of Facilities for LMD #1 ......................1 LMD #1 Proposed Budget ............................. 1 District Capital Improvements ..........................3 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 3 Appendix .......................................... 4 Fiscal Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General City Parkways, Medians, Parks and Community Trails) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Facilities for LMD #1 Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (LMD #1 ) represents 33.56 acres of landscape area and 38.25 acres of parks which are located at various sites throughout the City. These sites are not considered to be associated with any one particular area within the City, but rather benefit the entire City on a broader scale. As such, the parcels within this district do not represent a distinct district area as do the City's remaining LMD's. Typically parcels within this district have been annexed upon development The various sites maintained by the district consist of parkways, median islands, paseos, street trees, entry monuments, Community Trails and Parks. The 38.25 acres of parks consist of Bear Gulch Park which is 5 acres, 20 acres of East and West Beryl Park, 5 acres of Old Town Park, 6.5 acres of Church Street Park and the Rancho Cucamonga Senior Center which consists of 1.75 acres. The breakdown of maintained areas is as follows: 96/~)7 97/98 Ground Cover and Shrubs 24.07 24.58 Tuff 1.61 1.61 Parks 38.25 38.25 COmmunity Trails 7.37 7. ~7 Total Area in LMD #1 71.30 Acres 71.81 Acres The ground cover, shrubs and turf areas of the vadous landscape areas and the parks are maintained under contract by a private landscape maintenance company while the equestrian traits are maintained by the City's Trails and Application Crew. LMD #1 Proposed Budget The majority of the budgeted costs for LMD #1 are for direct maintenance of turf, ground cover af~ shrubs and the maintenance of the parks. These functions, along with tree maintenance and certain irrigation system repair and testing are performed through a Contract Services Agreement the City has with a/xtvate landscape maintenance company. The City's Trails and Application Crew maintains the equestrian tfsi,~s within the district. The projected costs to operate and maintain LMD #1 are as foltows: Personnel Regular Payroll S37,510.00 Overtime Salaries $1.400.00 Part-time Salaries S3,600.00 Fringe Benefits $16.420.0(;) Subtotal Personnel $58,930.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations Landscaping $51,430.00 Facilities $14,000.00 Vehicle Maintenance and Operations $18,670.00 General Liability $8,650.00 Emergency & Routine Vehicle Equipment Rental $250.00 Equipment Maintenance $7,190.00 Utilities Water Utilities $140,000.00 Telephone Utilities $2,000.00 Electric Utilities $42,000.00 Contract Services Parkway &Median Landscape Maintenance $288,450.00 Park Landscape Maintenance $156,400.00 Tree Maintenance $18.520.00 Contract Services - Facilities $8.000.00 Su btotal Operations $755,560.00 Capital Expenditures Outlay/Building Improvements $12,880.00 O utlay/Veh icles $24,090.00 Outlay/Equipment $1,560.00 Outlay/Computer $2.970.00 Subtotal Capital Expenditures $41,500.00 Capital Improvement Projects Landscape Plant Material Replacement $10,000.00 Parkway Tree Replacement $3,000.00 ADA Required Tot Lot Retrofit Phase 1 - Bear Gulch Park $30,000.00 Calsense Retrofits $60,000.Q0 Upgrade Brittany Trail $8.000.00 Haven Median Lighting Repair $10,000.00 Concrete Fence Replacement $30.000.00 (Hillside Trails I & 2. Hermosa Trail, Summit Trail) Subtotal Capital Improvement Projects $151,000.00 Assessment Administration and General Overhead $118.250.00 Tax Delinquency ~82.822.00 Total LMO #1 Expenditure Budget $1,208,062.00 Prior Year District Carryover Assessment Revenue Required District Capital Improvements The capital improvement budget for the District consists of $10, O00 for replacement of damaged plants and $3,000 for replacement of trees; $30,000 for Phase I of the required ADA tot lot retrofit at Bear Gulch Park; $8,000 for the ul~grading of the Brittany Trail; $10,000 to repair Haven Avenue median lighting; $60,000 for Calsense retrofits; and $30,000 to replace the concrete fences for Hillside trails No. 1 and 2, Hermosa Trail and Summit Trail. Capital equipment outlay consists of $1,560 (portion of cost) for the purchase of a backhoe attachment. Capital outlay for building improvements consists of S750 for block wall material bins and $1,130 to replace/repair chain link fence for the plant nursery, $8.000 to redesign RCSC landscaping and $3,000 to replace/repair restroom partition. Capital Vehicle Outlay consists of $8,050 (portion of cost) for a truck with utility body F-250 and $16.040 for a portion of the cost of a 35' aerial tower truck. Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $92.21 for the fiscal year 1997/98. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Factor A.U. A.U. Units Single Family Parcel 7240 1.0 7240 $92.21 $667.600.40 Multi-Family Parcel 5486 0.5 2743 $92.21 $252,932.03 Total $920,532.43 Appendix !' j FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 ANNEX_-~TIONS LANDSCAPE .xI.-~INTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 Ap. ril 5.1995 TR 14208 20 du FebmaD' 21, 1996 TR 15707 5 du April 17, 1996 DR 95-30 4 du August 7, 1996 TR 14072 22 du December 4, 1996 TR15730 28 du December 18, 1996 DR 95-2 t 14 du ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LiGHTiNG MAiNTEklANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 2 ~ '. ~::~ * ' ~ ~ ,, ~,~ . ~/A ~ /~ ~ ~ . CITY OF RANC~ CUQMON~ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA A~SESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STRE~..T LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 2 H I..~. H~ ,,~ /J~ A ',"~ H U~' - ,; : .... TH.-t'S_M'': ,..,/,/eEA S OM' C/T Y-NA IN T,:/ I / 1' / , CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMQNGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDtlIO 7",~/.,='//~, _: STATE OF CALIFORNIA " _ ' ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LiGHTiNG MAIIN It'-NAINCE DiSTRiCT NOS. I AND 2 _ ~ ,15'7 . ' . ~ ~0~ "~-....,, k ; CITY' OF RANCI, IO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDIN0 STATE OF CALIFORNIA m;,.,~.-r .',4o. ~5':z0'7 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAIN'T'~NANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STRE=_-T LIGHTING MAIN"1~NANCE5 DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 I II III III III III " --.. DB ~5-~O ~--~ ~ T/q, EE T. _//G ,,Y T ~ EA ~ A. N r,~ . 5 ?'M _-"Z ;' ,, :CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA "~" COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO "x AS S ES S M :.i.,N'T DZAGRA.,"vJ: LA.NDSCA. PE ,.'vL~klNTE,.NA..NCE DISTRZCT ,.NO. 1 STRZET LIGHTING :x'IAINTE.,NA2,q'CE DISTR/CT NOS. 1 A.,N'D 2 H;GHLAND AVe,. i .,. ~ '/' " ~ * HUNTER * DRIVE · .~ ... _ ~ ' !~ 20 21 22 · -~ . . ~ l I 12 13 14 15 16 I7 19: TRACT NO. 14072 LEGEND ....... -....': ?KV,'Y. L,MD MAINT. AREA ~:':Ei EASEMENT LMD MAINT. AREA · STREET LIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~IONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORzNIA Tract No. 12072 ASSESS~vL,F_.,:NT L:\j',,'DSC:\I'I:: ~I:\I~"rE..N.-\,.N'CI:: DISTRICT .NO. 1 57'lz, IZE'F LIGIITI~\'G ,~I.-\I~'~"I'EL~'?\~",'CE DIS'I'RIC'i' ~NOS. I .,~,~'N'D 2 CITY O1 STATE OF CALiFOll"4t:\ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. I STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 2 C/L MAIN STREET ~. .i.J._ _. ~1 PROJECT: DR 95-21 < ! APN CITY OF RANCHO CUC,anVIONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA PROJECT: DR 9_;-2 1 Annual Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Landscape Maintenance District No. 2 (Victoria Planned Community) W~lli-~7-~ J. O'Neil, City Enginee~ TABLE OF CONTENT8 Fiscal Year 199 7/98 ..................................1 Description of Facilities for LMD #2 ......................1 LMD #2 Proposed Budget ............................. 1 District Capital Improvements ..........................3 Assessment Rate Calculation ............ ............. 3 Appendix .......................................... 4 Fiscal Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 2 ( Victoria Planned Community) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Faci~ties for LMD #2 Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (LMD #1) represents landscape sites throughout the Victoria Planned Community. These sites are associated with areas within Victoda and as such any benefit derived from the landscape installation can be directly attributed to those parcels within that community. Because of this, assessments required for this district are charged to those parcels within that planned community. The sites maintained by the district consist of parkways, median islands, street trees, paseos, community trails and parks. The 32.37 acres of parks in Victoda consist of Kenyon Park, Victoria Groves Park, Vintage Park, V~ndrows Park and Ellena Park. Ellena Park, which is 4.87, was accepted into this district for maintenance in March 1996. The breakdown of maintained areas is as follows: 96/97 97/98 Ground Cover and Shrubs 48.68 48.68 Tuff 40.61 40.61 Parks 32.37 32.37 Community Trail~i 3.00 3.0(;) Total Area in LMD #2 124.66Acres 124.66 Acres The ground cover, shrubs and tuff areas of the various landscape areas and the parks are maintained under contract by a private landscape maintenance company while the equestrian trails are maintained by the City's Trails and Application Crew. LMD #2 Proposed Budget The majority of the budgeted costs for LMD #2 are for the direct maintenance of tuff, ground cover, shrubs. These functions, along with tree maintenance and certain irrigation system repair and testing are performed through a Contract Services Agreement the City has with a pdvate !andscaOe main~ company. 'The City's Trails and Application Crew maintains the equestrian trails and the City's Park Maintenance Crews maintain the parks within the district. The projected costs to operate and maintain LMD #2 are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll 5;533,920.00 Overtime Salaries $1,000.00 Part-time Salaries $11,120.00 Fringe Benefits $230,480.0() Subtotal Personnel $776,520.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations Landscaping $68,290.00 Facilities $12,000.00 Vehicle Maintenance and Operations $11,660.00 General Liability $12,950.00 Emergency &Routine Vehicle Equipment Rental $1,200.00 Equipment Maintenance $10,870.00 Utilities Water Utilities $280,000.00 Telephone Utilities $1,500.00 Electric Utilities $24,000.00 Contract Services Parkway &Median Landscape Maintenance $690,940.00 Park Landscape Maintenance $9,400.00 Tree Maintenance $20,960.00 Contract Services - Facilities $11.000.0O S u btotal Operations $1,154,770.00 Capital Expenditures Outlay/Building Improvements $22,700.00 O utl ay/Veh icles $23,350.00 Outlay/Equipment $1,560.00 O utlay/Computer $3.370.0Q Subtotal Capital Expenditures $50,980.00 Capital Improvement Projects Landscape Plant Material Replacement $50,000.00 P a rkway Tree Replacement $6,000.00 Caisense Retrofits $1Q. 000. QQ Subtotal Capital Improvement Projects $66,000.00 Assessment Administration and General Overhead $153,450.00 Tax Delinquency $51.67800 Total LMD #2 Expendfture Budget $2,253,398.00 Prior Year District Carryover <$530.680. Q0> Assessment Revenue Required $1.722.718.00 District Capital/mprovements The capital improvement budget for the District consists of $50,000 for replacement of damaged plants and S6,000 for replacement of trees; and $10,000 for Calsense Retrofits. Capital equipment outlay consists of $1,560 (portion of cost) for the purchase of a backhoe attachment. Capital outlay for building improvements consists of $600 for block wall material bins and $900 to replace/repair chain link fence for the plant nursery, $8,000 for a shade shelter for VVindrows Park tot lot; $8,000 for sign monument replacement at Victoria Park Lane at Base Line; and $5,200 for restroom partition replace/repair. Capital Vehicle Outlay consists of $12,000 (portion of cost) for a truck with utility body F-250 and $11,350 for a portion of the cost of a 35' aerial tower truck. Assessement Rate Calclation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $422.00 for the fiscal year 1997/98. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U. A.U. Single Family Parcel 3795 1.0 3795 S422.00 $1,601,490.00 Multi-Family Parcel 124 1.0 124 S422.00 $52,328.00 Comm/Ind Acre 21.59 2.0 43.18 $422.00 $18,222.00 Vacant Acre 480.34 0.25 120.09 $422.00 $50,678.00 Totals $1,722,718.00 Appendix ,._oUch m j~m,~''' :'~ ~ Immm i=1 -_ ell ' ! I , %...,""L.-,. iC &~ tdl41ltll~eelimmm J : J I eL) ' f~maimM4, I : I· j I : J I : -- ~'~ ...., t m , , t.., t , j j----,. ........-~ - : .. · FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 ANNEXATIONS L~NI)SCAPE M. AENTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 August 21, 1996 TR 15732 33 du ASSESS,_'viF:NT D[AGR,,~,'v[ ; LANDSCA2Z .~'IAI,.NTENANCE DISTRICT NO. - ST~ET LIGHTING >L~INTEN.~NCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 3 .,,,~,_.! CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA C O UNTY O F S AN B E RNA~ IN O ~ , ).._. l ..,,.-,~STATE OF CALIFORNIA U TZ-xCT 15732 Annual Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Landscape Maintenance District No. 3a (Hyssop Maintenance District) William J. O'Neil, City Engineer TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year1997/98 .................................. Description of Facilities for LMD #3a .....................1 LMD #3a Proposed Budget ............................ 1 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 3 Appendix .......................................... 4 Fiscal Year 1997/98 I The FY 97/98 annual report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 3a (Hyssop Maintenance District) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Facilities for LMD #3a II II Landscape Maintenance District No. 3a (LMD #3a) represents a landscape parkway on Hyssop Drive south of Sixth Street. The site is associated with an area within that district and as such any benefit derived fro the landscape installation can be directly attributed to those parcels within that district. Because of this. assessments required for this district are charged to those parcels within that district. The breakdown of maintained areas is as follows: 9~/97' 97/98 Ground Cover and Shrubs 0.14 0.14 Turf 0.00 0.00 Total Area in LMD #3a 0.14 Acres 0.14 Acres The ground cover and shrubs areas are maintained under contract by a private landscape maintenance company. LMD #3a Proposed Budget , The majority of the budgeted costs for LMD #3a are for the direct maintenance of turf, ground cover and shrubs. These. functions. along with tree maintenance and certain irrigation system repair and testing are performed througl~l :;a Contract Services Agreement the City has with a private landscape maintenance company. The projected costs to operate and maintain LMD #3a are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll $0.00 Overtime Salaries $0.00 Part-time Salaries $0.00 Fringe Benefits $0.00 Subtotal Personnel ' $0.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations Landscaping $350.00 Vehicle Maintenance and Operations $0.00 General Liability $40.00 Utilities Water Utilities $600.00 Telephone Utilities $0.00 Electric Utilities $140.00 Contract Services Landscape Maintenance $2.400,05 Subtotal Operations $3,530.00 Capital Expenditures Outlay/Building Improvements $0.00 O u tlay/Ve h icles $ 0.00 Outlay/Equipment $0.00 Outlay/Computer $0,00 Subtotal Capital Expenditures $0.00 Capital Improvement Projects Landscape Plant Material Replacement S2O0.00 Subtotal Capital Improvement Projects $200.00 Assessment Administration and General Overhead $300.00 Total LMD #3a EXpenditure Budget $4.030.00 Prior Year District Carryover <720.00> Assessment Revenue Required ~ Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $413.74 for the fiscal year 1997198. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U. A.U. Industrial Parcel 8 1.0 8 $413.74 $3,310.00 Appendix Annual Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Landscape Maintenance District No. 3b (Commercial/Industrial Maintenance District) Approved: ~' William J. O'Neii, Cit gineer TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 199 7/98 ..................................1 Description of Facilities for LMD #3b .....................1 LMD #3b Proposed Budget ............................ 1 District Capital Improvements ..........................3 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 3 Appendix .......................................... 4 Fisca/ Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 3b (Commercial/Industrial Maintenance District) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Faci~fies for LMD #3b Landscape Maintenance District No. 3b (LMD #3b) represents landscape sites throughout the Commercial/Industrial Maintenance District. These sites are associated with areas within that district and as such any benefit derived from the landscape installation can be directly attributed to those parcels within that district. Because of this, assessments required for this district are charged to those parcels within that district. The various landscape sites that are maintained by this district consist of median islands, parkways, street trees, entry monuments, the landscaping within the Metrolink Station and 22.87 acres of the Adult Sports Park (not including the stadium, parking lots or the maintenance building). The breakdown of maintained areas is as follows: 96197. 97/98 Ground Cover and Shrubs 9.81 9.81 Tuff 3.40 3.40 Parks 22.87 22.87 Total Area in LMD #3b 38.53Acres 38.53 Acres The tuff, ground cover and shrubs areas in the median islands, parkways, entry monuments and the Metrolink Station are maintained under contract by a private landscape maintenenace company. The Adult Sports Park is maintained by City landscape and facility maintenance crews. LMD# 3b Proposed Budget The majority of the budgeted costs for LMD #3b are for the direct maintenance of tuff, ground cover and shrubs. These functions, with the exception of the AduLt Sports Park. along with tree maintenance and certain irrigation system repair and testing are performed through a Contract Services Agreement the City has with a private landscape maintenance company. The projected costs to operate and maintain LMD #3b are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll $110,920.00 Overtime Salaries S2,500.00 Pan-time Salaries S9,550.00 Fringe Benefits 948,460.00 Subtotal Personnel $171,430.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations Landscaping $5,090.00 Sports Complex $34,970.00 Travel &Meetings $400.00 Vehicle Maintenance and Operations $1,030.00 General Liability $3,970.00 Emergency &Routine Vehicle Equipment Rental $1,800.00 Eq u ipment Maintenance $10,000.00 Dues $80.00 Hazard Waste Removal $350.00 Utilities Water Utilities $40,000.00 Telephone Utilities $2,500.00 Electric Utilities $10,000.00 Contract Services Landscape Maintenance $188,460.00 Landscape Maintenance - Sports Complex $10,850.00 Landscape Maintenance - Metrolink $11,200.00 Tree Maintenance 931.760.00 Subtotal Operations $352,460.00 Capital Expenditures Outlay/Building Improvements $95.380.00 O utlayNeh icles $0.00 Outlay/Equipment $27,500.00 Outlay/Computer 9160.00 Subtotal Capital Expenditures $123,040.00 Capital Improvement Projects Landscape Plant Material Replacement $26,000.00 Calsense Retrofits 910,650.00 S u btotal Capital Improvement Projects $36,650.00 Assessment Administration and General Overhead Tax Delinquency $40.378.0(~ Total LMD #3b Expenditure Budget 9772,588.00 Prior Year District Carryover <$168,750.00> Assessment Revenue Required 9603,838.00 District Capital Improvements The caeital improvement Dudget for the District consists of $26,000 for replacement of damaged plants and 510,650 for Calsense Retrofits. Capital equipment consists of $12,500 for a Cushman Utility Vehicle, $12,000 for a field rake and $3,000 for a paint shaker/mixer. Capital outlay for building improvements consists of $25,000 for ADA access to softball dugouts, $150 for block wall material bins for the plant nursery and $230 to replace/repair chain link fence for the plant nursery. Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $352.80 for the fiscal year 1997198. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U. A.U. Commllnd Acre 1711.56 1.0 17tl.56 $352.80 8603,838.00 Appendix FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 ANNEXATIONS LANDSCAPE .~IAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B .X[av 3, 1995 CUP 93-13 2.24 ac Janurn-?' 17, 1996 PM12959 27.17 ac Nlay 15, 1996 CUP 95-19 8.58 ac NIay 15, 1996 CUP 95-I5 5.7 ac June 19, 1996 PM 13845 23.7 ac July 17, 1996 CUP 95-40 1.25 ac December 4, 1996 DR 96-17 2.4 ac ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. , COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA L ASSESSM,ENT D[AGZ~'v[ L.--xzN'DSCAPE ),L4. INTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B STREET LIGHTING )L-XINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 .~N"D 6 AllOW IOUTE f PARCEL MAP 12959-[ < ,-_. > T A C O N 1 A D R. _,.,-/' < < PARCEL 3 o PARCEL I PARCEL 2 .= = PARCEL MAP 12959 > ~ PW 209--'7t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDI'NO STATE OF CALIFOR,NIA 12959 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO, STREET LiGHT]NG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS, 1 AND 5.~, Cl~Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA >9--.~., ~ COUNTY OF SAN BEBNARDII~IO / ~ / ,_ . .~, .~: .. ~,,,,~ .~ ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ',,,_ -, ,~...,'-'% '.- ~ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAP=_ MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NC. 3B STREET LJGHT]NG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NCS. 1 AND 5 ,, ,, - , ........... ' i ' 5'~,~E,~7' """' ~'~, '= "' ~) t/f'.~--' .-- _ _.--f-. crr~ oF RANCHO CtJCAMONGA , COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~' STATE OF CALIFORNIA ,---~: -" ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM ~ANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE ,DIS'T~ICi' NC. 3R S'T~E-"F LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NCS. 1 AND 5., : I F'0OT~ZLL · ~ J : t." i i II I j u- c SE'~:,ST Z~'cg vv~Y Z5 84 23 2Z ZL ZO !9 J..B t ',7/ - A ~--'.'-%' oF. PA~KWA'-(, Ti~'---.~S/- LtGH'i'-,q o, 2: .-,, C]TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA --r--"';"'." ::...,,-:-%~'--c ~ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO -..,,,.., . ,_,-../-,: ,--~:-' P -: STATE OF CALIFORNIA D ~. 1 ~, ~ "~"E -,_, '-'>.,,_,"~, ,' '; L ..... w~ t i ASSESS,."vIENT DIAG1L4~f ~ LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B " STREET LIGHTINGNIAINTENANCEDISTRICTNOS. 1 AND 6 NINT~I ST~r.r--T m. TJ. CITY OF ~~CHO CUCAiVIONG~ COUNTY STATE OF CALIFORNIA CUP 95-40 ASSESSMENT DI'AGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0.3E~ STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N(::)S. 1 AND o 0 . FC_-OTHLLL O..!< _..1 LLI -- r,2 ., ~ EUCAI Y-.D_"T']J~ LEGEND INDICATES STRE="t' TREES o I NDI CATES STRE:"F LIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA :: .'--~-~.,-~; --' COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~,---~ ~ ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA .....-,. ;.._,-.-~..--; · Annual Engineers Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 (Terra Vista Planned Community) William J. O'Neil, City EngineLff/ TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 199 7/98 ..................................1 Description of Facilities for LMD '~ '~ LMD #4 Proposed Budget ............................. 1 Distn'ct Capital Improvements ..........................3 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 3 Appendix .......................................... 4 Fiscal Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 (Terra Vista Planned Community), is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Facilities for LMD ff4 Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 (LMD #-4) represents landscape sites throughout the Tetra Vista Planned Community. These sites are considered to be associated with areas within that district and as such any benefit derived from the landscape installation can be directly attributed to those parcels within that district. Because of this, assessments required for this district are charged to those parcels within that district. The various landscape sites in Tetra Vista that are maintained by the district consist of parkways, median islands, street trees, paseos and parks. The 38.25 acres of park consist of Coyote Canyon Park, Milliken Park, West Greenway Park, Spruce Park and La Mission Park. The breakdown of maintained areas is as follows: The breakdown of maintained areas is as follows: 96~97 97198 Ground Cover and Shrubs 8.35 8.40 Turf 6.58 6.58 Parks 36.23 36.23 Total Area in LMD #-4 51.16 Acres 51.21 Acres The ground cover, shrubs and turf areas that make up the parkways, median islands and paseos are maintained under contract by a private landscape maintenance company The Parks are maintained by the City's Park Maintenance Crews. LMD Proposed Budget The majority of the budgeted costs for LMD ~ are for direct maintenance of tuff, ground cover and shrubs and the maintenance of the parks. These functions, along with tree maintenance and certain irrigation system repair and testing are performed through a Contract Services Agreement the City has with a private landscape maintenance company. The projected costs to operate and maintain LMD #4 are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll $310.070.00 Overtime Salaries $1,000.00 Part-time Salaries $10,640.00 Fringe Benefits $135,040.00 Subtotal Personnel $458,750.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations Landscaping $57,770.00 Facilities $12,000.00 Vehicle Maintenance and Operations $39,640.00 Equipment Maintenance $17,350.00 General Liability $6,350.00 Emergency &Routine Vehicle Equipment Rental $1,200.00 Utilities Water Utilities $120,000.00 Telephone Utilities $2,800.00 Electric Utilities $20,000.00 Contract Services - Parkway &Median Landscape Maintenance $234,320.00 Park Landscape Maintenance $10,400.00 Tree Maintenance $12,230.00 Contract Services - Facilities $11,500.00 Subtotal Operations $545,560.00 Capital Expenditures Outlay/Building Improvements $5.950.00 O utlayNeh icles $7.000.00 Outlay/Equipment $1,320.00 Outlay/Computer $2,450.00 Subtotal Capital Expenditures $16,720.00 Capital Improvement Projects Landscape Plant Material Replacement $20,000.00 ADA Required Tot Lot Retrofit Phase 1 - Milliken & Ccvc~e Canyon Parks $210.000.00 Calsense Retrofits S 10,000.00 Tetra VistaJBaseline Reconstruct Haven Median & Replace Plant Material $374,Q00.00 S ubtotal Capital Improvement Projects $614,000.00 Assessment Administration and General Overhead $95,420.00 Tax Delinquency 89.461 Total LMD #.4 Expenditure Budget $1,739,911.00 Prior Year District Carryover <$668.8..40.00> Assessment Revenue Required District Capital Improvements The .:asi:al irr',srovemen: Dud,~et for :me Dis.:r:c: :onsZs:s :f S37t..CCO :s recsns,:ruc: :~,e Baseline/Haven ,',',e:ian and replace .slant material; 3210,000 for ADA re.Zuirea retrofit for tot Ices at ,Milliken and Coyo:e Canyon Parks: 520.,3C'0 :o reelace damaged landscape .c!anc material and 510,000 for colsense retrofits throughout '~"' dis:riot. Ca:,itai equi.~mer:..: outlay consists of Sl.320 (port, ion of cost) for the purchase of a iaac:<hoe a:achment. CaDital outlay for ~uilding improvements consists of S3OO for block wall material bins and 545,3 to reDlace/repair chain link fence for the plant nursery, and SS.2rjO'~a reelace/repair restroom pa~;,tions. Canitat Vehicle Ourlay consists of ST.OOO (portion of cos:) for a truck with utili~ boOy F-250. Assessment Rate Calculation It ;s recommended that the rate per assessmen~ unit (A.U.) net be increased in fiscal year 1997/98. The following ta~',e summarizes the assessment ra.',e for the ~istrict: ' -~ Use :hysical =.' of A.U '~ Of Rate/ Revenue Unit TySe Physical Units Factor A.U. A.U. Sjn,;:e Famiiv Parcel 17~5 I 1T=5 252.50 .',tu;,',i-,-'am;iy ?arcel 2499 i 2=-c9 222.C0 5554.77~.00 CcrT'.m, ercial Acre 197.5 1 197.5 382.99 S75,580. G0 Total 51,071.071 Appendix FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 ANNE.'C-XTIONS LANDSCAPE ,xIAEN'TENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 December 20, 1995 PNf 14022 66.25 ac June 5, 1996 PNI 14786 10.2 ac June 19, 1996 PM 14806 25.0 ac August 21, 1996 TR 15526 55 du November 6, 1996 TR 15725 30 du ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE' DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 4 f ~.,,~,,";' .......... :"-~' ~ ' """" __. . ~ --" l,:::'. ',.. { / i'..-'...'~ r:: ....... "' '~.'m.~.-~:~ --._..~..~._.~. %...-. ,.-, .---.'--::::::-;..': '!B;z, .--::.:...,,.,:: P-=.'.m"i L.~'.,' !i"~ ""' :t"T'.'-'~ ~F~=:'~-'''' ,., . _ _ J . .. F~ ~ ...................~..-n--"-' ...... ....... /~ ~ ~m ~ ~w '~1 i,3 ti kll ~ 7~1 tdl =- -- k4 .:'! , , , ___.. =. 1 I=,--=N,D O sT,~P-=--T L_L~ .~T CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCI5 DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET LJGHTING.MAINTEHANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 4 / // CITY OF R&NCHO. CUCAMOIIGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDtNO STATE OF- CALIFORNIA ASSF-SSIVIF,.N1T DIAGRANt LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. ~ ST~F_ET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND ~ ~.~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMQNGA · ~""'."~-~'~-2 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO "'~"" "^: ,:,~ 1'--.'2£ :.- ~"'~': STAT ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 4 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ASSESSME,NT DIAGZ4.M LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRI~ NOS. I AND 4 L~ID MAINTENANCE AREA - ................ .-..- ' . ~ I'~ L ~ ; ' ' ,...:,' -i :~~! :.~','\"'~': ~"..:-. :~'-' 'i-,,L.." '; ' .- I. L i ~'_",;' U",'."."'. ....... :' .......... .,.2 - ., ,:; ,. '~,"..;; l i ~'..--'_:. ' i ' . ....::.:!~ __. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERzNARDINO , PROJECT- TR 15725 Annual Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Landscape Maintenance District No. 5 (Tot Lot) William J. O'Neil, City EngineL~ ' TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 199 7/98 .................................. 1 Description of Facilities for LMD #5 ......................1 LMD #5 Proposed Budget ............................. 1 District Capital Improvements ..........................3 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 3 Appendix .......................................... 4 Fiscal Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 5 (Tot Lot) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Facilities for LMD #5 Landscape Maintenance District No. 5 (LMD #5) represents a landscaped tot lot, located on the southwest corner of Andover Place and Bedford Drive. This site is associated with a group of 44 single family parcels which all have a common usage of the tot lot such that any benefit derived from the landscaping can be directly attributed to those particular parcels. Because of this, assessment required for this district are charged to those specific parcels. The breakdown of maintained areas is as follows: 96/97 97/98 Ground Cover and Shrubs 0.14 0.14 Turf 0.00 O.00 Total Area in LMD #5 0.14 Acres 0,14 Acres The ground cover and shrubs areas are maintained under contract by a private landscape maintenance company, LMD #5 Proposed Budget The majority of the budgeted costs for LMD #5 are for the direct maintenance of ground cover and shrubs. These functions, along with tree maintenance and certain irrigation system repair and testing are performed through a Contract Sen/ices Agreement the City has with a private landscape maintenance company. The projected costs to operate and maintain LMD #5 are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll $0.00 Overtime Salaries $0.00 Part-time Salaries , $0.00 Fringe Benefits $0.00 Subtotal Personnel $0.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations Landscaping $400.00 Vehicle Maintenance and Operations $70.00 General Liability $30.00 Utilities Water utilities $300.00 Telephone Utilities $0.00 Electric Utilities $150.00 Contract Services Landscape Maintenance $1,410.00 Su btotal Operations $2,360.00 Capital Expenditures Outlay/Building Improvements $0.00 O utlay/Veh icles $0.00 Outlay/Equipment $0.00 Outlay/Computer $0.00 Subtotal Capital Expenditures $0.00 Capital Improvement Projects ADA required tot lot retrofit $4,500.00 Subtotal Capital Improvement Projects 54,500 .O0 Assessment Administration and General Overhead $630.00 Tax Delinquency $105.00 Total LMD #5 Expenditure Budget $7,595.00 Prior Year District Carryover <$2.610.00> Assessment Revenue Required $4,985.00 District Capital Improvements The capital improvement budget for the District consists of $4,500 for the required ADA tot lot retrofit. Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $113.29 for the fiscal year 1997/98. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U. A.U. Single Family Parcel 44 1.0 44 $113.29 $4,985.00 Annual Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (Arterial Streets) William J. O'Neil, City Er~ineer TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 199 7/98 .................................. 1 Description of Facilities for SLD SLD #1 Proposed Budget .............................. 2 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 2 Appendix .......................................... 3 Fiscal Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (Arterial) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Facilities for SLD #1 Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (SLD #1 )) is used to fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on arterial streets throughout the City. The facilities within this district, being located on arterial streets, have been determined to benefit the City as a whole on an equal basis and as such those costs associated with the maintenance and/or installation of the facilities is assigned to the City wide district. This sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on arterial streets and traffic signals on arterial streets within the rights-of-way or designated easements of streets dedicated to the City. Typically, street lights are installed by private development as a condition of a development projecrs approval. Traffic signals can be installed by development or as a City capital improvement project. Historically, the installation of street lights and traffic signals has not been funded with Street Light District funds, however, this is permitted under the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. Any new street lights in areas to be maintained by the District, will become part of the active work program at such time as these new areas are annexed into the District. The normal process will be the dedication of the areas to the City, at which time a sufficient non-refundable deposit will be made by the developer to the City. This deposit will provide for costs of energizing and six months of ordinary and usual maintenance operation and servicing of the street lights in each development at the time of initial operation of the lighting system. The costs will be based on the number and type of street lights and based on Southern California Edison Company's rate for street lights. Immediately upon energization of the street lights, those street lights will become a part of the work program of the district. SLD Proposed Budget The majority of the budgeted operating costs for SLD #1 is for electric utility charges for the street lights and traffic signals within the district. The projected costs to operate and maintain SLD #1 are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll 5;0.00 Fringe Benefits $0.00 Subtotal Personnel $0.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations $22,200.00 Equipment Maintenance $920.00 Contract Services $80,000.00 Emergency &Regular Vehicle $1,500.00 General Liability $4,900.00 Electric Utilities $260,000.00 Subtotal Operations $369,520.00 Capital Expenditures Equipment 5;0.00 Subtotal Capital Expenditures $0.00 Assessment Administration and General Overhead 5;124,900.00 Tax Delinquency $26,740.00 Total SLD #1 Expenditure Budget 5;521,160.00 Prior Year District Carryover <$66.240.00> Assessment Revenue Required $454,920.00 Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at 5;17.77for the fiscal year 1997f98. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U. A.U. Single Family P=,.-:~. 16,328 1.0 16,328 $17.77 $290,149.0Q Multi-Family Parcel 5,527 1.0 5,527 S 17 77 S98,215.00 Commercial Acre 1872.72 2.0 3,745.44 $17.77 $66,556.00 Total 5454,920.00 ~_mcn rn Appendix District Capital Improvements The capital improvement budget for the District consists of $2,000 for replacement of damaged plants and $2,500 for the replacement of trees Capital Vehicle Outlay consist of $5,700 (portion of cost) for a 35" aerial tower truck. Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $151.45 for the fiscal year 1997/98. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U. A.U. Single Family Parcel 108 1.0 108 $151.45 $16,357.00 Total Fiscal Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 8 (South Etiwanda) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2. Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Facilities for LMD #8 Landscape Maintenance District No. 8 (LMD #8) represents landscape sites throughout the Etiwanda South Area. These sites are associated with areas within that district and as such any benefit derived from the landscape installation can be directly attributed to those parcels within that district. Because of this, assessments required for this district are charged to those parcels within that district. The various sites maintained by the district consist of parkways, median islands, paseos, street trees and Community Trails. The breakdown of maintained areas is as follows: 96/97 97/98 Ground Cover and Shrubs 0.23 0.23 Turf 0.14 0.14 Total Area 0.37 Acres 0.37 Acres LMD #8 Proposed Budget The budgeted costs for LMD #,8 are for direct maintenance of tuff, ground cover and shrubs. These functions, along with tree maintenance and certain irrigation system repair and testing are performed through a Contract Services Agreement the City has with a private landscape maintenance company. The Projected costs to operate and maintain LMD #8 are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll $0.00 Over Time $0.00 Pan-time Salaries $0,00 Fringe Benefits $0.00 Subtotal Personnel $0.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations Landscaping $1,190.00 Vehicle Maintenance and Operations $370.00 General Liability $130.00 Emergency & Routine Vehicle Equipment Rental $0.00 Equipment Maintenance $0.00 Utilities Water Utilities $1,500.00 Telephone Utilities $50000 Electric Utilities $300.00 Contract Services Parkway &Median Landscape Maintenance $7,420.00 Tree Maintenance $0.00 Subtotal Operations $11.41 0.00 Capital Expenditures Outlay/Building Improvements $0.00 OutlayNehicles $0.00 Outlay/Equipment $0.00 O utlay/Computer $120.00 Subtotal Capital Expenditures $120.00 Capital Improvement Projects Landscape Plant Material Replacement $2.000.00 Parkway Tree Replacement $2,500.00 S u btotal Ca pital Improvement Projects $4,500.00 Assessment Administration and General Overhead $1,850.00 Tax Delinquency $327.00 Total LMD #4i Expenditure Budget ~18,207.00 Prior Year District Carryover S ~ ,850.00 Assessment Revenue Required $16,357.00 TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 199 7/98 ..................................1 Description of Facilities for LMD #8 ......................1 LMD #8 Proposed Budget ............................. 1 District Capital Improvements ..........................3 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 3 Appendix ............................. .............. 4 Annual Engineers Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Landscape Maintenance District No. 8 (South Etiwanda) Wi!lia~rn~. O'Neil, City Engineer ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM L.-~'DSCA?E .',.L-LT'~"~_:",,'.-L.",'CE DISTR.ICT NO. S ST?~.ET LZGHT..~'G .~,t~F~'TE.~'.-L.\'CE D[STECT NOS. t .-LN'D ~ ',,VILSON A~c"~,.'b'E" / --. / / L.~N~ 5 C .~ E :~. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA :'~>~~ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO . j~-- '~'~ ~ ~ Tt~CTS 13566 ,TL~Z~.~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~3566-z FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 ANNE.'C-~TIONS L~NI)SCAPE ,~L~EN'TENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 November 20, 1996 TR 13566 13 du November 20, 1996 TR 13566-2 29 du Appendix District Capital Improvements The capital improvement budget for the District consists of $10,000 for replacement of damaged plants, S3,000 for replacement of trees; $10,000 for Calsense Retrofits; $27,000 to resurface the tot lot and Etiwanda Creek Park and S75,000 for soil/sod renovation at Etiwanda Creek Park. Capital Vehicle Outlay consist of $2, 100 for a portion of the cost of a truck with utility body F-250 and $9,450 for a portion of the cost of a 35' aerial tower truck. Capital equipment outlay consists of $480 (portion of cost) for the purchase of a backhoe attachment. Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $307.05 for the fiscal year 1997/98. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U. A.U. Single Family Parcel 1039 1.0 1039 $307.05 S319,025.00 Commllnd Acre 5 2.0 10 $307.05 $3,070.00 Total $322,095.00 Fiscal Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 7 (North Etiwanda) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Facilities for LMD #7 Landscape Maintenance District No. 7 (LMD #7) represents landscape sites throughout the Etiwanda North Area. These sites are associated with areas within that district and as such any benefit derived from the landscape installation can be directly attributed to those parcels within that district. Because of this, assessments required for this district are charged to those parcels within that district. The various sites maintained by the district consist of parkways, median islands, paseos, street trees, Community Trails and Etiwanda Creek Park. The breakdown of maintained areas is as follows: 96/97 97/98 Ground Cover and Shrubs 7.54 7.54 Turf 4.02 4.02 Parks 12.00 12.00 Community Trails 2.00 2,00 Total Area 25.56 Acres 25.56Acres LMD #7 Proposed BUdget The budgeted costs for LMD #7 are for direct maintenance of turf, ground cover. shrub and the park. These functions except for Etiwanda Creek Park and certain irrigation system repair and testing are performed through a Contract Services Agreement the City has with a private landscape maintenance company. The City's Trails and Application Crew maintains the Community Trails. Etiwanda Creek Park is maintained by the City's Park Maintenance Crew. The projected costs to operate and maintain LMD #7 are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll $28,510.00 Over Time 500.00 Pan-time Salaries $2,560.00 Fringe Benefits $12,460.00 Subtotal Personnel $44,030.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations Landscaping $3,900.00 Trees 2,500.00 Parks $18,550.00 Facilities $1,900.00 Vehicle Maintenance and Operations $1,850.00 General Liability $2,380.00 Emergency & Routine Vehicle Equipment Rental $250.00 Equipment Maintenance S500.00 Utilities Water Utilities $36,000.00 Telephone Utilities $2,000.00 Electric Utilities $3,600.00 Contract Services Parkway &Median Landscape Maintenance $108,470.00 Tree Maintenance $22,270.00 Parks $2,650.00 Facilities $3,400.00 Subtotal Operations $210,220.00 Capital Expenditures Outlay/Building Improvements $0.00 OutlayNehicles $2,100.00 Outlay/Equipment $480.00 Outlay/Computer $760.00 Subtotal Capital Expenditures $12,790.00 Capital Improvement Projects Landscape Plant Material Replacement $10,000.00 Parkway Tree Replacement $3.000. O0 Calsense Retrofits $10,000.00 Etiwanda Creek Park Soil/Sod Renovation $75,000.00 Etiwanda Creek Park Tot Lot Surfacing S27 000.00 Subtotal Capital Improvement Projects $125,000.00 Assessmerit Administration and General Overhead $29.8~.00 Tax Delinquency S19.325.00 Total LMD #7 Expenditure Budget $441,195.00 Prior Year District Carryover <119, t00.00> Assessment Revenue Required S32~, 0.95... 0.0 TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 199 7/98 ........................: .........1 Description of Facilities for LMD #7 ...................... LMD #7 Proposed Budget ............................. District Capital Improvements ..........................3 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 3 Appendix .......................................... 4 Annual Engineers Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Landscape Maintenance District No. 7 (North Etiwanda) ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. ~ STREET LJGHT]NG MAJNTENANC2.- DISTRICT NCS. 1 AND ,..5 -- H/ 3'5'~.' -/ ,'=// Q ~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -' ,, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO % .>- , ~ / 7'--'~.,..,-_:',. , ~ · ,~,~--' 5:' ,,' ST~T~- Q~ ¢~!~OR~IA FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 ANNEXATIONS L-XNDSCAPE .~,I. AL'N'TENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 5uly 3, 1996 TR 13835 78 du Appendix District Capital Improvements #6 The capital improvement budget for the District consists of $20,000 for replacement of damaged plants, S12,000 for replacement of trees; and $10,000 for Calsense Retrofits. Capital outlay for building improvements consists of $300 for block wall material bins and $450 to replace/repair chain link fence for the plant nursery. Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $246.97 for the fiscal year 1997/98. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U. A.U. Single Family Parcel 1249 1.0 1249 $246.97 $308,466.00 Fiscal Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 6 (Caryn Planned Community) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Facilities for LMD #6 Landscape Maintenance District No. 6 (LMD ~) represents landscape sites throughout the Caryn Planned Community. These sites are associated with areas within that district and as such any benefit derived from the landscape installation can be directly attributed to those parcels within that district. Because of this, assessments required for this district' are charged to those parcels within that district. The various sites maintained by the district consist of parkways, median islands, paseos, street trees, and Community Trails. The breakdown of maintained areas is as follows: The breakdown of maintained areas is as follows: 9~/97 97/98 Ground Cover and Shrubs 20.74 20.74 Turf 3.94 3.94 Community Trails 3.30 3.30 Total Area 27.98 Acres 27.98 Acres The ground cover, shrubs and turf areas that make up the parkways, median islands and paseos are maintained under contract by a private landscape maintenance company while the Community Trails are maintained by the City's Trails and Application Crew. LMD #6 Proposed Budget The majority of the budgeted costs for LMD #6 are for direct maintenance of turf, ground cover and shrubs. These functions, along with tree maintenance and certain irrigation system repair and testing are performed through a Contract Services Agreement the City has with a private landscape maintenance company. The City's Trails and Application Crew maintains the Community Trails within the district. The .projected costs to operate and maintain LMD #-6 are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll $13,180.00 Pan-time Salaries $520.00 Fringe Benefits $5,7100.00 Subtotal Personnel $19,410.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations Landscaping $8,780.00 Vehicle Maintenance and Operations $2,430.00 General Liability $3,440.00 Emergency &Routine Vehicle Equipment Rental $0.00 Equipment Maintenance $800.00 Utilities Water Utilities $75,000.00 Telephone Utilities $0.00 Electric Utilities $3,500.00 Contract Services Parkway &Median Landscape Maintenance $191,110.00 Tree Maintenance $31.900.00 Subtotal Operations $316,960.00 Capital Expenditures Outlay/Building Improvements $750.00 OutlayNehicles S0.00 Outlay/Equipment $0.00 Outlay/Computer $400.00 Subtotal Capital Expenditures $1,150.00 Capital Improvement Projects Landscape Plant Material Replacement $20,000.00 Parkway Tree Replacement $12,000.00 Calsense Retrofits $10.000.00 Subtotal Capital Improvement Projects $42,000.00 Assessment Administration and General Overhead $30,090.00 Tax Delinquency S9,256.00 ToTal LMD ~6 Expenditure Budget S4~, 885 Prior Year District Carryover <$1 Assessment Revenue Required $308,466.00 TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 199 7/98 ..................................1 Description of Facilities for LMD #6 ......................1 . LMD #6 Proposed Budget ............................. 1 District Capital Improvements ..........................3 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 3 Appendix .......................................... 4 Annual Engineers Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Landscape Maintenance District No. 6 (Caryn Planned Community) William J. O'Neil, City Engines4z Appendix Appendix FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 ANNEXATIONS STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 1 April 5, 1995 TR 14208 20 du May 3, 1995 CUP 93-13 2.24 ac December 20, 1995 PM 14022 66.25 ac January 17, 1996 PM 12959 27.17 ac February 21, 1996 TR 15707 5 du April 17, 1996 DR 95-30 4 du May 15, 1996 CUP 95-19 8.58 ac May 15, 1996 CUP 95-15 5.7 ac June 5, 1996 PM 14786 10.2 ac June 19, 1996 PM 14806 25.0 ac June 19, 1996 PM 13845 23.7 ac July 3, 1996 TR 13835 78 du July 17, 1996 CUP 95-40 1.25 ac August 7, 1996 TR 14072 22 du August 21, 1996 TR 15732 33 du August 21, 1996 TR 15526 55 du November 6, 1996 TR 15725 30 du November 20, 1996 TR 13566 13 du November 20, 1996 TR 13566-2 29 du December 4, 1996 TR15730 28 du FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 ANNEXATIONS STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 1 Cont ..... December 4, 1996 DR 96-17 2.4 ac December 18, 1996 DR 95-21 14 du ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LiGHTiNG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AN0 2 ~. ,~, /, . ... -- /, r.,//,.,r -.r//'~,~ ~" p,.__ I CITY OF RANClIO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT. NOS. I AND 6 .CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET LJGHTtNG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 4 · ,7--.. ,...... , ~ . ', I ,__' \ \ ....... "' ';;'..'-...'---.~7-~ ~ ..~~,~,..~ '"' -- ,--, ii ...',~::~.F:ij . . .~_.--,, . -~, -'-. - i " ~" ' ~,-.,...-11 i~l : .""'~Z1:Z' - Tt .- .. ,' d-"..., , : . , \ ' LF-'Z-Z-.ND 0 sTR~.'-T L_L~ ~,T N.T.5. ~_~.:..:,c~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~.~/ ~ ~ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO "'~~, STATE OF CALIFORNIA --!AtA,--.;; A S S E S S M E :N' T D[AGR_~'vJ: L.4jN'DSCAPE .~L-XINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B STREET LIGHTING :'vL-XlNTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 .&N'D 6 ARROW ROUTE PARCEL Z .-,,: > TACOMA DR. // < ~-~ v PARCEL 3 c PARCEL 1 PARCEL 2 z PARCEL MAP 129~9 ~ A~x~ !~a-~? I -08 i CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~IONGA COUNTY OF SAN BEI~NARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA P3,I 12959 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LiGHTiNG MAJhl I=NANCj~ DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 ~'. - : ~ }. t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO .,~ STATE OF C~LIFORNIA ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAIN'T'ENANCE DISTRICT N0. I STRET LJGHTiNG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NQS. I AND 2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~A~~. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~~ ~-~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA _, ~,,~~ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE GISTRICT N0.3E~ STREET LiGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NC)S. 1 ANG 5,,, O' C'~//= ~_~- /~ / CfTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA .- ;~~ ~ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO '~~}; STATE OF CALIFORNIA ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NC. 3B STREET ~GHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NCS. 1 AND 5 ;, Cu,~ P5-/5 City OF RANCHO CUCAMO NGA ,;-~.:~ ~ COUNTY OF SAN BEttNARDINO ~.,~ ~'.: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~;~ ~~-./~ A,,qSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 4 P.II. 113.. 141'14 PC::.,, I P.I.. IC). IK::.. 4 C,z,//_//f:'C/./,5'7. p.,,~ m. ~,m ,.,,.L ~u/x',-u "- " I I / CITY OF RANCHO' CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BE~NARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA ASSESS~-qENT DIAGRAz~ LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NC)S. 1 AND 4 "> .~.~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMQNGA ~:'-"-'~~, ~- COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO "_..,~.'-." -~:,..~'~ .~-~' ~ STAT~ OF CALIFORNIA ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3,..R STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 5., ; F00THZLL BOULEVARD , L 2 ~_ 3 . 9 _ C SE..BASTTAN wAY 'L=-.G-T-.ND ,, A.p, EA' oF. F"A~KWA"Y "T'~B~S/.L../GH'T'S o 22 .,.. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - ,~-~].~ --' COUNTY OF SAN BERNARD{NO ~ , ~,r -- , ~-. ,~.~-~ y ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA P, ~ .~j - .-, ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. ~' STREET LJGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND ,5., CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STAT~ OF CALIFORNIA ASSESSMENT DZAGKAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICTNOS. 1 AND 6 NINT~I STREET APN 207-271-52 NICtlOLS ~.GG RANCH PROJECT SITE '.:'- ".. .. -.% CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ') COUNTY OF SAN BERzNARDINO STATE OF CALIFOR.NIA " CUP 95-40 ASSESSMEN7 DIAGZ~f LANDSCAPE ,.'vL4INTENANCE DISTi:~CT ,.NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING~'L4INTEN.-~NCEDISTRICTNOS. 1 AN'D 2 HIGHLAND AVE. i ' "% ~,/2' '" '~ I0 9 3 76 5 z 3 2 I ./ ~ ./ .,/ · z "* HUNTER *DRIVE .. I I 12 13 14 15 I~ 17 19 . 2021 22 ·, ...... . IRA CT NO. ! 4072 / LEGEND ...... -:.: ?K~',tY. LMD ,',,'tAINT. AREA EASEMENT LMD ,'.fAINT. AREA. · STRE'-T LIGHTS .,~j,~. CITY OF R_'~NCHO CUCATVIONGA :} COUNTY OF SAN BEP,~NARDINO , :',.,?-_k STATE OF CAL/FORaNIA ~,,~~~,~~ Trncr No. 1407! \ A S S E S S ,.'vi2>'T D IA LANDSCAPE .:'vIAINTF:?<ANCZ DISTRICT NO. 2 STREET LIGHTliNG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 3 LEGEND G ~T G t jT.' · .STiqE~T s,'ra.z-'r r~--- ,, ~ " . . ': li' , . G CANOPY ' ... ,~ FAN' P,~J,2,1S " .  PICV.'Y L.%IC) .", S'rXEET LZGHTS IJ -ST~i~T [ . '-', -"J _ . ,.-,.~j~,:.. .~ . , ---'-- · · ---o,',S~:.~.:-.qO,v3,' ,,,.rJ. 4 .' _--_ · '7 ' . __.__ , / / / / j ,,.~7~j:~,~c CITY OF RANCHO CUCA>IONGA , '>i~ _2,.< ") COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~" >~ , ~ STATE OF CALIFOi'{NIA R TI(4CT 15732 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4. STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 4 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO .-, .,:,,,,. %:-5 ""7 ~-- --,,,.,. ,,- _ ~. ~ ~-- ,': STATE OF CA! IFORN~ t~ ...... ASSESSMENT D.rAGF~M LANDSCAI'E MAItNTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET LIGHTING MAIN'FENANCE DISTRICT NOS. i AND 4 L~ID MAINTENANCE Ai~EA .. · --:,- ------------:" .... ' '~.'rz. "-_'.z.~"_T'.'~.~, "' .........."- Z-j :z · .. -. ~ Ii1.~,~l'__. l ....... ; · . ...... · -- : :':::' ' ";2'. i "'" )! ~: :~" .:v _....: ...., CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~IONGA COUNTY OF SAN BEI'LN'ARDINO I'ROjECT- TR 15725 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM -- / I !~" / iL ..-LN"D 5 C .-LP E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - ;~,-,:,-~,~. ~ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO -~,--2 ,: STATE OF CALIFORNIA 13566-2 ,_.-,-~_.,--<,.-- AS S E S S MENT D [AG L.-\i',,'DSC.-\I'E ~I-\I~"i'E,,~'A,N'CE DISTRICT ..-\'0. 1 5]'i~EE'I' LIGiITI?','G ~Xl,.\I~N'I~EN:\h'~E'DI~'I'I~IC'i' ~'OS. I ..\~XD 2 ,.. I!,\AIILI'I'O,N STILE :." i . -.r___ ~. ....................... .... :""""': 'i., /_.:..~..z..=...,__.~:.,.::.:.,~.~,,:a. ,"' ....' '.,;---.~_;%=. ~c~::~-:,:i~e5~:----~,-.": '._ ! ' ~ 'z,:-',~~5-i:,'.-" i..i'j ';";"";"""':'-" "" :""-"r"' __.. .-_:_, . ..,o ,.,.. .'r ; ~,; ,. _, , / ....-,-._' ,._,c ___., .... _ ' :"i/' "!, T- Z.i/ "'="' LM;":'t~'j~INTENANCE ,-',,.fLEA ~"' PROJECT: T1LA. CT 15730 ~ .,. =:zrr~,,.~ I I  CITY OIr IL~XNCI-IO CUCA,3'IO,NGA ~" ~ COUNTY OF SAN BEIZ_L"q'AILDINO , ~. _,; STATE OF CALIFORz'x'IA ~ 'i'IL-\C'I' 15TSlJ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 0 0 FOPTHU l 0-~ uJ -- C./'J LEGEND * INDICATES STREET TREES o INDICATES STREET LIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. I STREET LIGHTING ,'VlAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 2 C/L MAIN STREET 2> < < U I PROJECT: DR 95-21 < ! APN 209-262-02 i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SA_N BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA PROJECT: DR 95-21 Annual Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 ' City of Rancho Cucamonga Street Light Maintenance District No. 2 (Local Streets) Approved: William J. O'Neil, City E~gineer TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 199 7/98 .................................. 1 Description of Facilities for SLD' #2 ......................1 SLD #2 Proposed Budget .............................. 2 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 2 Appendix ................... . .......................3 Fiscal Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Street Light Maintenance District No. 2 (Local Streets) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Facilities for SLD #2 Street Light Maintenance District No. 2 (SLD #2) is used to fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on local streets throughout the City but excluding those areas already in a local maintenance district. Generally this area encompasses the residential area of the City west of Haven Avenue. It has been determined that the facilities in this district benefit this area of the City. This sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on local streets and traffic signals (or a portion thereof)on local streets generally west of Haven Avenue. Typically, street lights are installed by private development as a condition of a development project's approval. Traffic signals can be installed by development or as a City capital improvement project. Historically, the installation of street lights and traffic signals has not been funded with Street Light District funds, however, this is permitted under the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. Any new street lights in areas to be maintained by the District, will become part of the active work program at such time as these new areas are annexed into the District. The normal process will be the dedication of the areas to the City, at which time a sufficient non-refundable deposit will be made by the developer to the City. This deposit will provide for costs of energizing and six months of ordinary and usual maintenance operation and servicing of the street lights in each development at the time of initial operation of the lighting system. The costs will be based on the number and type of street lights and based on Southern California Edison Company's rate for street lights. Immediately upon energization of the street lights, those street lights will become a part of the work program of the district. SLD #2 Proposed Budget The majority of the budgeted operating costs for SLD #2 is for electric utility charges for the street lights and traffic signals within the district. The projected costs to operate and maintain SLD #2 are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll $0.00 Fringe Benefits $0.00 Subtotal Personnel $0.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations $0.00 Equipment Maintenance $0.00 Contract Services $0.00 Emergency & Regular Vehicle $0.00 General Liability $2,590.00 Electric Utilities $210,000.00 Subtotal Operations $212,590.00 Assessment Administration and General Overhead $48,710.00 Tax Delinquency 913,868.00 Total SLD #2 Expenditure Budget $275,168.00 Prior Year District Carryover <20,200.00> Assessment Revenue Required $254,968.00 Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $39.97 for the fiscal year 1997/98. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U, A.U. Single Family Parcel 5460 1.0 5460- $39.97 $218.236.00 Multi-Family Parcel 919 1.0 919 $39.97 $36,732.00 Total $2.54,96t]. 00 Appendix FISCA.L YEAR 1997/98 ANNEXATIONS STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 2 August 7, 1996 TR 14072 22 du December 4, 1996 TR15730 28 du ASSESSMENT DIAGR..,~kM LAHDSCAPE M. AINTENANCE DISTRICT ,.NO. 1 STZEET LIGHTING ,3.'L-'kI~TENA.NCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 A~UD 2 HIGHLAND AVE. l O 9 S ii "i{ 7 a 5 4 3 , ~.\ -- .1 /' :.. ...' HUNTER DRIVE ~ , · · · ..... ~ 20 21 : 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19: -- , < ~ TRACT NO. 1~072 / LEGEND ...... ,.-...: ?KT,'Y. LMD MAINT. AREA   EASEMENT LMD MAINT. AREA · STREET LIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~IONGA COUNTY OF SAN BEt~NARDINO STATE OF CALIFOPdqlA Tract No. 14072 ASSESSMF, NT DIAGIb\M L.-\?~'DSC.-\I'E ~I.-\I~NTE,.'qANCE DISTIIlCT ;N'O. 1 S'I'I~[E-F LIGiITI~\'G i'~IAIrN"I'EN.-\~'CE DIS'I'RIC'I' I'N'OS. I ..\t'~'L) 2 PROJECT: TI~&CT 15730 0 Annual Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Street Light Maintenance District No. 3 (Victoria Planned Community) Approved: William J. O'Neil, City Eng~Li~neer TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 199 7/98 .................................. I Description of Facilities for SLD #3 ......................1 SLD #3 Proposed Budget .............................. 2 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 2 Appendix .......................................... 3 Fiscal Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Street Light Maintenance District No. 3 (Victoria Planned Community) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code. State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Fac~ities for SLD #3 Street Light Maintenance District No. 3 (SLD #3) is used to fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located within the Victoria Planned Community. Generally this area encompasses the area of the City east of Deer Creek Channel, south of Highland Avenue, north of Base Line Road. and west of Etiwanda Avenue. It has been determined that the facilities in this district benefit the properties within this area of the City. This sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on local streets and traffic signals (or a portion thereof)on local streets within the Victoria Planned Community. Typically. street lights are installed by private development as a condition of a development project's approval. Traffic signals can be installed by development or as a City capital improvement project. Historically, the installation of street lights and traffic signals has not been funded with Street Light District funds, however. this is permitted under the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. Any new street lights in areas to be maintained by the District. will become part of the active work program at such time as these new areas are annexed into the District. The normal process will be the dedication of the areas to the City, at which time a sufficient non-refundable deposit will be made by the developer to the City. This deposit will provide for costs of energizing and six months of ordinary and usual maintenance operation and servicing of the street lights in each development at the time of initial operation of the lighting system. The costs will be based on the number and type of street lights and based on Southern California Edison Company's rate for street lights. Immediately upon energization of the street lights, those street lights will become a part of the work program of the district. SLD #3 Proposed Budget The majority of the budgeted operating costs for SLD #3 is for electric utility charges for the street lights and traffic signals within the district. The projected costs to operate and maintain SLD #3 are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll $0.00 Fringe Benefits ~0.00 Subtotal Personnel $0.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations $0.00 Equipment Maintenance $10,000.00 Contract Services $0.00 Emergency & Regular Vehicle $0.00 General Liability $1,750.00 Electric Utilities $130.000.00 Subtotal Operations $141,750.00 Assessment Administration and General Overhead $35,300.00 Tax Delinquency ~7,801.00 Total SLD #3 Expenditure Budget $184,851.00 Prior Year Deficit Recovery $10, 190.00 Assessment Revenue Required ~195,041.00 Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $47.15 for the fiscal year 1997198. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U. A.U. Single Family ParGel 3795 1.0 3795 $47.15 $178,934.00 Multi-Family Parcel 124 1.0 124 $47.15 $5,847.00 Commercial Acre 75.67 2.0 151.34 $47.15 $7,136.00 Vacant Acre 33.13 2.0 66.26 $47.15 $3,124.00 Total $195,041.00 Appendix FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 ANNE,v~TIONS SIREET LIGIIlE~rG DISTRICT NO. 3 August 21, 1996 TR 15732 33 du ASSESSMENT DZAG_RA2v/ LANDSCAPE MAINTZNANCF, DISTRICT NO. ? STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 3 LEGEND ,.~ . ~-~ ~ ~ , F&~ P~MS  PK~'Y L%IO CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~M[ONGA COUNTY OF SAN BEI~NA~INO STATE OF CALIFORNIA TIL--XCT ~5732 SLD #5 Proposed Budget The majority of the budgeted operating costs for SLD #5 is for electric utility charges for the street lights and traffic signals within the district. The projected costs to operate and maintain SLD #5 are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll $0,00 Fringe Benefits $0.00 Subtotal Personnel $0.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations $12,780.00 Equipment Maintenance $630.00 Contract Services $0.00 Emergency & Regular Vehicle $500.00 General Liability $540.00 Electric Utilities $30,000. O0 S u btota I 0 perations $44,450. O0 Assessment Administration and General Overhead $9,660.00 Tax Delinqency $1 ,;305.00 Total SLD #5 Expenditure Budget $55,415.00 Prior Year District Carryover <$12,200.00> Assessment Revenue Required $43,215.00 Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $34.60 for the fiscat year !997,i98. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Ratel Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U. A.U. Single Family Parcel 1249 1.0 1249 $34.60 $43,215.00 Appendix · 'V mm~ ! m dm, dM, I ~ "' ..II a::)'), I &V ~ i i FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 ANhqEZXATIONS STREET LIGHTE~'G DISTRICT NO. 5 July 3, 1996 TR 13835 78 du ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. ~ STREET LJGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND ,,.5 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA Annual Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Street Light Maintenance District No. 6 (Commercial/Industrial) Approved. Wil~am J. O'Neil, City E~'~"eer TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 199 7/98 .................................. 1 Description of Facilities for SLD #6 ......................1 SLD #6 Proposed Budget .............................. 2 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 2 Appendix .......................................... 3 Fiscal Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Street Light Maintenance District No. 6 (Commercial/Industrial) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Facilities for SLD #6 Street Light Maintenance District No. 6 (SLD #6) is used to fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on commercial and industrial streets throughout the City but excluding those areas already in a local maintenance district. Generally this area encompasses the industrial area of the City south of Foothill Boulevard. It has been determined that the facilities in this district benefit the properties within this area of the City. This sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on industrial or commercial streets and traffic signals (or a portion thereof) on industrial or commercial streets generally south of Foothill Boulevard. Typically, street lights are installed by private development as a condition of a development project's approval. Traffic signals can be installed by development or as a City capital improvement project. Historically, the installation of street lights and traffic signals has not been funded with Street Light District funds, however, this is permitted under the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. Any new street lights in areas to be maintained by the District, will become part of the active work program at such time as these new areas are annexed into the District. The normal process will be the dedication of the areas to the City, at which time a sufficient non-refundable deposit will be made by the developer to the City. This deposit will provide for costs of energizing and six months of ordinary and usual maintenance operation and servicing of the street lights in each development at the time of initial operation of the lighting system. The costs will be based on the number and type of street lights and based on Southern Califomia Edison Company's rate for street lights. Immediately upon energization of the street lights, those street lights will become a part of the work program of the district. SLD #6 Proposed Budget The majority of the budgeted operating costs for SLD #6 is for electric utility charges for the street lights and traffic signals within the district. The projected costs to operate and maintain SLD ~6 are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll $0.00 Fringe Benefits $0.00 Subtotal Personnel $0.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations $2,550.00 Equipment Maintenance $300.00 Contract Services $0.00 Emergency & Regular Vehicle $500.00 General Liability $480.00 Electric Utilities $36,000.00 Subtotal Operations 5;39,830.00 Assessment Administration and General Overhead $8,540.00 Tax Delinquency $4,404.00 Total SLD #6 Expenditure Budget $52,774.00 Prior Year Deficit Recovery $28.160.00 Assessment Revenue Required $80,934.00 Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $51.40 for the fiscal year 1997/98. The following table summarizes the assessrrent rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U. A.U. Commllnd Acre 1574.6 1.0 1574.6 $5t .40 $80,934.L'.'.'.q0 Appendix FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 ANNEXATIONS STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO.6 .May 3, 1995 CUP 93-13 2.24 ac December 20, 1995 PM 14022 66.25 ac Janua~' 17, 1996 PM12959 27.17 ac May 15, 1996 CUP 95-19 8.58 ac .May 15, 1996 CUP 95-15 5.7 ac June 19, 1996 PM 13845 23.7 ac July' 17, 1996 CUP 95-40 1.25 ac December 4, 1996 DR 96-17 2.4 ac ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B STREET LJGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT. NOS. 1 AND 6 . __ ~I.'T.~S , CITY OF IIIN(:)I,I~ CUCAMON~A ~"~,,,--~0OUN'I'Y 0F ~AN IIERN~RI:IIN0 ~'.~, ~TAI'IE OF CAI-IFORNI~ C.LX.P c~S-13 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 4 ;' . /'-~__,_.,,-~..,--,._,I:.~...:.- .... ~.~ ~ ,. .._ . ....~~~ ' ~-'z~ ~ / ~ I ,:...%~. ._ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~--.,--~ ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~!~ ~,~,p~ AS S E S S MENT D IA GR_~'v'i L.4aNDS CAPE M. AINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B STREET LIGHTING ~L-XINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1.4~ND 6 ARROW ~OUTE PARCEL MAP I2959- 2 < :'= TACONIA DR.. / .~ < PARCEL 3 G PARCEL I PARCEL 2 PARCEL MAP 12959 APN 209-~71-08 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFOR2N'IA P.~I 12959 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LAN[:)SCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0.3B STREET LIGHT1NG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NGS. 1 AND ,S.,. CI'TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~-~, · , COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO "'~~: ', STATE OF CAL;FORN~A ' "' 2:., ~-:.~ _ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NC. 3B STREET L.JGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NCS. 1 AND 5 ,~ .C /-/? .PS- /5 CI1'Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO %'~....., ,~>-,~ ~: ST,~TE OF C~LIFoRNIA '---:>---~,,: CC-/',c~-~--/5, ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3~ STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 5., 7"= I FOOTHILL BOULEVARD "'/i I ,,6 F :~ z~ ! ~"_ cS~_"~STZ~N' w~,Y' Z5 2~ 23 22 2! 20 -'9 !8 t7 -L=_G=_ND ~ o ,-,, CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ,,,~,~ , "~vT ,', ' ,~-~; COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~,~ ~ ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~ .~. _-. ASSESSMENT DIAGRA.,'vf LANDSCAPE ~IAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. ~B STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND ~ NINTH STREET APN 207-271-52 NICIIOL$ EGG RANCH "-J PRO,rECT SITE '.:'- < . m. TJ. CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~IONGA COUNTY OF SAN BER2N'ARDINO STATE OF CALIFOILNIA CUP 95-40 ASSESSMENT DI'AGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 0 0 .. 0-~ I'""K~ / · %. ,.. LEGEND * INDICATES STREET TREES o I NDI CATES STREET LIGHTS CiTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA -, . .,~.~.~. -~COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~-,...,.. -,--. ,r-2,-Z. ~'(~ _,,v-' ! ~~ ,/: STATE OF CALIFORNIA Annual Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 1997198 City of Rancho Cucamonga Street Light Maintenance District No. 7 (North Etiwanda) Wii~ia~n J. O'Neil, City En~i/~er TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 199 7/98 .................................. 1 Description of Facilities for SLD #7 ......................1 SLD #7 Proposed Budget .............................. 2 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 2 Appendix .......................................... 3 Fiscal Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Street Light Maintenance District No. 7 (South Etiwanda) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Facfiifies for SLD #7 Street Light Maintenance District No. 7 (SLD #7) is used to fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on local streets in what is termed the North Etiwanda area of the City. Generally this area encompasses the area of the City east of Day Creek Channel and north of Highland Avenue within the incorporated area of the city. It has been determined that the facilities in this district benefit the properties within this area of the City. The sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on local streets and traffic signals (or a portion thereof) on local street within the North Etiwanda area. Typically, street lights are installed by private development as a condition of a development projecrs approval. Traffic signals can be installed by development or as a City capital improvement project. Historically, the installation of street lights and traffic signals has not been funded with Street Light District funds, however, this is permitted under the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. Any new street lights in areas to be maintained by the District, will become part of the active work program at such time as these new areas are annexed into the District. The normal process will be the dedication of the areas to the City, at which time a sufficient non-refundable deposit will be made by the developer to the City. This deposit will provide for costs of energizing and six months of ordinary and usual maintenance operation and servicing of the street lights in each development at the time of initial operation of the lighting system. The costs will be based on the number and type of street lights and based on Southern California Edison Company's rate for street lights. Immediately upon energization of the street lights, those street lights will become a part of the work program of the district. SLD #7 Proposed Budget The majority of the budgeted operating costs for SLD #7 is for electric utility charges for the street lights and traffic signals within the district. The projected costs to operate and maintain SLD #7 are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll $0.00 Fringe Benefits $0.00 Subtotal Personnel $0.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations $200.00 Equipment Maintenance $140.00 Contract Services $0.00 Emergency & Regular Vehicle $0.00 General Liability $170.00 Electric Utilities $12,000.00 Subtotal Operations $12,510.00 Assessment Administration and General Overhead $4,950.00 Tax Delinquency $4,757.00 Total SLD #7 Expenditure Budget $22,217.00 Prior Year District Recovery $440.00 Assessment Revenue Required $22,657.00 Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $33.32 for the fiscal year 1997/98. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U. A.U. Single Family Parcel 670 1.0 670 $33.32 $22,324.00 Comm/Ind Acre 5 2.0 10 $33.32 $333.00 Total $22,657.00 Appendix FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 ANNEXATIONS STREET LIGHTING DISTRICT NO. 7 November 20, 1996 TR. 13566 13 du November 20, 1996 TR. 13566-2 29 du ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LAI~DSCA_PE ~VLA/NTEIN~A~CE DISTRICT NO. 8 STI:LEET LIGHTING ~xd.LrNTEN..-~NCE DISTKICT NOS. t ,--~',,rD ~ ~-. WILSON AVENUE "' , '1 | ! I I I I 4 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE .aREAS ;~.. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA " COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO -,---,~>-, '~ TRACTS 13566 & _ i~-~.. $TAT~ OF Cj~J-|FO~|,A 13566-2 Annual Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Street Light Maintenance District No. 8 ( South Etiwanda ) W~lliam J. O'Neil, Cit~ginee~' TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 199 7/98 .................................. Description of Facilities for SLD #8 ......................1 SLD #8 Proposed Budget .............................. 2 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 2 Appendix .......................................... 3 Fiscal Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Street Light Maintenance District No. 8 (North Etiwanda) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Facilities for SLD #8 Street Light Maintenance District No. 8 (SLD #-8) is used to fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located on local streets in what is termed the South Etiwanda area of the City. Generally this area encompasses the area of the City east of Etiwanda avenue, north of Foothill Boulevard and south of Highland Avenue within the incorporated area of the City. It has been determined that the facilities in this district benefit the properties within this area of the City. The sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on local streets and traffic signals (or a portion thereof) on local street within the South Etiwanda area. Typically, street lights are installed by private development as a condition of a development project's approval. Traffic signals can be installed by development or as a City capital improvement project. Historically, the installation of street lights and traffic signals has not been funded with Street Light District funds, however, this is permitted under the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. Any new street lights in areas to be maintained by the District, will become part of the active work program at such time as these new areas are annexed into the District. The normal process will be the dedication of the areas to the City, at which time a sufficient non-refundable deposit will be made by the developer to the City. This deposit will provide for costs of energizing and six months of ordinary and usual maintenance operation and servicing of the street lights in each development at the 'time of initial operation of the lighting system. The costs will be based on the number and type of street lights and based on Southern California Edison Company's rate for street lights. Immediately upon energization of the street lights, those street lights will become a part of the work program of the district. SLD #8 Proposed Budget The majority of the budgeted operating costs for SLD #8 is for electric utility charges for the street lights and traffic signals within the district. The projected costs to operate and maintain SLD #8 are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll $0.00 Fringe Benefits $0.00 Subtotal Personnel $0.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations $130.00 Equipment Maintenance $0.00 Contract Sen/ices $0.00 Emergency & Regular Vehicle $0.00 General Liability $40.00 Electric Utilities $3,000.00 Subtotal Operations $ 3, 170.00 Assessment Administration and General Overhead $890.00 Tax Delinquency $205.00 Total SLD #8 Expenditure Budget $4,265.00 Prior Year Deficit Recovery $2,710.00 Assessment Revenue Required $6,975.00 Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $193.75 for the fiscal year 1997/98. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U. AU. Single Family Parcel 36 1.0 36 $193.75 56,975.00 Appendix U iV mmmmmmmSa me~mmma It .I mmm4mmt "' _= dmmmw  ~ mmm~$,l ! mmee~mw : .I i : j : i ,- .~.mmmm.ml ~ ; BE I ,v e~ee I,e mm~iilmmmHimmemimmemmm,l~l~,~i, i~ v~ I' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM DATE: April 8, 1997 TO: Mayor and Members of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council FROM: ~ SUBJECT: FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 COMPREBENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT Attached for your information is the fiscal year ended June 30, 1996 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). BACKGROUND The City of Rancho Cucamonga's CAFR for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1996 is presented herewith prepared following the guidelines recommended by the Govemment Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada. This organization recommends that the report be published in an easily readable and efficiently organized manner, be prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in all material respects, be audited in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards by an independent accountant, and include certain general and statistical information. In accordance with these recommendations, the June 30, 1995 report is divided into three sections. The first is an Introductory Section summarizing the organizational and financial structure, departmental activities, major financial events, and prospects for the future. This is followed by the Financial Section which includes the audited financial statements and the unqualified opinion of the City's outside independent auditors. The third section is the Statistical Section which presents ten years of historical financial data and various statistical information about the City. The City is audited annually by independent auditors who determine the acceptability of the City's accounting and financial record system. The auditors have not identified any problems in the City's finance system and state in the Independent Auditor's Report, which is included in the Financial Section of the CAFR, that the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the City of Rancho Cucamonga at June 30, 1996. , j MEMORANDUM RE: FISCAL YEAR 1995-96 COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT April 8, 1997 Page 2 The CAFR is being presented to the California Society of Municipal Finance Officers (CSMFO) and the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) for award consideration. The City has received the CSMFO award for outstanding financial reporting for the last nine years and has received the GFOA certificate for achievement for excellence in financial reporting for the last eight years. Respectfully submitted, Susan M. Stark Finance Officer Attachment: June 30, 1996 CAFR sms:cafr disk:wp\cafragnd sms:c:wpXcafragnd Annual Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Street Light Maintenance District No. 4 (Terra Vista Planned Community) William J. O'Neil, City E~gineer TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 199 7/98 .................................. ~ Description of Facilities for SLD #4 ......................1 SLD #4 Proposed Budget .............................. 2 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 2 Appendix .......................................... 3 Fiscal Year 97/98 I II The FY 97/98 annual report for Street Light Maintenance District No. 4 (Terra Vista Planned Commiunity) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Facilities for SLD f¢4 ,,,,,,,,, Street Light Maintenance District No. 4 (SLD #4) is used to fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located within the Terra Vista Planned Community. Generally this area encompasses the residential area of the City east of Haven Avenue, south of Base Line Road, north of Foothill Boulevard and west of Rochester Avenue. It has been determined that the facilities in this district benefit the properties within this area of the City. This sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on local streets and traffic signals (or a portion thereof )on local streets within the Terra Vista Planned Community. Typically, street lights are installed by private development as a condition of a development project's approval. Traffic signals can be installed by development or as a City capital improvement project. Historically, the installation of street lights and traffic signals has not been funded with Street Light District funds, however, this is permitted under the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. Any new street lights in areas to be maintained by the District, will become part of the active work program at such time as these new areas are annexed into the District. The normal process will be the dedication of the areas to the City, at which time a sufficient non-refundable deposit will be made by the developer to the City. This deposit will provide for costs of energizing and six months of ordinary and usual maintenance operation and servicing of the street lights in each development at the time of initial operation of the lighting system. The costs will be based on the number and type of street lights and based on Southern California Edison Company's rate for street lights. Immediately upon energization of the street lights, those street lights will become a part of the work program of the district. SLD Proposed Budget The majority of the budgeted operating costs for SLD #-4 is for electric utility charges for the street lights and traffic signals within the district. The projected costs to operate and maintain SLD #4 are as follows: Personnel Regular Payroll $0.00 Fringe Benefits $0.00 Subtotal Personnel $0.00 Operations Maintenance and Operations $10,000.00 Equipment Maintenance $0.00 Contract Services $0.00 Emergency & Regular Vehicle $0.00 General Liability $750.00 Electric Utilities $45,000.00 Subtotal Operations $55,750.00 Assessment Administration and General Overhead $19,890.00 Tax Delinquency ~;1,966.00 Total SLD #4 Expenditure Budget $77,606.00 Prior Year Deficit Recovery $20,560.00 Assessment Revenue Required $98,166.00 Assessment Rate Calculation It is recommended that the rate per assessment unit (A.U.) remain at $28.96 for the fryr, aL year 1997/98. The following table summarizes the assessment rate for the district: Land Use Physical # of A.U. # Of Rate/ Revenue Unit Type Physical Units Factor A.U. A.U. Multi-Family Parcel 2499 0.5 1249.5 $28.96 $36,186.00 Single Family Parcel 1745 1.0 1745 $28.96 S50,535.00 Commercial Acre 197.6 2.0 395.2 S28.96 $11,445.00 Total $98,168.00 Appendix FISCAL YEAR 1997/98 A~N~'EJtATIONS STREET LIGttTE~FG DISTRICT NO. 4 December 20, 1995 PM 14022 66.25 ac June 5, 1996 PM 14786 10.2 ac June 19, 1996 PM 14806 25.0 ac August 21, 1996 TR 15526 55 du November 6, 1996 TR 15725 30 du ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE' DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 4 ~ ~,,' i \...,., ' i I L.:.-:;.,- ' I · '. \", i ...... ' · .-..,~.n.'~ ";'.-..:.._':r--t i ---., "' TT .... , ~ ~_ -- 7_:-.".23 ....... --,--TT.TT· - r=r "" '~ ',: ! 't ....... ,,-...";';'~' ..... -..,....u~,,~,.~ ~ i...~L7. -- ~,'.~.- """~ ,iL~\' ' i [ ~.,,:"~'.Z_ l ' "'~ -,.,. ,r :,,! 2, ~--.! "'.,,c~':a,., ,, f.,... :..e. ,':,."-~':' O sT','~P,.~-T L..LG .~.T.5. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA %~,,._;,.~,~ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO "'~"~ ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET LiGHTING.MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. I AND 4 s/= f= u c ~: / . 4 yENU'E ,I,' ' -- / _ , CITY OF RANCHO' CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ,~,,~/,d.7~'~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ASSESS~iENT DIAGRA~ LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4. STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 4 +' r: ,~ 15 77 AJ ~ 5 TR ~ E'r" {... / G H T" Z E5 -: ,q '. ,,~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA :'~~'~ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO "'~'~ ~: STATE OF CALIFORNIA ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 4 · ~::~,,~_~.CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA : ..,~ ,-----7 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ,,'T'-,~,..,~ -%~- ' 5'/, · "'."--~,; '~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA _._ -~' ,,_,j ' CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~IONGA COUNTY OF SAN BEI~NARDINO PROJECT- TR 15725 Annual Engineer's Report Fiscal Year 1997/98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Street Light Maintenance District No. 5 (Caryn Community) Approved: ~illiam J. O'Neil, City Engineer TABLE OF CONTENTS Fiscal Year 199 7/98 .................................. 1 Description of Facilities for SLD #5 ......................1 SLD #5 Proposed Budget .............................. 2 Assessment Rate Calculation ......................... 2 Appendix .......................................... 3 Fiscal Year 97/98 The FY 97/98 annual report for Street Light Maintenance District No. 5 (Caryn Planned Community) is prepared in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Part 2, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Light Act of 1972) Description of Facilities for SLD #5 Street Light Maintenance District No. 5 (SLD #5) is used to fund the maintenance and/or installation of street lights and traffic signals located within the Caryn Planned Community. Generally this area encompasses the the area of the City east of Milliken Avenue, south of Banyan Street, north of Highland Avenue and west of Rochester Avenue. It has been determined that the facilities in this district benefit the properties within this area of the City. This sites maintained by the district consist of street lights on local streets and traffic signal (or a portion thereof) on local street within the Caryn Planned Community. Typically, street lights are installed by private development as a condition of a development project's approval. Traffic signals can be installed by development or as a City capital improvement project. Historically, the installation of street lights and traffic signals has not been funded with Street Light District funds, however, this is permitted under the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. Any new street lights in areas to be maintained by the District, will become part of the active work program at such time as these new areas are annexed into the District. The normal process will be the dedication of the areas to the City, at which time a sufficient non-refundable deposit will be made by the developer to the City. This deposit will provide for costs of energizing and six months of ordinary and usual maintenance operation and servicing of the street lights in each development at the time of initial operation of the lighting system. The costs will be based on the number and type of street lights and based on Southern California Edison Company's rate for street lights. Immediately upon energization of the street lights, those street lights will become a part of the work program of the district. 7'Lj:'LIC City of Rancho Cucamonga Table of Contents Page NUmber INTRODUCTORY SECTION Letter of Transmittal i City Officials . xxv Organizational Chart xxvi Geographic Location Diagram xxvii Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting xxviii Certificate of Award for Outstanding Financial Reporting xxix FINANCIAL SECTION INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S REPORT 1 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The notes to the financial statements are an integral part of the component unit financial statements Exhibit A - Combined Balance Sheet - All Fund Types and Account Groups 3 Exhibit B - Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - All Govemmental Fund Types 4 Exhibit C - Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual (Budgetary Basis) -'All Govemmental Fund Types 6 Exhibit D - Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings - Proprietary Fund Type - Enterprise and Internal Service Funds 12 Exhibit E - Combined Statement of Cash Flows - All Proprietary Fund Types 13 City of Rancho Cucamonga Table of Contents NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 14 SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES Schedule 1 - Balance Sheet - General Fund 56 Schedule 2 - Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - General Fund 57 Schedule 3 - Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual (Budgetary Basis) - General Fund 58 Schedule 4 - Combining Balance Sheet- All Special Revenue Funds 63 Schedule 5 - Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances- All Special Revenue Funds 67 Schedule 6 - Combining Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual (Budgetary Basis) - All Special Revenue Funds 71 Schedule 7 - Combining Balance Sheet- All Debt Service Funds 80 Schedule 8 - Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances o All Debt Service Funds 81 Schedule 9 - Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual - All Debt Service Funds 82 Schedule 10 - Combining Balance Sheet- All Capital Projects Funds 83 Schedule 11 - Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - All Capital Projects Funds 84 Schedule 12 - Combining Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual (Budgetary Basis) - All Capital Projects Funds 85 Schedule 13 - Combining Balance Sheet - All Agency Funds 88 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1996 Prepared by Finance Department Susan M. Stark Finance Officer This page intentionally left blank. City of Rancho Cucamonga Table of Contents Schedule 14 - Combining Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities - All Agency Funds 89 Schedule 15 - Statement of General Fixed Assets 93 Schedule 16 - Schedule of General Fixed Assets by Function and Activity 94 Schedule 17 - Schedule of Changes in General Fixed Assets by Function and Activity 95 STATISTICAL SECTION Exhibit 1 - General Governmental Expenditures by Function 96 Exhibit 2 - General Government Revenue by Source 97 Exhibit 3 - Assessed Valuation of All City Property 98 Exhibit 4 - Property Tax Levies and Collections 99 Exhibit 5 - Direct and Overlapping Property Tax Rate 100 Exhibit 6 - Special Assessment Collections 101 Exhibit 7 - Direct and Overlapping Bonded Debt 103 Exhibit 8 - Legal Debt Margin (General Obligation Bonds) 104 Exhibit 9 - Number of Permits 105 Exhibit 10 - Construction Activity - Building Permit Valuation 107 Exhibit 11 - Demographic Statistics 109 Exhibit 12 - Principal Taxpayers 111 Exhibit 13 - Purchased Insurance Policies 112 Exhibit 14 - Miscellaneous Statistical Information 113 This page intentionally left blank. INTRODUCTORY SECTION " :{ C I T ~" ,"D,r- D_ANC O CUCAHONCA December 11, 1996 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga ' Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Councilmembers: Submitted for your information and consideration is the Annual Financial Report for the year ended June 30, 1996. This is a combined report of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, Rancho Cucamonga Public Improvement Corporation and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. The goal of the City of Rancho Cucamonga' s financial staff is to strive for excellence in the performance of the financial functions and reporting. The Govemment Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) awarded a Certificate to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for its comprehensive annual financial report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1995. The Certificate of Achievement is the highest form of recognition for excellence in state and local govemment financial reporting. In order to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, a govemment unit must publish an easily readable and efficiently organized Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), whose contents conform to program standards. Such CAFR must satisfy both generally accepted accounting principles and applicable legal requirements. The Certificate of Achievement is valid for a period of one year only. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has received a Certificate of Achievement for the last eight consecutive years (June 30, 1988 through June 30, 1995). We believe our current report continues to conform to the Certificate of Achievement program requirements, and we are submitting it to GFOA. i Mayor William J. Alexander Councilmember Paul Biane Mayor Pro-Tern Rex Gutierrez Councilmember James V. Curatalo Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager Councilmember Diane Willjams 10500 Civic Center Drive * P.O. Box 807 · Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 · (909) 989-1851 * FAX (909) 987-6499 I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION GENERAL INFORMATION The City of Rancho Cucamonga currently has an estimated population of 115,900 and encompasses approximately 37.5 square miles. It is located between the City of Upland to the West, Ontario to the South, Fontana to the East, and is in the Western section of San Bernardino County which is in the southern part of the State of Califomia. The local economy is primarily based on retail commercial business and light manufacturing, which emphasizes the City's efforts at retaining sales tax generating businesses to help stabilize the City's financial base. REPORTING ENTITY AND ITS SERVICES The reporting entity is comprised of the City government, Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, Rancho Cucamonga Public Improvement Corporation, and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. The City provides accounting services to all these agencies. The Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency is shown in the financial statements in two combined groups, namely: the Redevelopment Funds are included in the Capital Projects Fund whereas the Tax Increment Funds are included in the Debt Service Fund. The Rancho Cucamonga Public Improvement Corporation is shown in the Capital Projects Fund and Debt Service Fund. The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District is reflected in the Special Revenue Fund. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is a general law city govemed by the State of Califomia Govemment Code and local ordinances and provides quality service by blending the talents of City staff and utilizing other agencies. Certain services necessary to continue the high quality of life in Rancho Cucamonga such as water, sanitation (i.e. sewage), and police are furnished by the County of San Bemardino and other specialized agencies. The City provides building safety regulation and inspection, street lighting and beautification, land use planning and zoning, housing and community development services, maintenance and improvement of streets and related structures, traffic safety maintenance and improvement, and a full range of recreational and cultural programs for citizen participation. The Redevelopment Agency provides the services associated with selling the City as an optimum location for companies to establish their operations. The City's location and local labor market are just two optimum items available as a selling tool. The primary focus of the Redevelopment Agency is on the long-term economic development of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The Rancho Cucamonga Public Improvement Corporation is a nonprofit corporation which was established to assist the City by financing, acquiring, constructing, improving and leasing public improvements for the benefits of residents of the City. Fire protection for the City and its sphere of influence is provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION The Finance Department is structured under the Administrative Services Department with the Director of Administrative Services having responsibility for Personnel, Risk Management, Purchasing, Licensing, Resource Services, Geographical Information Services, Management Information Services, and the City, Redevelopment Agency, and Fire District Treasury functions. The Finance Officer is responsible for directing the accounting, financial planning and reporting, payroll, budget analysis, budget preparation, budget implementation and management, and cash management functions for the City, Redevelopment Agency and Fire District. GOVERNMENT The City of Rancho Cucamonga was incorporated in 1977 as a general law city under the provisions of the Government Code of the State of Califomia, and operates under the Council-Manager form of city government. The City officials elected at large include a Mayor and four City Councilmembers, City Clerk, and City Treasurer. The Mayor and Councilmembers are elected on - a staggered basis for a term of four years. There is no limit on the number of terms an individual can serve as Mayor or as Councilmembers. The Mayor and City Council appoint the City Manager. REPORTING STANDARDS The financial report has been prepared in conformance with the generally accepted accounting principles as set forth by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB), applicable pronouncements of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, and the full financial disclosure guidelines of the Governmental Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada. The implementation of Statement No. 3 of the National Council on Govemmental Accounting (adopted by GASB) defining the governmental reporting entity as including the City and all of its related entities over which the City Council has continuing oversight responsibility, has resulted in the preparation of this financial reports' format consolidating the financial data of the City and all of its related entities. FINANCIAL STATEMENT FORMAT In accordance with the above mentioned guidelines, the report is divided into the following three sections: 1. INTRODUCTORY SECTION: Contains the principal officers, City organization chart, and the letter of transmittal. iii 2. FINANCIAL SECTION: Contains the auditor's opinion, combined financial statement, and combining financial statements by fund type and individual funds. 3. STATISTICAL SECTION: Contains relevant financial and non-financial data presenting historical trends and other information about the City. NOTES TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS The Notes to the Financial Statements, which are part of the General Purpose Financial Statements within the Financial Section, are an integral part of the financial report and are essential to the fair presentation and adequate disclosure of the financial position of the City, Redevelopment Agency, Corporation, and Fire District. The notes should be read along with the financial statements to gain a fuller understanding of the information contained within this report. Your attention is specifically directed to the presentation of the City's significant accounting policies. RESPONSIBILITY The responsibility for the accuracy of the data presented, the completeness and fairness of its presentation, including all disclosures, rests with the City. The data, as reported, is believed to be accurate in all material respects; and was designed in a manner to present fairly the financial position of the City, Redevelopment Agency, Corporation, and Fire District at June 30, 1996, and the results of its operations and changes in financial position. All disclosures necessary for the reader to gain a maximum understanding of the City's financial affairs have been included. FUND DESCRIPTIONS Definitions of the various funds and account groups of the reporting entity are included as supplementary information within the various divisions of the Financial Section of this report. ACCOUNTING SYSTEM AND BUDGETARY CONTROL The City's accounting records are maintained on the accrual basis to the extent practicable for the independent certified public accountants who audit the accounting records of the City. This system has been designed to provide reasonable, but not absolutely guaranteed, assurance that: 1. Assets have been protected from losses arising from unauthorized use or disposition. 2. Financial records can be relied upon for preparing adequate financial statements and for maintaining accountability for assets. iv II. HIGHLIGHTS OF FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY A. Economic Development/Marketing The Agency continues to focus on business attraction, retention and expansion. The Agency contracted with PHH Fantus to develop the Economic Development Strategic Plan for Rancho Cucamonga, completed in January, 1996. The approved plan provides goals, objectives and implementation tools to achieve optimum economic development results tailored to our community. Retention/Expansion - The business site visitations and tri-annual business receptions continued to be a focus of the Redevelopment Agency. A total of 346 manufacturers were contacted and presented with a welcoming packet with referral information and provided assistance as needed. The Agency hosted three business receoptions for new businesses within the City in July, December and March. Participants included Agency and City staff, Mayor and Council members, Small Business Development Center (SBDC), Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce, Chaffey College and Inland Empire Economic Partnership (IEEP). The Agency's Third Party Certification Program provided assistance to seven existing and/or expanding businesses to bring their machinery into UL compliance. The Agency also developed and implemented the City's first "Manufacturers Appreciation Week" in May. Marketing/Attraction - The Agency actively pursued regional tourism recognition with the Cities of Ontario and Fontaria by developing the "Tri-Communities Brochure" and participated in regional marketing activities and publications through the Inland Empire Economic Partnership (IEEP) and International Conference of Shopping Centers (ICSC). The Fax on Demand Program was in full force throughout this fiscal year and resulted in over 400 contacts. Local businesses and potential clients received promotional skybox tickets to provide them with an opportunity to experience the sports/entertainment contribution to the City' s total quality of life. The annual Visions Newsletter and the Business Visions publications were mailed throughout the commtmity and were included in public relations packets. The City's Souvenir Shop is continuously updating and monitoring merchandise. These quality souvenirs have carried the City's name across the United States to Chicago, New York, Minnesota and Alaska. Capital Improvements - Over the past eight years the Agency has focused a significant amount of capital effort in developing adequate flood control improvements. As a result, the Agency determined that these significant flood control efforts merited an updated hydrology and flood report to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). As a result of the report, approximately 500 homes, as well as commercial and industrial acreage are no longer included in a flood zone. Through the removal of the flood zone designation, property owners are no longer required to obtain flood insurance and undeveloped properties are now able to develop without providing interim flood control improvements resulting in reduced local development costs. B. Affordable Housing Rental Housing - Southem Califomia Housing Development Corporation (SCHDC) rehabilitated two existing apartment complexes within the City; Mountainside and Monterey Village. Agency funds were combined with other financing obtained by SCHDC to acquire and rehabilitate a total of 608 units, of which half were made affordable. Senior Housing - Prairie Pacific Development Corporation (PPDC) and the Agency entered into a Developer Dispositon Agreement (DDA) to construct 159 senior apartment units adjacent to the City's library. PPDC obtained a four percent state tax credit to assist in financing the development. This project is underway and construction is scheduled to commence in March, 1997. Occupancy is anticipated to occur in 1998. Home Ownership - The Housing Finance Agency, a joint partnership formed with the Cities of Rancho Cucamonga and Chino, provided 18 affordable home mortgages to Rancho Cucamonga households serviced through the California Rural Home Mortgage Finance Authority. Northtown Housing Development Corporation (NHDC) has continued their single-family infill development and down payment assistance programs through leveraging other public/private funds with Agency funds. Twelve three-and four-bedroom homes have been developed on sites throughout the City for purchase or lease/purchase option by income-eligible households. NHDC also completed new construction of the 88-unit Villa Del Notre condominium project. These units are also for large families having three, four or five bedrooms. Habitat for Humanity received Agency assistance to construct a new single family house utilizing sweat equity and other grants and loans. The Agency executed a consortium agreement with the County of San Bernardino' s HOME Program which includes down payment assistance and tenant-based rental assistance. Discussions have begun with Neighborhood Housing Services to develop a program for first-time homebuyers. The Agency is also considering a proposal to join San Bernardino County's HOME Program, and a partnership with the City of Chino to develop a first-time homebuyers program using Single Family Mortgage Revenue Bonds. It is anticipated that all three homebuyer programs will be implemented in the 1995/96 fiscal year. ENGINEERING The most significant capital project for fiscal year 1995/96 was the completion of the design for the Haven Avenue Street and Storm Drain Improvements from Deer Creek Channel to Base Line Road, and obtaining the necessary funding for the improvements. The project, which will be completed in fiscal year 1995/96, will widen Haven Avenue on the west side to three lanes by removing the channel on that side of the street and replace it with a pipe. This is the first of a multi phase program to fully widen Haven Avenue in the vicinity of the open channel. vi Construction of twelve acres of the Etiwanda Creek Park commenced, which will be completed in fiscal year 1996/97. In conjunction with the park, East Avenue from Sumit Avenue to the north was widened to accommodate the additional traffic for the park. Design was begun on widening East Avenue from Summit Avenue south of Victoria Street. Jersey Boulevard design was completed with construction set for fiscal year 1996/97. This project will improve the profile and cross section of the street and also improve the badly deteriorating pavement. Base Line Road was widened from two to four lanes from Day Creek Channel to Victoria Park Lane. The project not only provided for the high volume of traffic through the area, it also improved the alignment of the roadway resulting in a safer section of Base Line Road. This project eliminated the final "bottleneck" on Base Line Road within the City. The City rehabilitated over eight miles of residential and major streets during the year. The relatively new rubberized slurry process was utilized on these streets. This will not only extend the life of the pavement but also provide a good skid resistance for increased safety. The City installed traffic signals at Arrow Route and White Oak, and at Archibald Avenue and 8th Street. A right turn lane was added at Archibald Avenue and Base Line Road to aid traffic flow. Other projects included the rehabilitation of the Senior Center and the design of Lions Center improvements. Construction of the latter is scheduled for completion during fiscal year 1996/97. The City reconstructed damaged cobblestone curb on Etiwanda Avenue in keeping with the rural development of the area. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds were used to improve 9th Street between Grove Avenue and Edwin Street. This project constructed curb and gutter, sidewalks, street lights, and repaved the deteriorating pavement. PLANNING A. Current Planning During the 1995/96 fiscal year, the Current Planning section processed a significant number of major development projects, permit entitlements, and special projects as summarized below: Staff processed a total of 723 applications of all types, ranging from Home Occupation Permits to Tentative Tract maps. vii Major development projects which were processed included the Heritage Bag Manufacturing Plan, Diversified Pacific Homes' 28-1ot subdivision in Etiwanda, North Star Recycling, Office Max Price Club Expansion, Karubian Distribution Center, AMPAC, Sacred Heart Church, and the Cucamonga County Water District headquarters. The continued strength of commercial construction also required significant attention during this past fiscal year. Major projects that went through plan check and/or were under construction included Koll Arrow Center, Home Depot, Masi Plaza, Villa Del Norte, Office Max, Price Club Expansion, and North Star Recycling. The Current Planning section was involved with many special projects. The first special project was updating the Development Code, Industrial Area Specific Plan, and other regulatory documents. The second special project was Route 30 Freeway Task Force. B. Advance Planning A City-initiated commercial retail market study was undertaken and completed. The study was intended to establish a current base line of commercial land use in the City and what would be a healthy balance of new land use oppommities. In addition, staff processed nine Specific/Community Plan Amendments, two Development District Amendments, and nine General Plan Amendments. Four new County and twenty-one new governmental referrals were received and reviewed. Two of the County and eight of the govemment referrals required a response. The County referrals requiring a response included the following: · Notice of Preparation for the San Sevaine Redevelopment Project Area · West Valley Juvenile Detention Facility The governmental referrals requiring a response included the following: · EIS for the Cajon Pipeline Project · RP#4 Outfall Alignment. · Recovery Plan for the Delhi-Sands Flower Loving Fruit Fly. · Guasti Plaza' s Specific Plan. · PUC Rules. · West Gate Specific Plan · Ontario Mills Mall · City of Upland's General Plan Update viii Historic Preservation accomplishments included the following: Designated four residences (Hickox, Cour, Maloof, and Palmer) as Landmarks, and two sites as Points of Historic Interest (Sacred Heart Church and Etivista Winery). · During this period, five Landmark Alteration Permits were processed and three Mills Act Property Tax Reduction Agreements were entered into by land marked property owners to reduce property taxes and secure on-going maintenance for the Hickox, Cour, and Palmer Residences. C. Community Development Block Grant Administration This year saw the completion of several capital and facility improvement projects, including construction of improvements on Calaveras Avenue from Arrow Route to 9th Sti'eet and completion of 98 percent of the improvements on 9th Street from Grove Avenue to Edwin Street. Other work included sidewalk repair and replacement throughout target neighborhoods resulting in a total of 5,294 square feet of sidewalk replacement. In order to accommodate handicapped persons, the City installed approximately 7,572 square feet of handicapped curbing. 'The third phase of interior improvements to the City's Senior Center, including replacing interior lighting and adding chair rails and new carpeting were completed. Finally, design work for the Lion' s Center East improvements were completed. The City-run Home Improvement Program offers eligible residents grants or deferred payment loans to complete needed repairs to their homes. A total of 40 lower income households were assisted through this program, with a total of 4 loans, 12 grants and 24 emergency grants completed. In addition, another 72 households were assisted with minor home repairs. A range of public service activities are funded through the Community Development Block Grant Program including youth programs, graffiti removal, and food and shelter assistance. A total of 69 at-risk youth were provided after school activity and guidance. Approximately 16,620 square feet of graffiti was removed from target neighborhoods; the City continued to fund landlord/tenant and fair housing services to approximately 328 households. Additionally, public services were provided to assist 147 homeless or near homeless individuals by providing four families with transitional shelter and assistance toward obtaining permanent housing and 3 battered spouse households were provided shelter at the House of Ruth. In addition, 23,805 meals were provided to 1,587 households in need. The 1996-97 Consolidated Annual Plan and the 1994-95 Annual Performance Report were both completed during the 1995/96 fiscal year. ix BUILDING AND SAFETY Building activity for Fiscal Year 1995/96 was approximately one hundred and twenty million dollars. Major retail outlets contributed to a third consecutive year of sustained activity. These outlets included Home Depot and Office Max. Frito/Lay also completed a major expansion to their facility. Building and Safety is now a fully integrated division providing all plan checking and inspection for conformance to Uniform Building and Fire Codes and Code Enforcement of Municipal Code Property Maintenance Standards. COMMUNITY SERVICES The Community Services Department continued to devote its energy during fiscal year 1995/96 to the provision of quality cultural, recreational, senior and human services programs as well as providing administrative support to the events held at the Epicenter. Demand for Community Services to address the needs of the residents and their families remained high. The 1995/96 fiscal year found the Community Services Department reassessing or improving existing programs/services. The following major activities were accomplished: A. Youth Programs and Activities The very popular Play School Program (operated September - June) for youngsters from one to five years old continued to provide classes to more than 450 children, enhancing their social skills while creating a fun environment in which to learn. Play Camp, which operates in July and August serves up to an additional 250 children. The Contract Classes Program continued to be a successful part of the Community Services Department. In 1995/1996, we offered more than 1,000 classes throughout the year and provided leisure activities to more than 8,000 individuals. Annual events continuing to gamer the enthusiasm and participation of the community included: The annual Breakfast with Santa was offered and saw more than 200 children and parents celebrate the holidays, make a craft, sing songs and dine with Santa! Breakfast was provided as a community service project by the Rancho Grande Kiwanis Club. The Egg Htmt, held at three sites, Red Hill Park, the Epicenter, and Windrows Park is always a popular event bringing out more that 2,000 participants. Other activities included a nine-week Summer Day Camp, and the Kid Explorers Summer Program. B. Family Program/Activities Family oriented programs and activities also offered during fiscal year 1995/96 included: , The 4th of July celebration at Red Hill Commtmity Park where over 7,000 residents enjoyed a fun-filled day in the park. 4~ The 11 th annual season of Concerts in the Park presented six concerts offering a variety of music where nearly 9,400 residents enjoyed evenings of music under the stars. ~ Art in the Park provided a day of cultural arts and crafts, dancing, music, magic, puppets and more representing various cultures of our community to approximately 6,000 community members. Over 18,000 residents celebrated our City's 18th anniversary of cityhood by attending our Founders Day Parade and Celebration held on the second Saturday of November with a theme of "Through the Eyes of a Child." Movies in the Park provided nearly 12,575 residents with six weeks of family movies on Tuesdays and Fridays. Special theme contests were offered to enhance the program. The community usage of the four reservable parks in the City of Rancho Cucamonga (Heritage, Red Hill, Coyote Canyon, and Hermosa) had an estimated attendance of 69,391 in 1995/96. I~ The following facilities were also utilized by community residents during fiscal year 1995/96: Equestrian Center (4,970), Amphitheatre (11,163), and Civic Center Courtyard (1,560). C. Teen Programs and Activities Teen Recreation Activity Club (TRAC) meets monthly during the school year to plan activities and discuss future programs. They also sponsor an annual Christmas Party and End of the Year Party and are recognized for their service each May at the Park and Recreation Commission meeting. TRAC xi members also receive a monthly newsletter (TRAC Tattler) with information about upcoming activities and volunteer opportunities. Thanks to the active participation of young adults in the TRAC, many programs and activities were supported through their volunteer efforts. Teen Snack Bars operated at various community and special events throughout the year helping to raise funds for teen activities. Night on the Town is a teen operated babysitting service through which 50 youth volunteered their services bi-monthly to help parents get a little "R & R" while at the same time providing entertaining and enriching activities for youngsters. Our second annual Teen Job Fair and Job Skills Workshop was held in May and attracted over 200 teens. The Job Fair featured educational sessions and a local business vendor fair. The Teen Learning Center was planned in fiscal year 1995/96 and implemented in the summer of 1996. Thirty-three (33) teens volunteered over 2,500 hours of community service during the 8 weeks of summer. D. Sports The City continued its second year of Youth Roller Hockey at the expanded parking lot on Rochester across from the Epicenter. Over 1,900 boys and girls participated. Portable rinks were used and games/practices were scheduled around the Quakes baseball season and special events to ensure multiple use of the parking lot. This three season program ranked 3rd highest participation in California among roller hockey programs and 1 st highest in the state amongst cities. Summer Swim Lessons attracted over 3,300 participants. This is the largest summer swim lesson program in the County of San Bernardino. Over 5,100 children participated in the recreational swim program. Pee Wee Soccer in its fifth year grew from 420 to 740 participants this last year, and Pee Wee Baseball attracted 750 three to five year olds to learn the basic fundamentals of baseball. We now have two seasons of soccer, Spring and Fall. This was the second year of use at the Rancho Cucamonga High School for the youth basketball program (750 boys and girls participated). This was due to our joint use agreement which allowed gym use in exchange for allowing the high school to use the Epicenter for their graduation ceremonies. This year youth basketball dropped all fundraising and went to team sponsorships. The amount raised increased by over $10,000 this year to a total of $40,000. xii The Pee Wee Sports program reduced its staff and began utilizing 160 volunteers (25-35 year olds) instead. The more mature volunteers have provided a better all around program. Each season was also 'expanded from 5 to 7 weeks due to the cost savings. The City' s adult softball program increased from 432 teams to 456 teams (7,560 participants). The City expanded its sport oppommities for women by starting its first Women's Six-aside Soccer League with 18 teams ( 180 participants). 3-on-3 women' s basketball league had 4 teams with 16 players. Men' s Flag Football grew from 11 teams to 28 teams (280 players) and adult coed volleyball grew from 11 teams to 18 teams ( 180 players). E. Senior Programs/Activities Following the completion of renovations the senior center was officially dedicated on June 22, 1996. Ceremonies were incorporated into the annual Senior Citizens Fine Art Show. Both events attracted a large amount of participation from residents young and old. As result of the renovations and some program re-organization we were able to add the center's Thompson Room to our programming. Currently the room is used as a drop-in, where seniors can read, work on puzzles, or watch television. Coffee is provided free of charge by Secure Horizons and the Daily Bulletin newspaper and moming orange juice is provided by Health Net. Among some of the on-going scheduled events at the Center are six major holiday related events which · are co-sponsored with the Rancho Cucamonga Senior VIP Club. In addition, there are six (6) mini- events that are organized entirely by center staff. Classes at the Center included aerobics, crafts, mature driving re-training, and line dancing, all of which are available for a nominal fee. In addition, activities such as pool, cards, scrabble, and checkers are offered at no cost. Entertainment consists of Senior Cinema twice a month in the afternoon, and ballroom dancing on the first Tuesday and second Saturday of the month. The Old-timers Foundation continues to provide meals for our daily nutrition program. In addition to providing meals for walk-ins, they also deliver meals to seniors who are homebound. Also, our end of the month birthdays for seniors are co-sponsored by the Old-timers Foundation. F. Human Services Programs/Activities During Fiscal Year 1995/96 over 70,000 information and referral requests from the community at large pertaining to a variety of questions and needs such as food stamps, senior services, health care, xiii housing, emergency food banks, job training and placement sources were handled. Physical examinations and immunizations (sponsored by the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health) were given to children, adults and seniors at the Senior Center on a monthly basis. Omnitrans bus passes and I.D. cards were also sold at the Center. Daily Nutrition meals provided through a contract with the Old-timers Foundation, health screening, legal aid, blood pressure screening, home visits and phone calls, insurance counseling, peer counseling, and monthly surplus food distribution for seniors are all offered as part of our Human Service Program. In addition, numerous information/referral publications have been developed to assist the community including a comprehensive community resource directory, a senior housing directory, a child care directory, adult day care resource list, and emergency services resource listings. Annual events included the Community Health Fair, a Flu Shot Clinic (900 shots were given during the 1995/96 clinic), a Holiday Basket Program providing food to 600 needy families, and the annual recognition program for the City's 700 volunteers who assist the City in the delivery of its programs, activities and services. A highlight of our human service programs for fiscal year 1995/96 continued to be the "The Doctor Is In" series presented monthly by a volunteer physician in the community. Health related topics included: Kidney and Urinary Tract Infections, Diabetes, Breast Cancer, Dizziness and Falls, Depression and Anxiety, and Heat Exhaustion/Heat Stroke. In addition two special presentations were provided for the community; one on Signs, Symptoms of Thyroid Disorders, the other the Treatment of Thyroid Diseases including a presentation on the psychological affects. Informational presentations of interest to the community were also presented monthly on a wide variety of topics including, Getting Your Affairs in Order, EIder Abuse, Stress and Caregiving, The New Age of Libraries, Eating for a Healthy Heart and How to Wrap Up Holiday Stress. G. Epicenter Events & Rentals Thirty-five (35) bookings took place during fiscal year 1995/96 at the Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter. Events included such activities as the a Symphony Concert Series, Willie Nelson and WayIon Jennings Concerts, two Home Shows, Credit Union Auto Show, Scout-O-Rama, and the City' s Founders Day Celebration. A. B. Miller High School and Rancho Cucamonga High School graduation ceremonies and several commercial filmings were also hosted at the stadium. H. Other Highlights The City's quarterly newsletter, The Grapevine, serves as a strong link in uniting the three founding communities of Alta Loma, Cucamonga and Etiwanda. In addition, the quarterly newsletter informs the xiv City's rapidly growing population of new policies, development, activities and recreational oppommities taking place in the community. POLICE DEPARTMENT A. COPS More Grant/TRU Program During the 1995/96 fiscal year it was proposed that a Telephone Report Unit (T.R.U.) Program be initiated within the Police Department. This program enables citizens to report selected types of crimes via telephone. The resulting time savings allows field officers more unobligated patrol time. In conjunction with this program the Police Department received a Federal COPS MORE Grant to help offset the cost of the TRU. The time saved by the TRU has equated to the equivalent of placing two (2) additional officers on patrol. B. Crime Free Multi-Housing Project The Crime Free Multi-Housing Project (CFMHP) was initiated for the purpose of addressing the crime problem that exists in rental properties. It creates a coalition between landlords, tenants, and local law enforcement. The program is divided into three (3) phases and at the conclusion of each phase the rental complex/manager is given a Crime Free Multi-Housing Sign to post on their property. To date more than half of the apartment complexes in the City have become an active part of the program and it is anticipated that there will be a reduction in crime and calls for service in the future. C. COPS Universal Grant The Police Department applied for and received notification that we had been awarded the COPS Universal Grant. This three (3) year grant program will provide partial funding for an additional five (5) patrol officers. The balance of the funds for these new officers is to come from a California State Grant Program as established trader Assembly Bill 3229 to be administered by a five member committee titled Supplemental Law Enforcement Oversight Committee comprised of various municipal and county officials selected in a manner yet to be determined. The increase in swom personnel staffing for Rancho Cucamonga will greatly assist the City in its ever vigilant effort to maintain an acceptable level of proactive patrol time. XV LIBRARY In September of 1994, the City opened the doors of its first municipal public library. Now celebrating two years of service, the library welcomes an average of 1,000 visitors through its doors each day. Today, with over 100,000 books and media collections that range from video to CD Rom discs, the library loans more than ½ million items to its residents each year. Over 90,000 information questions were answered by a staff of five during this past fiscal year. The Library also added Internet access to its list of services and, as a result, the Information Staff is now able to instantaneously access the Internet and provide up to date information services to the public from the cyber super highway. In fiscal year 1995/96, over 20% of the Library's budget was generated by fees, fundraising and grantsmanship. Working with a Friends of the Library group additional revenues of $50,000 was raised via donations. The creation of a Library Foundation has been warmly received and set a fiscal year 1996/97 fundraising goal at over $70,000. Fines and fees continue to be evaluated and a fee based Technology Center, partnered by local business, is in the planning stages for 1997. CASH MANAGEMENT Cash not immediately needed to finance City operations during the year was invested in short-term money market instntments in accordance with State laws governing deposit of public funds. The City invests in time deposits from 14 to 720 days maturity, issues of federal agencies, bankers acceptances, · mortgage securities and the State's Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF). During the fiscal year 1995/96, 95% of the idle cash was invested. It is the objective of staff to attain a greater percentage of invested funds, while maintaining the necessary reserves needed to fund City services. DEBT ADMINISTRATION The City of Rancho Cucamonga, as a general law city, is restricted from incurring general obligation bonded indebtedness which would exceed 3.75% of the total assessed valuation of all real and personal property. The City of Rancho Cucamonga does not have any general obligation debt; however, the City and its component units do have various bond and certificates of participation issues. Note 11 of the Notes to the Financial Statements of this report presents more detailed information about these issues. On August 17, 1995 the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency entered into a three year term loan in the amount of $21,000,000 to fund the Mountainside, Monterey Village and Sycamore Springs project in conjunction with the Southern California Housing Corporation. Principle and interest are payable semi-annually commencing on March 1, 1996. The loan is intended to be paid off with bond proceeds which were issued in September 1996 as follows. xvi On September 1, 1996 the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency issued 1996 Housing Set-Aside Tax Allocation Bonds in the amount of $37,665,000 to be used to repay to Sanwa Bank existing loans in the amounts of $28,710,670 and to complete projects for which those loans were originated. This bond issue consists of $8,790,000 of serial bonds with maturities beginning September 1, 1997 through September 1, 2006 and $28,695,000 of term bonds maturing thereafter. RISK MANAGEMENT During fiscal year 1995/96, the City of Rancho Cucamonga continued its commitment to risk management programs for safety, general liability and workers' compensation. Aggressive claims handling and a strong litigation stand have assisted in maintaining an appropriate reserve for current and future claims payments. In addition, various risk control techniques, including employee accident prevention training, loss control techniques, loss control through safety programs and employee hazardous identification programs have been implemented to minimize accident-related losses and exposure by the public. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is self-funded for the first $100,000 of loss for general liability claims and purchases coverage from $100,000 to $10.0 million dollars in toss. The City ofRancho Cucamonga utilizes a self-funded workers' compensation program. There will be an on-going commitment to risk management programs to ensure the safety of the public and city employees and to reduce the financial exposures from catastrophic losses within the City's boundaries. IIl. PROSPECTS FOR THE FUTURE One time reimbursements, inter-fund transfers, and budget cuts in the previous fiscal years allowed General Fund revenues, such as sales tax, to catch up and replace these short term solutions. This stabilization process and the coming back to life of the Southern California economy will help to improve the stability of services. The biggest challenges will continue to be costs imposed by other agencies that cannot be passed on (such as law enforcement overhead charges) and additional. attacks on revenue (think Jarvis and Proposition 218). Our assessment districts currently remain stable at level "A" service with increased costs absorbed through continued reductions in water usage due to the completion of automated monitoring. These districts have not received increases for four years and automation will eventually run its course of savings. However, the Jarvis Initiative recently passed on the November ballot, may alter the ability for assessment districts to keep up with costs of maintenance, thereby calling into question the ability for cities to keep up with growth demands on services in the future. A preliminary review of the City's districts, in light of Proposition 2 18, reveals that all of the lighting districts appear to be in the exempt xvii category by virtue of being covered under the streets exemption. All other special districts originated shortly after incorporation as property owner petitioned districts and as a result are "grand fathered". However, current interpretation (subject to legislative or court action) is that in the future, when and if these districts require an increase, the increase would be subject to a property owner vote. Right now it appears that only Park District 85 (Red Hill and Heritage Parks) will require property owner validation prior to July l, 1997. Staff is busily researching procedures and alternatives in order to present a mutually beneficial process to handle this new requirement. Library services were fully implemented in fiscal year 1994/95 with the transfer of the San Bemardino County Library Tax revenue to the City and the opening of the new library (as pictured on the cover of this report). The transition between County and the City has been tremendously successful with a much higher level of service and exceptional community support. The challenge for the Library, which remains dependent upon a slowly declining property tax, is meeting the demand for expanded services despite limited financial resources. In an effort to meet these demands, the Library continues to explore innovative ways to provide more varied and higher levels of service in the most cost efficient manner possible. Partnerships with the community are constantly being developed, and the Friends of the Library Bookstore continues to greatly enhance the oppommity for the community to provide support for the Library. With continued excellent management, an entrepreneurial spirit, and community support through the Friends' organization, the Library has been able to cope and maintain its services. The City' s law enforcement contract with San Bemardino County Sheriffs Department continues to rise in cost with a six percent increase effective in 1995/96 due to labor negotiations and an additional overhead charge. The cost of this contract service continues to escalate annually beyond the CPI and, with this latest adoption of an additional overhead charge, it is recommended that the City again look at the feasibility of its own police department to enable better control of its future and its costs. The City must look at the fiscal as well as the service components of its local law enforcement and has a responsibility to explore options to better control its own destiny. Effective August 1996, City Council applied an accelerated version of the previously approved Utility Tax reduction formula. City Council has always maintained that if greater reductions could be accomplished beyond the formula, such would be directed. The increased reduction will see the utility tax rate reduced nearly 10% from 4.66 to 4.21. Additionally the "cap" will be reduced by approximately 40% from $50,000 to $30,000 for industrial / business users with high utility usage. The challenge continues to be sustaining services for a growing population as well as providing some tax relief while at the same time addressing increased costs with limited resources. Even as the economy in Southem California comes to life, additional imposed costs will continue as well as limitations on revenues. The new Jarvis initiative will severely affect the ability of the City to obtain revenues to handle future growth. The State will continue to "tinker" with the revenue system in ways that will impact local government, usually negatively. Our City must remain vigilant in its legislative efforts to protect its revenues and its ability to provide the needed services which residents and businesses demand and have come to expect here in Rancho Cucamonga. XVlll IV. FINANCIAL STATEMENT ANALYSIS The fiscal operations of the City are primarily accounted for in the Governmental Funds which include the General, Special Revenue, Debt Service, and Capital Project funds. REVENUE ANALYSIS The total fund equity (aggregate fund balances) in these funds of $171.6 million reflects an increase of $16.4 million over the previous fiscal year. Total financing sources available during the year amounted to approximately $127.8 million. Of this amount, $87.2 million was from governmental fund type resources, $27.1 million was from debt proceeds, and $13.5 million was from operating interfund transfers. The following is a recap of the 1995/96 fiscal year general governmental fund type-revenues by major source. Also presented is the percentage each source represents of total revenues, and the increase or (decrease) over the prior year. REVENUE BY SOURCE (amounts in thousands) Increase / Revenue and Other 1995/96 Percent (Decrease) Financing Sources Revenue Of Total From 1994/95 Taxes $ 57,538 45.0 % $ 4,178 Licenses & Permits 1,594 1.2 ( 20 ) Fines & Forfeits 291 0.2 ( 124 ) Use of Property &Money 8,473 6.6 1,626 Intergovernmental 11,179 8.7 ( 2,483 ) Charges for Services 2,746 2.1 622 Development Fees 2,714 2.1 ( 84 ) Other 2,718 2.1 ( 760 ) Total Operating Revenue: $ 87,253 $ 2,955 Gain/(Loss) On Sale Of Land -0- 0.0 ( -0-) Debt Proceeds 27,117 21.2 16,968 Excess Funds From Bond Trustee 18 0.0 18 Operating Transfers In 13,488 10.6 1,183 Miscellaneous ( 51 ) 0.0 649 TOTAL FINANCE SOURCES: $ 127,825 __Jl00.0 % $ 24.283 xix The increase in debt proceeds is due to the Redevelopment Agency' s execution of a three year term loan to fund the Mountainside, Monterey Village and Sycamore Springs projects in conjunction with the Southern California Housing Corporation. This loan is intended to be paid off with bond proceeds that were issued September 1, 1996. The $4.2 million increase in tax revenue is reflected in both additional property tax increment to the Redevelopment Agency of approximately $2.0 million, and additional sales tax receipts of approximately $1.4 million, as Rancho Cucamonga continues to see a rise in retail and commercial facilities both expanding and relocating into our community. The increase in Gain / Loss On Sale Of Land appears above only as a comparison to the Redevelopment Agency' s prior year land sale and reveals only that there was no activity in this area for the current fiscal year. The decrease in Intergovernmental revenues represents both the increase in Motor Vehicle Fee revenues of $335,222 and the decrease of monies (-$2.6 million) received mainly through the special revenue funds of the Metrolink project which is indicative of that project' s completion in the prior year. Once again Use of Money and Property increased over the prior year ($1.6 million) due almost entirely to increased income from investments. Income from investments was able to increase over the prior year for the second time in approximately six years due to a more stable cash flow and an increase in funds available to invest. A slight increase in developer activity is seen via the rise in revenues from Charges For Services, specifically related to Planning and Engineering fees. EXPENDITURE ANALYSIS During the 1995/96 fiscal year, expenditures and interfund transfers amounted to approximately $111.4 million which reflects an increase of $6.8 million when compared to the previous fiscal year. The following is a recap of the 1995/96 fiscal year expenditures and interfund transfers by major function, including the percentage each function represents of total expenditures, and the increase or (decrease) over the prior year. xX EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION (amounts in thousands) Increase / 1995/96 Percent (Decrease) Expenditures Of Total From 1994/95 General Administration $ 8,701 7.8 % $ ( 3,674 ) Public Safety 9.417 8.5 364 Public Safety- Fire 8,951 8.0 ( 130 ) Engineering &Public Works 8,981 8.1 ( 96 ) Community Development 6,489 5.8 ( 676 ) Community Services 3,725 3.3 1,024 Capital Outlay 31,168 28.0 4,937 Debt Service 14,118 17.6 5,515 Total Government Expenditures: $ 97,065 $ 7,264 Operating Transfers Out 14,354 12.9 ( 497 ) TOTAL EXPENDITURES: $ 111,419 100.__0 % $ 6,767 Capital Outlay increased over the prior year by $4.9 million largely due to the Redevelopment Agency' s increased activity in affordable housing projects (+ $10.2 million) and a decrease of $2.1 million when compared to the prior year due to a long term debt reclassi~cation from Capital Outlay to Debt Service. The remaining decrease from prior year of $3.2 million is due to the City' s 1994/95 completion of the Metrolink Station General Administration expenditures decreased from the prior year by $3.7 million. The Redevelopment Agency reflects a $1.4 million decrease when compared to the prior year due to a long term debt reclassification from General Administration to Debt Service. The Agency also shows a $1.2 million reduction as the prior fiscal year saw the completion of the initial inventory purchase for the opening of the City' s new library facility. Another reduction in General Administration is the credit entry of approximately $1.0 million to fiscal year 1995/96 personnel overhead costs in order to appropriately reflect the prepaid contributions at the Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS). It is important to note that these prepaid PERS costs do not represent available spendable resources even though they are a component of total assets. The increase in Debt Service is primarily a result of the Redevelopment Agency's above mentioned reclassifications to debt service. Also impacting the Redevelopment Agency' s debt service expenditures is the first payment in March 1996 of the three year term loan initiated on August 17, 1995 and mentioned earlier in this report. xxi Community Services shows an increase over prior year of $1.0 million due primarily to a litigation settlement ($.7) stemming from a 1989 park site condenmation purchase which was ultimately settled in fiscal year 1995/96. During this time, these funds were held on deposit and reflected as such in the financial statements until final settlement was made in 1995/96 and the funds were released and expenditure recorded. The remaining increase is the result of three grants received by the City' s Library Services Department (Califomia Literacy Campaign Grant, the Major Urban Resources Library Grant, and the Weingart Foundation Grant) and some minor increases to Community Service's recreation programs. PROPRIETARY FUND TYPES A. Internal Service Fund The City maintains an intemal service fund for Capital Replacement / Fleet Maintenance. This fund is supported by user charges to customers. Internal service funds account for services to the various departments within the City. The following represents activity during the current (1995/96) and the previous (1994/95) fiscal years: 1994/9~ 199~/96 (amounts in thousands) Operating Revenues $ 389 $ 327 Non-Operating Revenues 245 414 Operating Transfers In 2.403 Total Finance Sources: $ 3,037 $ 1,241 LESS: Operating Expenses ( 103 ) ( 76 ) NET INCOME / (LOSS): $ 2.934 $ 1.165 The Internal Service Fund (Capital Replacement / Fleet Maintenance) increased its retained earnings by approximately $1.2 million. The fees to the Internal Service Fund are a combination of direct transfers of funds approved during the budgetary process and a formula to recapture vehicle and equipment costs. A. Enterprise Fund This enterprise fund was established for the Rancho Cucamonga Sports Complex, more commonly known as the Epicenter. This fund is supported by charges to customers, rental fees, and an admission xxii tax. This fund accounts for personnel and operating costs directly associated with the operations of this facility. The following represents activity during the current (1995/96) and the previous (1994/95) fiscal years: 1994/95 1995/96 (amounts in thousands) Operating Revenues $ 706 $ 1,053 Non-Operating Revenues 584 207 Operating Transfers In 143 1366 Total Finance Sources: $ 1,433 $ 1,626 LESS: Operating Expenses ( 1,169 ) ( 2,108 ) PLUS: Add Back Depreciation Related To Contributed Capital: 0 419 NET INCOME / (LOSS): $ 264 $ ( 63 ) The Enterprise Fund had a net loss of $62,788 during the 1995/96 fiscal year. . V. GENERAL FIXED ASSETS General fixed assets of the City are those fixed assets used in the performance of general governmental functions and exclude the fixed assets of Proprietary Funds. As of June 30, 1996 the general fixed assets of the City mounted to $111,622,070. This mount represents the original cost of the assets, net of additions and deductions from July 1, 1995 to June 30, 1996 and is considerably less than their present value. The system of accounting presently recommended by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) does not allow for the recording of depreciation of general fixed assets as an expense of governmental funds. VI. INDEPENDENT AUDIT The required audit of the books of accounting and financial records, and transactions of all departments of the reporting entity was conducted by independent certified public accountants selected by the City Council. The auditor' s opinion has been included in the Financial Section of this report. xxiii VII. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The cover photograph on this 1995/96 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), taken by David A. Gautreau of The Control Room, is the City of Rancho Cucamonga' s Public Library facility located at 7368 Archibald Avenue. City library services were implemented in fiscal year 1994/95 with the transfer of San Bemardino County Library Tax revenue to the City and the opening of the City' s own facility. The City' s library is double the size of the previous County Branch Library and has a collection over 40% greater than the previous branch. The library welcomes an average of 1,000 visitors each day and loans more than ½ million items to its residents each year. The preparation of this report on a timely basis could not have been accomplished without the efficient and dedicated services of the entire staff of the Finance Department and the administration staff of the Administrative Services Department. We appreciate and would like to commend all the City departments who assisted and contributed material. We also recognize and would like to acknowledge the Mayor and members of the City Council for their interest, dedication, and constant support in planning and conducting the financial operations of the City in a responsible and progressive manner. Respectfully Submitted, Jack Lam, AICP Susan M. Stark City Manager Finance Officer xxiv sms: hd& dsk:wp\cafr696 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA CITY OFFICIALS JUNE 30, 1996 CITY COUNCIL Name Term Expires William J. Alexander Mayor 1998 Rex Gutierrez Mayor Pro Tem 1996 Paul Biane Councilmember 1996 James V. Curatalo Councilmember 1998 Diane Williams Councilmember 1998 ADMINISTRATION AND DEPARTMENT HEADS City Manager and Executive Director of the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency Jack Lam Deputy City Manager Jerry Fulwood City and Redevelopment Agency Attorney James L. Markman Treasurer (term expires 1996) James Frost City Clerk (term expires 1996) Debra Adams Redevelopment Agency Manager Linda Daniels Interim Administrative Services Director Linda Daniels Finance Officer Susan Stark City Planner Brad Buller Building Official Bill Makshanoff City Engineer Joe O'Neil Community Service Manager Suzanne Ota Library Manager Debra Clark XXV xxvi Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting Presented to City of Rancho Cucamonga, California For its Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1995 A Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting is presented by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada to government units and public employee retirement systems whose comprehensive annual financial reports (CAFRs) achieve the highest standards in government accounting and financial reporting. Executive Director xxviii This page intentionsJly left blank. Z: NIOI~LD~S ~IVIDNIVMI~I This page intentionally left blank. G E N E n A L F U N D This pa~e intentionally lef~ blank. w- CD e ClO ~ ~'~ z 0 Z  rLZZli1 uJClCIC) =) i,,u,.Z O u~m...am 0 0 · Z ,,- u.~ 0 0 u u- Cl U.I n- 3= 0 (J u.. .~ e '0 e ¢) ,.- {/)u- c e,- U ,.- _>, u ~o~ ~ · .,~>- .- c u.. >- ~ · ~ _e=,i ,- IBee n-e This page intentionally left blank. S P E C I A L R E V E N U E F U N D S This page intentionally left blank. SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Gas Tax Fund Establish to account for the revenue and disbursement of funds used for road construction and maintenance of the City network system. The City's share of state gasoline taxes provided the financing. SB325 Fund Establish to account for the revenue and disbursement of funds received by extending the statewide sales tax of 1/4 of 1 cent to motor vehicle fuel under the Transportation Development Act. Recreation Fund Established to account for the wide variety of classes, special events, and activities sponsored by the Community Services Department. Park Development Fund Established to account for the residential park development fees charged subdividers upon issuance of a building permit for development of future park or recreational sites. Beauti~cation Fund Established to account for fees collected to provide proper landscaping and irrigation systems after parkway and median improvements are made. SB300 Fund Established to account for the revenue and disbursement of state general funds monies for the reconstruction of existing roadways when the widening brings the road up to generally acceptable safety standards.. Lighting Districts Fund Established to account for the costs associated with providing street lights. Financing is provided by special assessments levied against the benefitting property owners. Landscape Maintenance Fund Established to account for the costs associated with providing landscape maintenance. Financing is provided by special assessments levied against the benefitting property owners. Systems Development Fund Established to account for fees charged a subdivider for the construction and expansion of City streets and highways which provide additional capacity and safety. Park Bond Act 1980 and 1984 Funds Established to account for the revenue and disbursement of funds received from the State of Califomia for construction of parks and recreational facilities. Drainage Facilities Fund Established to account for fees charged developers for purposes of defraying the actual or estimated costs of constructing planned drainage or sewer facilities that are in the subdivision. Pedestrian Grants Fund Established to account for the revenue and disbursement of funds received for the construction of facilities provided for the exclusive use of pedestrians and bicycles. Federal Aid Urban Fund Established to account for the revenue and disbursement of Federal funding for the construction of the City roadway system. Community Development Block Grant Fund Established to account for grants received from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. These revenues must be expended to accomplish one of the following objectives: elimination of slum or blight, or benefit to low and moderate income persons by providing loans and grants to owner-occupants and rental property owners to rehabilitate residential properties. Assessment Administration Fund Established to account for the revenue and disbursement of administration of assessment districts. San Sevaine/Etiwanda Drainage Established to account for Development Impact fees collected in the San Sevaine/Etiwanda Drainage Assessment District for the construction of regional and mainline flood control projects in that district. SB 140 Established to account for the revenue and disbursement of State matching funds for the construction of eligible street construction projects. Air Quality Improvement Fund Established to account for the revenue and disbursement of funds received as a result of Assembly Bill 2766 which imposed an additional registration fee on motor vehicles. These revenues are to be used to reduce air pollution from motor vehicles and for related planning, monitoring, enforcement, and technical studies (Vehicle Code Section 9250.17 and Health & Safety Code Chapter 7, Pan 5 of Division 26, commencing with Section 44220). 800 MHZ Fund Established to account for the revenue and disbursement of funds received as a result of the formation of the West End Communications Financing Authority which issued bonds to provide funds for the acquisition of certain capital equipment by the cities of Chino, Ontario, and Rancho Cucamonga, California. Fuel Efficient Traffic Signal Management Grant Fund (FETSIM) Established to account for grants received from the Califomia Department of Transportation. These revenues are to be used on the retiming of signalized intersections. SBA Tree Grant Established to account for expenses and reimbursements associated with the U.S. Small Business Administration's discretionary grant program for the planting of trees by certified small businesses. South Etiwanda Drainage Established to account for monies deposited by property owners for initial consulting costs related to a possible formation of an assessment district for master planned drainage facilities. Masi Commerce Center Established to account for monies deposited by developers for initial consulting and administrative costs and expenses related to a proposed public financing district. Measure I Established to account for the revenue and disbursement of county/local gasoline tax funds for the construction and maintenance of eligible street projects. Library Services Established to account for services provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Library. Funding for this service is made possible through a transfer of San Bernardino County library tax revenues to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for library purposes. Some start-up costs were incurred during 1993/94; however, full implementation of City library services did not begin until September 1994. Metrolink Established to account for the commuter rail project (Metrolink Station) being funded by a combined source of State Proposition 108 (Passenger Rail & Clean Air Bond Act of 1990) and San Bernardino County Measure I revenues allotted to the City through an agreement with San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG). California Literacy Campaign Grant The California Literacy Campaign Grant is administered by the State Library of California for the purpose of promoting literacy. Weingart Foundation Grant - The Weingart Grant Fund is administered by a private foundation (Weingart Foundation) which awarded this one time grant to the City of Rancho Cucamonga' s Library. These funds are to be used specifically for the establishment of an electronic learning library meant to provide students (kindergarten through twelfth grade) with home work assistance. MURLS Grant Awarded each year by the California State Library this Grant program is titled Major Urban Resource Libraries Services Grant and is funded through the Federal Library Services and Construction Act. Awarded on application to public libraries serving a population in excess of 100,000, the funds must be used to purchase business reference resources. Used Oil Recycling Grant In 1991, the Legislature passed AB 2076, the California Oil Recovery Enhancement Act. The Act requires oil manufacturers to pay $0.04 to the California Integrated Waste Management Board for each quart of lubricating oil sold in the State of California. These grant funds are available to governmental agencies, based on population, for the purpose of establishing and administering used oil collection programs. These funds must be used expressly for oil recycling collection and educational programs. Fire District Established to account for the revenue and disbursement of funds received by Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District in the course of that agency's fire protection services. ~.,., .,.o ..... ~. '~ ,, ~ ...... ~.- f-- c: o1 ~ ,~. ,.- ,,=. ....... !1 ....!1 ._1 '1 ...................... .....;li 'rJ 'll 'll ,,m, ~ ...... ; ...... =~ ~ .... ~ '~ ~""- - ~ .., ..,l .... 0 aw E z ~.~zz ~.o .~ ~ 0 ,,:) ~ ,... ( ZWaWe) "~ C.) {J ~Z ............. ~o ..... ~' , ,,. 'll !11 ' !11 Z 0 ~ . .~m, . , _o .... c~ ...... ~ ,a '-o ~- "' z -.: ,:, ** ** rr CC) C~ 4R 44 This page intentionally left blank. D E b T S E R V I C E F U N D This pa~e intentionally left blank. DEBT SERVICE FUNDS Public Improvement Corporation Fund The Rancho Cucamonga Public Improvement Corporation was incorporated on November 14, 1988 under the Non-Profit Public Benefit Corporation Law of the State of Califomia. The Corporation was established for charitable purposes including rendering financial assistance to the City by financing, acquiring, constructing, improving and leasing public improvements for the benefit of residents of the City and the surrounding area. Redevelopment Agency Fund ' This fund is established to accumulate monies for the payment of loans from the City of Rancho Cucamonga (payable as funds become available to the Agency), and payment of specific Tax Allocation Bonds due in annual installments. All tax increment monies received, placed in this fund, and used to retire debt are done so in accordance with the Health and Safety Code. 0 ~ LLI n '~ WZCI C) UJlU ~) WZ C) (.) Z 0 o:,,~w ,- :]: O~w ~1~ I'WWUJ~' · Wz "J C) w-t-~0 u,I 0 C A P I T A L . P R 0 J E C T S F U N D S This page intentionally left blank. CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS AsSessment District 82-IR Fund Established to account for the receipt and disbursement of funds used in the construction of streets, storm drainage and utility improvements within the project area. Financing was provided by the sale of bonds under the Refunding Act of 1984 for 1915 Improvement Act Bonds. Assessment District 84-1 Fund Established to account for the receipt and disbursement of funds used in the construction and installation of public capital drainage facilities, together with appurtenant work and incidental expenses, to serve and provide drainage protection to property located within Community Facilities District No. 84-1 (Day Creek Drainage System). Financing was provided by the sale of bonds under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982. Assessment District 84-2 Fund Established to account for the receipt and disbursement of funds used in the construction of certain public works of improvement, together with appurtenances and appurtenant work, including acquisition where appropriate, in Special Assessment District No. 84-2 (Alta Loma Channel Improvement). Financing was provided by sale of bonds under the Improvement Bond Act of 1915. Assessment District 86-2 Fund Established to account for the receipt and disbursement of funds used in construction and acquisition of drainage improvements together with appurtenances and appurtenant work, acquisition of real property, if necessary, and incidental expenses within the Assessment District No. 86-2. Financing was provided by the sale of limited obligation bonds under the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 Assessment District 89-1 Fund Established to account for the receipt and disbursement of funds used in the construction within the Assessment District 89-1. Redevelopment Agency Fund Established to account for financial resources to be used for acquisition or construction of major capital facilities within the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Project Area. Financing is to be provided by the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency. Un F I D U C - I A R Y F U N D This page intentionally left blank. AGENCY FUNDS Special Deposits Fund Established to account for all deposits held by the City in its fiduciary capacity. Deferred Compensation Fund Established to account for employee-deferred earnings restricted to be paid at a later date to said employee upon termination or retirement from the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Assessment District 82-1R Fund Established to account for assessments received under the Refunding Act of 1984 for 1915 Improvement Act Bonds. Assessments received are restricted for payment of principal, interest, and penalties thereon, upon presentation of proper coupons. Community Facilities District 84-1R Fund Established to account for assessments received under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982. Assessments received are restricted for payment of principal, interest, and penalties thereon, upon presentation of proper coupons. Assessment District 84-2 Fund Established to account for assessments received under the Improvement Bond Act of 1915. Assessments received are restricted for payment of principal, interest, and penalties thereon, upon presentation of proper coupons. Assessment District 86-2 Fund Established to account for assessments received under the Improvement Bond Act of 1915. Assessments received are restricted for payment of principal, interest, and penalties thereon, upon presentation of proper coupons. Assessment District 85-PDR Fund Established to account for assessments received under the Refunding Act of 1984 for 1915 Improvement Act Bonds and Landscape/Lighting Act of 1972. Assessments received are restricted for payment of principal, interest, and penalties thereon, upon presentation of proper coupons. Community Facilities District No. 88-2 Fund Established to accotmt for assessments received under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982. Assessments received are restricted for payment of principal, interest and penalties thereon, upon presentation of proper coupons. Assessment District 89-1 Fund Established to account for assessment received under the Improvement Bond Act of 1915. Assessments received are restricted for payment of principal, interest, and penalties thereon, upon presentation of proper coupons. Community Facilities District No. 93-3 Fund Established to account for assessments received under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982. Assessments received are restricted for payment of principal, interest and penalties thereon, upon presentation of proper coupons. G E N E R A L F I X E D A S S E T S This page intentionally left blank. (,-1 u) Z ~ >, ~ ._m -- r,,) '~,.- o .,m,c~ ~ -r Z m Z OZ a: 0 0 Z 'o I- 'i c~)~~C) u) -- E ~- ~ ~ - - = , ¢9~ &-~ ,m o mE; o Eqe "- _,,, 0 ;¢Ou) O,'~u.~< - = · 0 = z This page intentionally left blank. Lance 203 North Brea Boulevard Brandon W. Burrows ~llg ~ Donald L. Parker & Suite 203 Michael K. Chu Soil Brea, CA 92821-4056 David S. Hale hard (714) 672-0022 Retired Fax (714) 672-0331 Ro~e~ C.Lance CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Richard C. Soil Fred J. Lunghid, Jr. City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 · INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, as of and for the year ended June 30, 1996 as listed in the accompanying table of contents. These general purpose financial statements are the responsibility of the City's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these general purpose financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the general purpose financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall general purpose financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the general purpose financial statements referred to above present faidy, in all matedal respects, the financial position of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at June 30, 1996, and the results of its operations and the cash flows of its proprietary fund types for the year then ended in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on the general purpose financial statements taken as a whole. The supplemental schedules listed in the accompanying table of contents are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a required part of the general purpose financial statements of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures MEMBER CALIFORNIA SOCIETY OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS City Council City of Rancho Cucamonga applied in the audit of the general purpose financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly presented in all material respects in relation to the general purpose financial statements taken as a whole. August 26, 1996 O 0 M b I N E . D S T A T E M E N T S This page intentionally left blank. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Exhibit A COMBINED BALANCE SHEET - ALL FUND TYPES AND ACCOUNT GROUPS JUNE 30, 1996 PROPRIETARY FIDUCIARY ACCOUNT GROUPS GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES FUND TYPES FUND TYPE General General TOTALS Special Debt Capital Internal Fixed Long-Term (Memorandum Only) ASSETS AND OTHER DEBITS General Revenue Service Pro~ects Enterprise Service A~lency Assets Debt 19 9 6 19 9 5 Cash and investments (Note3) $26.481.796 $24.187,846 $14,261,260 $65,963,881 $ 289.220 $7,185,599 $10.177.064 $ - $ - $148,546.666 $129.413,761 Cash and investments with trustee (Note 3) - 5,822,459 - 4,541,108 - - 10,363.567 11.104.892 Restricted cash (Note 3) - 7,421,981 - - 7,421,981 7,037,141 Investment - land held for resale (Note 1) - 10.778.871 - - - 10,778,871 10.778.871 Receivables (net of uncollectibles): 2,628,434 2,207,461 605,602 9,885,840 120,532 98,676 - - 15,546.545 15.844.879 Prepaid PERS costs (Note 4) 1,096,403 ' - - 1,096,403 - Due from other funds (Note 13) 1,415,494 102,751 97,859 43,868 - - - 1,659,972 7,839.147 De poeits 8,991 532,250 - - - 541,241 1,217,586 Advances to other funds (Notes 6 and 13) 14,772.211 4,290,000 - - 19,082,211 17.868.263 Fixed assets - net book value (Notes 7 and 8) - 20,547,755 528,828 111.622,070 132.698,653 130.534.399 Amount available in debt service funds - - - 19,519,025 19.519,025 19,908,970 Amount to be provided for retirement of general long-term debt - ' 159,341,866 159,341.866 141,277.880 Total Assets and Other Debits $ 46r403,329 $ 26,498,058 $ 20,787,180 $ 91,494,71 0 $ 20,957,507 $ 7.714.427 $ 22.238,829 $111.622,070 $178,860.891 $ 526,577,001 $ 492.825 789 LIABILITIES~ FUND EQUITY AND OTHER CREDITS Liabilities: Accounts payable $ 491,264 $ 979,480 $ 1,1 69,551 $ 41,117 $ 113,747 $ $ 66.626 $ $ $ 2.861.785 $ 3,057,774 Accrued payroll payable 162.802 305,410 - 17,087 4,923 490,202 301.877 Accrued employee benefits (Note 11) 1,230,843 566,850 - 1,548,085 3,345,778 3,137,639 Deposits - - - 3,864 - 7,410.037 7,413,901 6,954,868 Due to other funds (Note 13) 66,160 1,300.51 1 97,993 128,525 66,783 - 1,659,972 7.839,147 Due to other governments - 216,844 611 - 217,455 142,841 Deferred revenue (Notes6 and 10) 6,453,936 80.079 - - - 6,534,015 5,731.480 Deferred compensation payable (Note 16) .... 4.541,108 4.541,108 3.779,174 Obligation under capital leases (Note 11 ) - - - 149, 159 - 726, 181 875,340 979.015 Bond indenture reserve requirement .... 1,457,580 1.457,580 1,457,580 Payable to trustee .... 8.758,555 8,758,555 8,594,770 Advances from other funds (Notes 11 and 13) - 300,000 .... 18.762,211 19,082,211 17,868.263 Bonds and notes payable (Note 11 ) ..... 113,360.000 113,360,000 115,805,000 Developer loans payable (Note 11 ) ...... 44,464,414 44,454,414 25,066,692 Total Liabilities 8,405,005 3,749, 174 1,268,1 55 '173,506 197,597 149, 159 22,238,829 178,860,891 21 5,042,31 6 200,716, 120 Fund Equity: Investment in general fixed assets ' ' - 111,622,070 - 111,622,070 109,722.920 Contributed capital - - 20,540,307 - 20,540,307 20,522,908 Retained earnings: Reserved (Note 14) - - 7,585,268 7.565,268 6,400.699 Unreserved - - 219.603 - 219,603 282,391 Fund balances: Reserved (Note 14) 9,886,631 11.845,585 24,604,241 - - 46.336,457 41,186,788 Unreserved: Designated (Note 14) 28,111,693 4.721,209 19,433,958 65,450,325 - - 117.717,185 101,042.049 Undesignated 6, 182,090 85.067 1,266,638 - - 7,533,795 12.951,914 Total Fund Equity and Other Credits 37,998,324 22,748,884 19,519,025 91,321,204 20,759,910 7,565,268 111,622.070 311,534,685 292, 109,669 Total Liabilities, Fund Equity and Other Credits $ 46,403,329 $ 26,498,058 $ 20,787,180 $ 91,494,710 $ 20,957,507 $ 7,714.427 $ 22,238,829 $111,622.070 $178.860,891 $ 526,577.001 $ 492,825,789 See Notes to Financial Statements 3 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Exhibit B Page 1 of 2 COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES TOTALS Special Debt Capital (Memorandum Only) General Revenue Service Projects I 9 9 6 19 9 5 Revenues: Taxes $ 21,104,640 $ 13,794,981 $ 17,721,077 $ 4,917,269 $ 57,537,967 $ 53,359,823 Licenses and permits 1,593,576 - 1,593,576 1,61 3,580 Fines and forfeits 207,188 84,001 - 291,1 89 415, 196 Use of money and property 2,294,809 1,147,899 51 8,052 4,51 2,235 8,472,985 6,847,563 Intergovernmental 5,383,283 5,796, 121 - 11,179,404 13,662,447 Charges for services 1,875,752 870,239 - 2,745,991 2, 123,670 Development fees 2,713,750 - 2,713,750 2,797,661 Other 2,602, 148 116, 119 - 2,718,267 3,478,201 Total Revenues 35,061,398 24,523, 110 18,239, 129 9,429,504 87,253, 139 84,298, 141 Expenditures: Current: General government 4,893, 189 1,631,363 283, 140 1,893,235 8,700,927 12,374,623 Public safety 9,417,013 - 9,417,013 9,053,236 Public safety - fire protection 8,951,549 8,951,549 9,080,935 Engineering and public works 6,306,375 2,645,840 28,752 8,980,987 9,076,883 Community development 2,964,885 3,523,973 - 6,488,858 7, 165, 128 Community services 1,092,788 2,632,464 - 3,725,252 2,700,897 Capital outlay - 4,132,338 445,858 26,589,859 31,1 68,055 26,231,344 Debt service: Principal 254,933 161,146 8,452,442 718,239 9,586,760 4,504,304 Interest and fiscal charges 35,596 10, 186 6,787, 158 3,210,073 10,046,013 9,613,587 Total Expenditures 24,987,779 23,688,859 15,968,598 32,440,158 97,065,394 89,800,917 Excess of Revenues over (under) Expenditures $ 10,093,617 $ 834,251 $ 2,270,531 $ (23,010,654) $ (9,812,255) $ (5,502,776) See Notes to Financial Statements 4 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Exhibit B Page 2 of 2 COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES TOTALS Special Debt Capital (Memorandum Only/) General Revenue Service Proiects 19 9 6 19 9 5 Other FInancing Source (Uses): Operating transfers in $ 267,558 $ 1,006,881 $ 9,108,334 $ 3,105,408 $ 13,488,182 $ 12,305,501 Operating transfers out (1,644,636) (374,715) (11,180,810) (1,154,380) (14,354,541 ) (14,851,301 ) Gain or (Loss) on sale of land held - - (2,509,634) Debt proceeds - 27,117,351 27,117,351 10,148,814 Excess funds from bond trustee 18,730 - 18,730 Miscellaneous - 10, 141 (588,000) 527,078 (50,781) (699,861) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) (1.358.347) 642.307 (2.660.476) 29.595.457 26.218,941 4,393,519 Excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses $ 8.735,270 $ 1.476,558 $ (389.945) $ 6.584.803 $ 16.408,686 $ (1,109.257) Fund Balances: Beginning of Fiscal Year - as originally reported $ 29,263,312 $ 21,272,068 $ 19,908,970 $ 84,736,401 $ 155.180.751 $155.440,416 Restatements (Note 14) - - 977,513 Beginning of Fiscal Year - as restated 29,263,312 21.272,068 19,908,970 84,736,401 155, 180.751 156,417.929 Excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses 8,735,270 1,476,558 (389.945) 6,584,803 16,408,686 (1.109,257) Residual Equity Transfer (Note 14) (258) 258 - - (127,921 ) End of Fiscal Year (Exhibit A) $ 37,998,324 $ 22.748,884 $ 19,519,025 $ 91,321,204 $ 171,587,437 $155,180.751 See Notes to Financial Statements 5 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Exhibit C Page 1 of 6 COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES BUDGET AND ACTUAL (BUDGETARY BASIS) ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Variance- Variance- Favorable Favorable Budget Actual {Unfavorable) Budget Actual . (Unfavorable) Revenues: Taxes $20,745,540 $ 21,104,640 $ 359,100 $ 12,953,080 $13,794,981 $ 841,901 Licenses and permits 1,477,600 1,593,576 115,976 - . Fines and forfeits 309,200 207, 188 (102,012) 63,890 84,001 20,111 Use of money and property 580,000 2,294,809 1,714,809 541,740 1,147,899 606,159 Intergovernmental 4,431,900 5,383,263 951,383 8,869,780 5,796,1 21 (3,073,659) Charges for seNices 1,487,060 1,875,752 388,692 891,510 870,239 (21,271) Development fees - - - 1.986,340 2,685,361 699,021 Other 2,594,780 2,602,143 7,368 128,110 116,119 (11,991) Total Revenues 31,626,080 35,061,396 3,435,316 25,434,450 24,494,721 (939,729) Expenditures: Current: General government 7,720,712 5,002,867 2,717,845 1,736,71 2 1,634,636 102,076 Public safety 9,875,71 5 9,418,045 457,670 Engineering and public works 7,299,618 6,588,362 711,256 2,707,549 2,645,840 61,709 Community development 3,061,500 3,040,032 21,468 4,370,244 3,529,439 840,805 Community services 1,1 43,520 1,093,946 49,574 2,235,790 2,641,530 (405,740) Public safety - fire protection - 9, 142,360 8,951,549 190,811 Capital outlay - 10,742,535 8,483,379 2,259, 156 Debt service: Principal 254,933 (254,933) 409,710 161,146 248,564 Interest and fiscal charges 35,596 (38,596) - 10, 186 (10, 186) Total Expenditures 29, 101,065 25,435,781 3,664,264 31,344,900 28,057,705 3,287,195 Excess of Revenues over (under) Expenditures $ 2,525,015 $ 9,624,615 $ 7,099,600 $ (5,910,450) $ (3,562,984) $ 2,347,466 See Notes to FInancial Statements 6 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Exhibit C Page 2 of 6 COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES BUDGET AND ACTUAL (BUDGETARY BASIS) ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 GENERAL FUND SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS Variance- Variance- Favorable Favorable Other FInancing Sources (Uses): Budget Actual (Unfavorable) BudSlet Actual (Unfavorable) Operating transfers in $ $ 267,559 $ 267,559 $ 1,237,120 $ 1,006,881 $ (230,239) Operating transfers out (1,116,360) (1,644,636) (528,276) (374,715) (374.715) Excess funds from bond trustee 18,730 18,730 - . Loss on sale of land held . Debt proceeds . . . Miscellaneous - 10,141 10,141 Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) (1,116,360) (1,358,347) , (241,987) 1,237, 120 642,307 (594,813) Excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses (BudgetaW Basis) 1,408,655 8,266,268 6,857,613 (4,673,330) (2,920,677) 1,752,653 Adjustments: To adjust for encumbrances (Note 1 ) - 469,002 469,002 4,368,846 4,368,846 Excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses (GAAP Basis) - BudgetsW Classifications 1,408,655 8,735,270 7,326,615 (4,673,330) 1,448, 169 6.121,499 Other Adjustments: To record excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses for nonbudgeted funds (Note 1 ) ' - 28,389 28,389 Excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses (GAAP Basis) $ 1,408,655 $ 8,735,270 $ 7,326,615 $ (4,673,3,30) $ 1,476,558 $ 6,149,888 Fund Balances: Beginning of Fiscal Year - as originally reported $ 29,263,312 $ 29,263,312 $ - $ 21,272,068 $ 21,272,068 $ Restatements (Note 14) - , , Beginning of Fiscal Year - as restated 29,263,312 29,263,312 21,272,068 21,272,088 Excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses (GAAP Basis) 1,408,655 8,735,270 7,326,615 (4,673,330) 1,476,558 6, 149,888 Residual Equity Transfer (Note 14) (258) (258) 258 258 End of Fiscal Year (ExhibitA) $30,671,967 $ 37,998,324 $ 7,326,357 $ 16,598,738 $ 22,748,884 $ 6,150,146 See Notes to FInancial Statements 7 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Exhibit C Page 3 of 6 COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES BUDGET AND ACTUAL (BUDGETARY BASIS) ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS Variance- Variance- Favorable Favorable Budget Actual (Unfavorable) BudSlet Actual (Unfavorable) Revenues: Taxes $ 16,820,300 17,721,077 $ 900,777 $ 4,866,880 $ 4,917,269 $ 50,389 Licenses and permits - . Fines and forfeits - Use of money and property - 501,899 501,899 66,060 4,512,235 4,446,175 Intergovernmental . Charges for services . Development fees . Other Total Revenues 16,820,300 18,222,976 1,402,676 4,932,940 9,429,504 4,496,564 Expenditures: Current: General government 5,000 283, 140 (278, 140) 1,820,610 1,837,530 (16,920) Public safety - 620,000 55,705 564,295 Engineering and public works - 217,932 28,752 189.180 Community development - . Community services . Public safety - fire protection . Capital outlay 572,500 530,925 41,575 25,043,990 26,657,729 (1,61 3,739) Debt service: Principal 8,729,960 8,142,442 567,518 10,440,580 718,239 9,722,341 Interest and fiscal charges 6,997,600 6,698,308 299,292 787,740 3,210,073 . (2,422,333! Total Expenditures 16,305,060 15,654,815 650,245 38,930,852 32,508,028 6,422,824 Excess of Revenues over (under) Expenditures $ 515,240 $ 2,568,161 $ 2,052,921 $ (33,997,912) $ (23,078.524) $ 10,919,388 See Notes to Financial Statements 8 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Exhibit C Page 4 of 6 COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES BUDGET AND ACTUAL (BUDGETARY BASIS) ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 DEBT SERVICE FUNDS CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS Variance- Variance- Favorable Favorable Other FInancing Sources (Uses): BudSlet Actual (Unfavorable) Budget Actual (Unfavorable) Operating transfers in $ 8,732,600 $ 8,733.619 $ 1,019 $ 3,256.885 $ 3.105,408 $ (1 51.477) Operating transfers out (8,736,500) (11,180,810) (2,444,310) (1,154,380) (1,154,380) Excess funds from bond trustee . Loss on sale of land held . Debt proceeds 10,543,535 27,117.351 16,573,816 Miscellaneous (588.000) (588,000) 527,078 527,078 Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) (3,900) (3,035,191) .. (3,031,291) 12,646,040 29,595,457 16,949,417 Excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses (Budgetary Basis) 511,340 (467,030) (978,370) (21,351,872) 6,516,933 27,868,805 Adjustments: To adjust for encumbrances (Note 1) 85,067 85,067 67,870 67,870 Excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses (GAAP Basis) - Budgetary Classifications 511,340 (381,963) (893,303) (21,351.872) 6,584,803 27,936,675 Other Adjustments: To record excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses for nonbudgeted funds (Note 1) . ('/,982) (7,982) - Excess of Revenues end Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses (GAAP Basis) $ 511,340 $ (389,945) $ (901,285) $ (21,351,872) $ 6,584,803 $ 27,938,675 Fund Balances: Beginning of Fiscal Year - as originally reported $ 19,908,970 $ 19,908,970 $ $ 84,738,401 $ 84,736,401 $ Restatements (Note 14) - - Beginning of Fiscal Year- as restated 19,908,970 19,908,970 84,738,401 84,738,401 - Excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses (GAAP Basis) 511,340 (389,945) (901,285) (21,351,872) 6,564,803 27,936,675 Residual Equity Transfer (Note 14) - End of FiscalYear (Exhibit A) $ 20,420,310 $ 19,519,025 $ (901,285) $ 63,384,529 $ 91,321,204 $ 27,936,675 See Notes to Financial Statements 9 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Exhibit C Page 5 of 6 COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES BUDGET AND ACTUAL (BUDGETARY BASIS) ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 TOTALS (MEMORANDUM ONLY) 1996 1995 Variance- Favorable BudSlet Actual (Unfavorable) Actual Revenues: Taxes $ 55,385,800 $ 57,537,967 $ 2,152,167 $ 53,359,823 Licenses and permits 1,477,600 1,593,576 115,976 1,61 3,580 Fines and forfeits 373,090 291,1 89 (81,901) 415,196 Use of money and property 1,187,800 8,455,842 7,269,042 6,842,704 Intergovernmental 13,301,680 11,179,404 (2, 122,276) 13,662,447 Charges for services 2,378,570 2,745,991 387,421 2,123,670 Development fees 1,986,340 2,685,381 699,021 2,797,661 Other 2,722,893 2,718,267 (4,623) 3,478,201 Total Revenues 78,813,770 87,208,597 8,394,827 84,293,282 Expenditures: Current: General government 11,283,034 8,758,173 2,524,861 12,431,323 Public safety 10,495,715 9,473,750 1,021,965 9,054,464 Engineering and public works 10,225,099 9,262,954 952,145 9,295,707 Community development 7,431,744 6,569,471 862,273 7, 197,521 Community services 3,379,310 3,735,476 (356, 166) 2,706, 187 Public safety - fire protection 9,142,360 8,951,549 190,811 9,080,935 Capital outlay 38,359,025 35,672,033 686,992 26,238,148 Debt service: Principal 19,580,250 9,276,760 10,303,493 4,504,304 Interest and fiscal charges 7,785,340 9,957,163 (2,171,823) 9,613,567 Total Expenditures 115,561,877 101,657,329 14,024,548 90, 120, 156 Excess of Revenues over (under) Expenditures $ {36,868,107) ,$ (14,448,732) $ 22,419,375 $ (5,826,874) See Notes to FInancial Statements 10 CITY OF F~ANCHO CUCAMONGA Exhibit C Page 6 of 6 COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES BUDGET AND ACTUAL (BUDGETARY BASIS) ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 TOTALS (MEMORANDUM ONLY) 1996 1995 Variance- Favorable Other FInancing Source (Uses): Budget Actual (Unfavorable) Actual Operating transfers in $ 13.226,605 $ 13.113.467 $ (113.138) $ 12.305,501 Operating transfers out (11.007,240) (14,354,541 ) (3,347.301) (14.851,301 ) Excess funds from bond trustee 18.730 18.730 - Loss on sale of land held - (2.509.634) Debt proceeds 10.543.535 27.117.351 16.573.816 10.148.814 Miscellaneous (50,781) (50,781) (699,861) Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) 12,762,900 25,844.226 13,081.326 4.393.519 Excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses (BudgetaW Basis) (24.105,207) 11,395,494 35.500.701 (1.433,355) Adjustments: To adjust for encumbrances (Note 1 ) 4,990.785 4.990.785 319,239 Excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses (GAAP Basis) - BudgetaW Classifications (24, 105,207) 16,386,279 40,491,486 (1,114, 116) Other Adjustments: To record excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses for nonbudgeted funds (Note 1 ) 20,407 20,407 4,859 Excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses (GAAP Basis) $ (24,105,207) $ 16,406,686 $ 40,511,893 $ (1.109,257) Fund Balances: Beginning of Fiscal Year - as originally reported $155,150,751 $155.180.751 $ $155.440,416 Restatements (Note 14) 977.51 3 Beginning of Fiscal Year - as restated 155.180.751 155.180.751 156,417,929 Excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses (GAAP Basis) (24.105.207) 16,406.686 40.511.893 (1.1 09.257) Residual Equity Transfer (Note 14) - (127.921 ) End of Fiscal Year (Exhibit A) $131,075,544 $171,567,437 $ 40.511.893 $155.150,751 See Note to Financial Statements 11 · CITY Oi~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA Exhibit D STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS PROPRIETARY FUND TYPE ENTERPRISE AND INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 Enterprise Internal Service T O T A L S Sports Vehicle Year ended June 30, Operating Revenues: Complex Replacement 19 9 6 I 9 9 5 Charges for services $ 607,170 $ 326,620 $ 933,790 $ 776,593 Rents 445,489 ' 445,489 317,942 Total Operating Revenues 1,052,659 326,620 1,379,279 1,094,535 Oporatlng Expenses: Salaries and benefits 766, 149 766, 149 581,364 Administrative costs 1,967 1,967 6,926 Maintenance and operations 543,689 543,689 323,487 Contractual services 371,602 371,602 257,566 Vehicle and equipment maintenance 5,413 5,413 Depreciation 424,662 70,471 495, 133 526,031 Total Operating Expenses 2, 108,069 75,884 2, 183,953 1,695,374 Operating Income (Loss) (1,055,410) 250,736 (804,674) (600,839) Nonoperating Revenue: Interest income 36 413,833 413,869 Taxes 245, 190 Miscellaneous 202,733 202,733 168,219 4,415 4,415 416,667 Total Nonoperating Revenues 207, 184 413,833 621,01 7 830,076 Net Income (Loss) Before Operating Transfers (848,226) 664,569 (183,657) 229,237 Operating transfers In 366,359 500,(XX) 868,359 2,545,800 Net Income (Loss) (481,867) 1,164,569 682,702 2,775,037 Add back depreciation related to contributed capital 419,079 419,079 419,079 Increase (Decrease) in Retained Earnings $ (62,768) $1,154,569 $ 1,101,781 $ 3,194,116 Retained Earnings: Beginning of Fiscal Year - as originally repoded $ 282,391 $ 6,400,699 $ 6,683,090 Restatement (Note 14) , $ 3,560,532 .... ('/1,558I Beginning of Fiscal Year- as restated 282,391 6,400,699 6,683,090 3,488,974 Increase (Decrease) in Retained Earnings (62,788) 1,164,569 1,101,781 3, 194,116 End of Fiscal Year (Exhibit A) $ 219,603 $ 7,565,268 $ 7,784,871 $ 6,683,090 See Notes to Financial Statements 12 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Exhibit E COMBINED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS ALL PROPRIETARY FUND TYPES FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1996 Enterprise... Internal Service T 0 T A L S Sports Vehicle Year ended June 30~ Cash Flows from Operating Activities: Complex Replacement 19 9 6 19 9 5 Operating Income (Loss) (Exhibit D) $ (1,055,41 0) $ 250,736 $ (804,674) $ (600,839) Adjustment to reconcile Operating Income to Net Cash: Depreciation 424,662 70,471 495, 133 526,031 Adjustment to retained earnings (94,005) Miscellaneous income 4,41 5 4,41 5 50,000 Changes in Assets and Liabilities: (Increase) decrease in taxes receivable 30,963 (Increase) decrease in accounts receivable (21,472) (21,472) 323,541 Increase (decrease) in due from other funds 15,000 15,000 505,091 Increase (decrease) In accounts payable 17,689 17,689 48,484 Increase (decrease) in accrued payroll payable 4,676 149,159 153,835 (471) Increase (decrease) in due to other funds 68,783 68,783 (498,219) Total Adjustments 496,753 234,630 731,383 891,41 5 Net Cash Provided (Used) by Operating Activities (558,657) 485,366 (73,291) 290,576 Cash Flows from Noncapital FInancing Activities: Taxes 202,733 - 202,733 168,219 Operating transfers in 366,359 500,000 868,359 2,545,800 Net Cash Provided (Used) by Noncapital Financing Activities 569,092 5(X),000 1,069,092 2,714,019 Cash Floe from CapHal end Related FInancing Activities: Principal payments on capital leases - - (25,944) Acquisition of fixed assets (28,041) (205,718) .. (323,759) (233,020) Net Cash Provided (Used) by Capital and Related Financing Activities (28,941) (295,718) (323,759) (258,964) Cash Flows from Inveating Activities: Interest on investments 36 413,8,33 413,869 245, 190 Net Cash Provided (Used) by Investing Activities 36 41 3,8,33 413,869 245, 190 Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash and Investments (17,570) 1,103,481 1,085,91 1 2,990,821 Cash and Investments at Beginning of Year 306,790 6,082,118 6,388,908 3,398,087 Cash and Investments at End of Year (Exhibit A) $ 289,220 $ 7, 185,599 $ 7,474,819 $ 6,388,908 SCHEDULE OF NONCASH TRANSACTIONS There were no non-cash transactions during the fiscal year. See Notes to Financial Statements 13 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS JUNE 30, 1996 I. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES Note 1: Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies a. Description of the Reporting Entity The City of Rancho Cucamonga was incorporated on November 30, 1977 under the laws of the State of California and enjoys all the rights and privileges applicable to a General Law City. It is governed by an elected five-member board. As required by generally accepted accounting principles, these financial statements present the City of Rancho Cucamonga (the primary government) and its component units. The component units discussed below are included in the reporting entity because they have the same governing body as that of the pdmary government and because of their operational financial relationship with the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Blended component units: The Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency was established on May 20, 1981 pursuant to the State of California Health and Safety Code, Section 33000. Its purpose is to prepare and carry out plans for the improvement, rehabilitation and development of blighted areas within the territorial limits of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Separate financial statements may be obtained from the Agency. The Rancho Cucamonga Public Improvement Corporation was incorporated on November 14, 1988 under the Non-Profit Public Benefit Corporation Law of the State of California. The Corporation was established for charitable purposes including rendering financial assistance to the City by financing, acquiring, constructing, improving and leasing public improvements for the benefit of residents of the City and the surrounding area. Separate financial statements are not available for the Corporation. The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection Distdct (formerly, Foothill Fire Protection District) was a special district formed by the County of San Bernardino for the purpose of fire suppression within its boundaries. Effective July 1, 1989, operations of this district were taken over by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The distdct still operates as a separate special district; however, now it is under the control of the City of Rancho Cucamonga instead of the County of San Bernardino. Separate financial statements are not available for the District. b. Description of Funds Fund Accounting Systems Governmental accounting systems are organized and operated on a fund basis. A fund is defined as an independent fiscal and accounting entity with a self-balancing set of accounts recording cash and other financial resources, together with all related liabilities 14 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 1: Organization and Summary of Signirr, ant Accounting Policies (Continued) and residual equities or balances, and changes therein, which are segregated for the purpose of carrying on specific activities or attaining cedain objectives in accordance with special regulations, restrictions, or limitations. Types of Funds Governmental Fund Types General Fund - to account for all unrestricted resources except those required to be accounted for in another fund. Special Revenue Funds - to account for the proceeds of specific revenue sources (other than major capital projects) that are restricted by law or administrative action to expenditures for specified purposes. Debt Service Funds - to account for the accumulation of resources for, and payment of, interest and principal on general long- term debt. Capital Projects Funds - to account for financial resources segregated for the acquisition of major capital facilities (other than those financed by Proprietary Funds). Proprietary Fund Types Enterprise Funds - to account for operations in a manner similar .to private business enterprises where the intent is that the costs (expenses, including depreciation) of providing goods or services to the general public on a continuing basis is to be financed or recovered primarily through user charges. Internal Service Funds - to account for the financing of goods or services provided by one department or agency to other departments or agencies of the City or to other governmental units, on a cost-reimbursement basis. Fiduciary Fund Types Agency Funds - to account for assets held by the City as trustee or agent for individuals, private organizations, or other governmental units, and/or other funds. 15 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 1: Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) Account Groups Fixed Assets and Long-Term Liabilities The accounting and repoding treatment applied to the fixed assets and long-term liabilities associated with a fund are determined by its measurement focus. All governmental funds are accounted for on a spending or "financial flow" measurement focus. This means that only current assets and current liabilities are generally included in their balance sheets. Their repoded fund balance (net current assets) is considered a measure of "available spendable resources". Governmental fund operating statements present increases (revenues and other financing sources) and decreases (expenditures and other financing uses) in net current assets. Accordingly, they are said to present a summary of sources and uses of "available spendable resources" dudng a pedod. Fixed assets used in governmental fund type operations (general fixed assets) are accounted for in the General Fixed Assets Account Group, rather than in governmental funds. Public domain ("infrastructure") general fixed assets consisting of roads, bddges, curbs and gutters, streets and sidewalks, drainage systems, and lighting systems, are not capitalized. No depreciation has been provided on general fixed assets. All fixed assets are valued at historical cost or estimated historical cost if actual historical cost is not available. Donated fixed assets are valued at their estimated market value on the date donated. Fixed assets acquired under lease/purchase contracts are recorded in the Internal Service Fund and the General Fixed Assets Account Group. The corresponding liabilities are recorded in the Internal Service Fund and the General Long-Term Debt Account Group. Interest accrued dudng construction (if any) of fixed assets is capitalized as a pad of the asset cost. All proprietary funds are accounted for on a cost of services or "capital .maintenance" measurement focus. This means that all assets and all liabilities (whether current or noncurrent) associated with their activity are included on their balance sheets. Their reported fund equity (net total assets) is segregated into contributed capital and retained earnings components. Proprietary fund type operating statements present increases (revenues) and decreases (expenses) in net total assets. Depreciation of all exhaustible fixed assets used by Proprietary Funds is charged as an expense against their operations. Proprietary fund fixed assets are repoded net of accumulated depreciation on their balance sheets. Depreciation has been 16 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 1: Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) provided over the estimated useful lives using the straight line method for all classes of fixed assets. The estimated useful lives are as follows: Automotive Equipment 5 years Other Equipment 5-10 years Long-term liabilities expected to be financed from governmental funds are accounted for in the General Long-Term Debt Account Group, not in the governmental funds. Noncurrent podions of long-term receivables due to governmental funds are reported on their balance sheets, in spite of their spending measurement focus. Special repoding treatments are used to indicate, however, that they should not be considered "available spendable resources", since they do not represent net current assets. Recognition of governmental fund type revenues represented by noncurrent receivables is deferred until they become current receivables. Noncurrent podions of long-term loans receivable are offset by fund balance reserve accounts. Special repoding treatments are also applied to governmental fund inventories (if any) to indicate that they do not represent "available spendable resources", even though they are a component of net current assets. Such amounts are generally offset by fund balance reserve accounts. Because of their spending measurement focus, expenditure recognition for governmental fund types does not include amounts represented by noncurrent liabilities. Since they do not affect net current assets, such long-term amounts are not recognized as governmental fund type expenditures or fund liabilities. They are instead repoded as liabilities in the General Long-Term Debt Account Group. c. Functional Classifications Expenditures of the City are classified by function. Functional classifications are defined as follows: General Government includes legislative activity, City Clerk, City Attorney, City Manager as well as management or suppodive services across more than one functional area. Public Safety includes those activities which involve the protection of people and property. Public Safety - Fire Protection includes activities of the fire protection district involved in the protection of people and property from fire. 17 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 1: Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) Enrlineerin.q and Public Works includes all maintenance, engineering and capital improvements which relate to streets, sewers, parks, flood control and other public facilities. Community Development includes those activities which involve planning and redevelopment as well as building and safety. Community Services includes those activities which involve the providing of recreational, cultural and educational services. d. Basis of Accounting Basis of accounting refers to when revenues and expenditures or expenses are recognized in the accounts and reported in the financial statements. Specifically, it relates to the timing of the measurements made regardless of the nature of the measurement. All governmental funds and Agency funds are accounted for using the modified accrual basis of accounting. Their revenues are recognized when they become measurable and available as net current assets. Revenues considered susceptible to accrual in those funds wherein revenue is recognized on a modified accrual basis is as follows: property and sales taxes, revenue from the use of money and property, interfund transfers, unbilled service receivables and intergovernmental revenue are all considered measurable and are recognized as revenue on a modified accrual basis; licenses, permits, fines and forfeitures and similar items are, for the most pad, not susceptible to accrual and consequently are not recorded until received. Agency funds are purely custodial (assets equal liabilities) and thus do not involve measurement of results of operations. The assets and liabilities are accounted for on a modified accrual basis with the exception of the City's Deferred Compensation Plan which is accounted for on a market value basis in accordance with Statement No. 2 of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). Property tax revenue is recognized on the basis of NCGA Interpretation No. 3; (adopted by GASB) that is, in the fiscal year for which the taxes have been levied providing they become available. Available means then due, or past due and receivable within the current pedod and collected within the current pedod or expected to be collected soon enough thereafter (not to exceed 60 days) to be used to pay liabilities of the current pedod. The County of San Bernardino collects property taxes for the City. Tax liens attach annually as of 12:01 A.M. on the first day in March preceding the fiscal year for which the taxes are levied. The tax levy is made July 1 and covers the fiscal pedod July 1st to June 30th. All secured personal property taxes and one-half of the taxes on real property are due November 1st; the second installment is due February 1st. All taxes are delinquent, if unpaid, on December 10th and April 10th respectively. Unsecured personal property taxes become due on the first of March each year and are delinquent, if unpaid, on August 31st. Grants, entitlements, or shared revenues recorded in governmental funds are recognized as revenue in the accounting period when they become susceptible to accrual, i.e., both measurable and available (modified accrual basis). Grants received before the revenue 18 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 1: Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) recognition cdteda has been met are repoded as deferred revenue, a liability account. Such resources not received are repoded as a receivable if the revenue recognition criteria has been met. Expenditures are generally recognized under the modified accrual basis of accounting when the related fund liability is incurred; principal and interest on general long-term debt is recognized when due. All proprietary funds are accounted for using the accrual basis of accounting. Their revenues are recognized when they are earned and become measurable, expenses are recognized when they are incurred if measurable. e. Budgetary Data General Budget Policies The City Council approves each year's budget submitted by the City Manager prior to the beginning of the new fiscal year. Public headngs are conducted pdor to its adoption by the Council. Supplemental appropriations, where required during the period, are also approved by the Council. There were several supplemental appropriations required dudng the year. A detailed mid-year review was conducted at which time a revised budget was adopted. There were no significant non-budgeted financial activities during the year. The City Council may transfer funds between funds or activities set forth in the budget. The City Manager may transfer funds between appropriations within an appropriation as set fodh in the budget and may transfer appropriations between activities within any fund. Budget data presented in the financial statements are the final adjusted amount. At fiscal year-end all operating budget appropriations lapse. Encumbrances Encumbrances are estimations of costs related to unperformed contracts for goods and services. These commitments are recorded for budgetary control purposes in the General, Special Revenue, and similar governmental funds. Encumbrances outstanding at year-end are repoded as a reservation of fund balance. They represent the estimated amount of the expenditure ultimately to result if unperformed contracts in-process at year-end are completed. They do not constitute expenditures or estimated liabilities. Budget Basis of Accounting Budgets for governmental funds are adopted on a basis consistent with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) except that for bud.qetinrl purposes only encumbrances are treated as expenditures. 19 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 1: Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued) The Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual - All Governmental Funds presents comparisons of the legally adopted budget with actual data on the budgetary basis. The difference between the budgetary basis and GAAP are also presented and reconciled on this statement. This reconciliation included the following unbudgeted funds: Excess of Revenues and Other Sources over (under) Expenditures and Other Uses Special Revenue Fund Type: SB 300 $ - San Sevaine/Etiwanda Drainage 28,389 800 Mhz Radio - FETSIM Grant - SBA Tree Grant - Total Special Revenue Fund Type $ 28,389 Debt Service Fund Type: Public Improvement Corporation $ (7.982) Total $ 20,407 L Other Accounting Policies Total Columns on Combined Statements "Memorandum Only" captions on combined statements - total columns mean that totals are presented for overview informational purposes only and that they do not fairly present financial position or results of operations for the governmental unit as a whole in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Interfund eliminations have not been made in the aggregation of these totals. 20 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 1: Organization and Summary of Signirr, ant Accounting Policies (Continued) Investments Investments are stated at cost. At June 30, 1996, the City's investment in land held for resale is stated at cost as the Agency expeds to sell this land with no decline in value. Claims and Judgments and Compensated Absences Claims and Judfiments Only the shod-term liability is reflected as a current liability in all applicable governmental fund types, the remainder of the liability is repoded in the General Long-Term Debt Account Group. The shod-term liability which will be liquidated with expendable available financial resources is the amount of settlement reached, but unpaid, related to claims and judgments entered. At June 30, 1996, there are no matedal long-term judgments and claims against the City and no liability is repoded in the General Long- Term Debt Account Group. In addition, the City has determined that at June 30, 1996, there are no material incurred but unrepoded claims against the City. Compensated Absences The City utilizes the General Fund and Special Revenue - Fire District Fund to account for its compensated absences. The shod-term podion is determined to be the amount due to employees for future absences which is attributable to services already rendered and which is expected to be paid dudng the next fiscal year. The total amount of liability for compensated absences is segregated between shod-term and long-term as indicated above and are accordingly reflected in the General Fund, Fire Distdct Special Revenue Fund and General Long-Term Debt Account Group. Vacation pay is payable to employees at the time a vacation is taken or upon termination of employment. Normally, an employee can not accrue more than one and one-half times his regular annual entitlement. Sick leave is payable when an employee is unable to work because of illness. For City employees, those who terminate their employment after five years of continuous service and have at least 50% of five years sick leave accrued on the books upon termination may be paid for 120 hours of the accrued leave. For Fire Distdct employees, sick leave may be accumulated indefinitely or an employee with ten or more years of service shall be eligible to conveal unused sick leave to vacation in accordance with the following with any remainder of hours to still remain used sick time. 21 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 1: Organization and Summary of Signirgant Accounting Policies (Continued) Employee Accumulated Balance Vacation Type Pdor Calendar Year Conversion Rate Shitt 108 hr- 144 hr one - half ShiR 72 hr - 108 hr one - fourth 40 hour 72 hr- 96 hr one - half 40 hour 48 hr - 72 hr one - fourth Upon service retirement of a public safety employee the option exists to sell back up to one-half of total accumulated sick time or have the time credited toward service in accordance with the Public Retirement Law. All unused sick leave is forfeited upon termination, other than for normal retirement. Post-Employment Benefits The City and Redevelopment Agency do not provide post-employment benefits; however, medical coverage is provided to Fire Distdct personnel and their dependents upon retirement. The District recognizes the cost of providing these benefits by recording the insurance premiums as expenditures. The cost for 13 retirees was $56,016 for fiscal year 1995-96. II. STEWARDSHIP Note 2: Stewardship, Compliance and Accountability a. There were no funds which contained deficit fund balances as of June 30: b. Excess of expenditures over appropriations in individual funds at the departmental level are as follows: General Fund: Expenditures Appropriations Excess General government: Engineering and Public Works Traffic management $ 251,967 $ 221,970 $ 29,997 Construction management 393,453 346,740 46,713 Community development Building and safety 1,799,292 1,794,440 4,852 22 . City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 2: Stewardship, Compliance and Accountability (Continued) Expenditures Appropriations Excess Special Revenue Funds: Gas Tax Engineering and public works 1,679,559 1,597,630 81,929 SB 325 Engineering and public works 41,650 23,410 18,240 Capital outlay 170,769 138,100 32,669 Park Development Community services 805,415 36,620 768,795 Beautification Engineering and public works 146,834 145,270 1.564 Drainage Facilities Engineering and public works 38,378 38,150 228 Debt Service Funds: Redevelopment Agency General government 283, 140 5,000 278,140 Capital Projects Funds: Redevelopment Agency General government 1,837,530 1,820,610 16,920 Public safety 26,657,729 25,043,990 1,613,739 Interest and fiscal charges 3,210,073 787,740 2,422,333 III. DETAIL NOTES ON FUNDS AND ACCOUNT GROUPS (Notes 3-14) Note 3: Cash and Investments Cash and investments at June 30 consisted of the following: 23 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 3: Cash and Investments (Continued) Cash on hand $ 5,300 Pooled Cash and Deposits 39,023,107 Pooled Investments 86,858,674 Investment in State Treasury's Investment Pool 33,838,790 Investment with Trustee - Money Market 5,822,459 Deferred Compensation - Unclassified 783,884 Total Cash and Investments $ 166,332,214 The City follows the practice of pooling cash and investments of all funds except for funds required to be held by outside fiscal agents under the provisions of bond indentures and funds in its deferred compensation plan.. All investments held are in compliance with the City's investment policy. Interest income earned on pooled cash and investments is allocated to the various funds based on the cash balances. Interest incomE; from cash and investment with fiscal agent and in the deferred compensation plan is credited directly to the related fund. Pooled Cash and Non-Negotiable Certificates of Deposit All pooled cash and non-negotiable certificates of deposit are entirely insured or collateralized. The California Government Code requires California banks and savings and loan associations to secure a City's deposits by pledging government securities as collateral. The market value of pledged securities must equal at least 110% of a City's deposits. California law also allows financial institutions to secure City deposits by pledging first trust deed roodgage notes having a value of 150% of a City's total deposits. The City may waive collateral requirements for deposits which are fully insured up to $100,000 by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). Cash and Investments with Fiscal Agent The City has monies held by a trustee pledged to the payment or security of cedain bonds, cedificates of certification, and lease obligations. The California Government Code provides that these monies, in the absence of specific statutory provisions governing the issuance of these bonds, cedificates, or leases, may be invested in accordance with the ordinance, resolutions or indentures specifying the types of investments its fiscal agent may make. These ordinances, resolutions, and indentures are generally more restrictive than the City's general investment policy. In no instance have additional types of investments, not permitted by the City's general investment policy, been authorized. 24 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 3: Cash and Investments (Continued) Cash and Investments - Deferred Compensation Plan The City offers its employees a deferred compensation plan created in accordance with Internal Revenue Code Section 457. The market value of the plan assets at June 30, 1996 is $4,541,108. The City has two plans. One plan is held in savings accounts where each padicipant is insured up to $100,000. The other plan is held as an unclassified investment. See Note 16 for additional information about this plan. Credit Risk, Carrying Amount, and Market Value of Deposits Cash and deposits of the City are summarized below. The deposits are classified as to credit risk by three categories as follows: Category 1 includes deposits that are insured or collateralized, with the securities held by the City or its agent in the City's name; Category 2 includes deposits which are uninsured but which are collateralized with the securities held by the pledging financial institution's trust department in the City's name; Category 3 includes deposits which are uninsured and uncollateralized, or collateralized with securities held by the pledging financial institutions, or by its trust depadment or agent but not in the City's name. Cateqory Bank Carrying 1 2 3 Balance Amount Cash in Bank and Petty Cash $ 305,500 $ 9,415,380 $ - $ 9,720,880 $ 8,945,651 Deferred Compensation 3,570,800 186,424 - 3,757,224 3,757,224 Certificates of Deposit 600.000 2~5,725,532 -_:_ 26,325,532 26,325,532 Totals $ 4 476 300 $ ~ $ ..:__ $ 39 803 636 $ 39,028.407 Pooled Investments Authorized Investments Under provisions of the City's Investment Policy, and in accordance with Section 53601 of the California Government Code, the City may invest in the following types of investments: Securities of the U.S. Government, or its agencies Small Business Administration Loans Cedificates of Deposit Bankers Acceptance 25 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 3: Cash and Investments (Continued) Commercial Paper Local Agency Investment Fund (State Pool) Deposits Passbook Savings Account Demand Deposits Repurchase Agreements Reverse Purchase Agreements Credit Risk, Carrying Amount and Market Value of Investments Investments of the City are summarized below. The investments that are represented by specific identifiable investment securities are classified as to credit dsk by three categories as follows: Category 1 includes investments that are insured or registered for which securities are held by the City or its agent in the City's name; Category 2 includes uninsured and unregistered investments for which the securities are held by the broker's or dealer's agent in the City's name; Category 3 includes uninsured and unregistered investments for which the securities are held by the broker or dealer, or by its agent, but not in the City's name. Cateft o ry C a rryi ng M a rket 1 2 3 Amount Value City Investments: U.S. Government Securities $ 37,021,799 $ 49,836,875 $ .:._ $ 86,858,674 $ 85,984,507 Total City Investments $ 37,021,799 $ 49,836.875 $ _:_- $ .86,858,674 $ 85,984,507 Investment in State Treasury's Investment Pool Investment in State Treasury's cannot be assigned a credit risk category because the City does not own specific securities. However, the fund's investment policies and practices with regard to the credit-and market risks have been determined acceptable to the City's investment policies. There is no established market for the City's share of this pool and thus no market value can be disclosed. Investment in State Treasury's Investment Pool $ .33,838,790 Investment with Trustee Amounts invested with Trustee in mutual funds cannot be assigned a credit risk category because the City does not own specific securities. However, the fund's investment policies and practices with regard to the credit and market risks have been determined acceptable to the City's investment policies. Carrvina Amount Market Value Investments with Trustee - Mutual Funds $ 5,822.459 $ .5,822,459 26 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 3: Cash and Investments (Continued) Deferred Compensation Plan A portion of the City's deferred compensation plan is held in unclassified investments and therefore cannot be assigned a credit risk category. The remainder is held in deposits and is classified above. In accordance with GASB pronouncements these have been recorded at market value. Deferred Compensation $ 783,884 Note 4: Prepaid PERS costs The City has prepaid contributions with PERS in the amount of $1,096,403. This amount can be utilized to offset employer contributions in fiscal year 1996-97. Note 5: Uneamed Gram Because vadous federal and state subventions and grants have not been received nor the revenue recognition criteria met, the following awards are not reflected in the financial statements: Fund Amount Community Development Block Grant $ 548,585 Park Bond Ads 133,914 State Department of Transportation 1,121,268 State Department of Parks and Recreation - Police Resource 119,145 Total $ 1,922,912 Note 6: Advances to Redevelopment Agency Dudng the current and pdor fiscal years, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has loaned the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency funds for use in financing various projects. The loans which amount to $8,021,228 as of June 30, 1996 bear interest at a rate of 12% per annum and are payable as funds become available to the Agency. As of June 30, a total of $6,450,985 matured interest due on these loans has been added to principal. As this interest is not payable currently, the City has recognized deferred revenue in this amount. 27 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to FInancial Statements (Continued) Note 7: Changes In General Fixed Assets A summary of changes in general fixed assets follows: Restated Balance Balance Balance June 30, 1995 Restatement June 30, 1995 Additions Deletions June 30, 1996 Purchased/Contributed Assets: Land $ 39,659,983 $ (4,351,01 5) $ 35,308,968 $ 6,571 $ - $ 35,315,539 Building improvements 72,007,224 (17, 163, 195) 54,844,029 104,842 - 54,948,871 Improvements other than buildings 55,711 - 55,711 55,711 Equipment and vehicles 13,363,397 (13,769) 13,349,628 1,678, 145 638,438 14,389,335 Furniture and fixtures 3,374,652 (16,610) 3,358,042 10,534 - 3,368,576 Construction-in-prog ress 2,806,542 - 2,806,542 807, 519 70,023 3,544,038 Total $ !31,267,509 $ (21.544.589) $ 109,722,920 $ 2,607,611 $ 708,461 $ 111,622,070 The adjustments above relate to the contribution of the sports complex from the general fixed asset account group to the Sports Complex Fund (Proprietary Fund Type). Note 8: Proprietary Fund Fixed Assets A summary of proprietary fund type property, plant and equipment is presented below: Allowance Estimated Fixed for Net Useful Life Assets Depreciation Book Value Enterprise - Sports Complex Purchased/Contributed assets: Land $ 4,351,01 5 $ $ 4,351,01 5 Building improvements 30 years 17,203,656 1,047,896 16, 155,760 Automotive equipment 5 years 24,650 5,764 18,886 Other equipment 5-10 years 29,787 7,693 22,094 Total $ 21,609, 108 $ 1.061.353 $ 20 54_7 755 28 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 8: Proprietary Fund Fixed Assets (Continued) Allowance Estimated Fixed for Net Useful Life Assets Depreciation Book Value Internal Service: Purchased assets: Automotive equipment 5 years $ 1,059,201 $ 764,417 $ 294,784 Other equipment 5-10 years 279,735 78,673 201,062 Assets acquired through capital leases - equipment 5-10 years 294,745 261,763 32,982 Total $ 1,633,681 $ 1,104,853 $ ,528,828 Note 9: Pension Plan Obligations a. Plan Description The City and Fire Distdct contributes to the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS), an agent multiple-employer public employee retirement system that acts as a common investment and administrative agent for participating public entities within the State of California. Separate plans are maintained for each of these entities. Total payroll and the payroll for employees covered by the system for the year ended June 30, 1996 were as follows: City Fire Distdct Total Total Payroll $ 12,268,309 $ 5.669.336 $ 17.937.645 Covered Payroll 10,845.636 4,236,724 15.082.360 City Plan All full-time and part-time City employees who are eligible may participate in the system. To be eligible for service retirement an employee must be at least age 50 and have 5 years of PERS-credited service. For non-safety employees the benefits are payable monthly for life, in an amount that vades from 1.426 percent at age 50 to 2.418 percent at age 63 (for each year of credited service) of their final compensation. PERS also provides death and survivor's benefits; all benefit provisions and all other requirements are established by State statute and City ordinance. 29 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 9: Pension Plan Obligations (Continued) Fire District Plan All full-time employees who are eligible may participate in the system. To be eligible for service retirement an employee must be at least age 50 for safety and at least 60 for non-safety employees and have 5 years of PERS-credited service. For public safety employees, the benefits are payable monthly for life, in an amount that varies from 2 percent at age 50 to 2.7 percent at age 60 (for each year of credited service) of their final compensation. For non-safety employees the benefits are payable monthly for life, in an amount that vades from 1.092 percent at age 50 to 2.418 percent at age 63 (for each year of credited service) of their final compensation. PERS also provides death and survivor's benefits; all benefit provisions and all other requirements are established by State statute. "Final Compensation" under both plans is the average monthly pay rate for the last consecutive 36 months (or any other 36 month pedod if higher); however, with respect to public safety employees only the average monthly pay rate for the last consecutive 12 months (or another 12 consecutive months if higher) may be used if the entity's contract with PERS provides for one year final compensation. b. Employee and Employer Contribution Obligations The City and Distdct makes the contributions required of its employees on their behalf and for their account. The rates are set by statute and therefore remain unchanged from year to year. The present rates are: Member Rates as a Cate_aorv Percenta,qe of Wa.qes Local miscellaneous members 7 % Local safety members with benefits under Adicle 21252.01 9 % Local safety members with benefits under Adicle 21252.6 7 % The City and District are required to contribute the remaining amounts necessary to fund the benefits for its members, using the actuarial basis recommended by the PERS actuades and actuarial consultants and adopted by the board of administration. 30 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 9: Pension Plan Obligations (Continued) c. Funding Status and Progress The amount shown below as the "pension benefit obligation" is a standardized disclosure measure of the present value of pension benefits, adjusted for the effects of projected salary increases and step-rate benefits, estimated to be payable in the future as a result of employee service to date. The measure is intended to help assess the funding status of the system on a going-concern basis, assess progress made in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due, and make comparisons among employers. The measure is the actuadal present value of credited projected benefits and is independent of the funding method used to determine contributions to the system. The pension benefit obligation was computed as part of an actuadal valuation performed as of June 30, 1995. Significant actuarial assumptions used in the valuation include (a) a rate of return on the investment of present and future assets of 8.50 percent a year compounded annually, (b) projected salary increases of 4.5 percent a year compounded annually, attributable to inflation, (c) no additional projected salary increases attributable to seniority/merit, and (d) no post retirement increases. The pension benefit obligation was computed as part of an actuarial valuation performed as of June 30, 1995, but reflects all plan amendments adopted through June 30, 1996. For the amounts which follow, prior to 1994, assets were shown at book value. The 1994 and subsequent years assets am shown at actuarial value (smooth market value) which may make them not comparable for trend purposes. The total assets in excess of pension benefit obligation applicable to the employees at June 30, 1996 were as follows: City Fire District Total Pension Benefit Obligation: Retirees and beneficiaries currently receiving benefits and terminated employees not yet receiving benefits $ 2,035,032 $ 3,594.657 $ 5,629,689 Current employees: Accumulated employee contributions including allocated investment earnings 7,521,870 4,692,342 12,214,212 Employer-financed vested $ 4,499,905 $ 5,608,154 $ 10,108,059 31 . City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 9: Pension Plan Obligations (Continued) City Fire District Total Employer-financed nonvested $ 190,062 $ 138,334 $ 328,396 Total Pension Benefit Obligation 14,246,869 14,033,487 28,280,356 Net assets available for benefits at cost Market Value Market Value Market Value $21.665.797 20,381,747 $ .18,604,658 17,502,030 $40,270,455 37,883,777 Assets in Excess of Pension Benefit Obligation $ . 6,134,878 $ 3,468,543 $ 9,603,421 d. Contributions Required and Contributions Made PERS uses the Entry Age Normal Actuadal Cost Method which is a projected benefit cost method. That is, it takes into account those benefits that are expected to be earned in the future as well as those already accrued. According to this .cost method, the normal cost for an employee is the level amount which would fund the projected benefit if it were paid annually from date of employment until retirement. PERS uses a modification of the Entry Age Cost Method in which the employer's total normal cost is expressed as a level percentage of payroll. PERS also uses the level percentage of payroll method to amodize any unfunded actuadal liabilities. The amodization period of the unfunded actuadal liability ends in the year 2000. The significant actuadal assumptions used to compute the actuadally determined contribution requirement are the same as those used to compute the pension benefit obligation, as previously described. The contributions to the system for the year ended June 30, 1996 were made in accordance with actuarially determined requirements computed through an actuarial valuation performed as of June 30, 1995. The contribution consisted of the following: 32 · City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 9: Pension Plan Obligations (Continued) Fire District City Safety Employees Non-Safety Employees ..... Total Percent of Percent of Percent of Percent of Current Current Current Current Covered Covered Covered Covered Contribution Payroll Contribution Payroll Contribution Payroll Contribution Payroll Normal Cost $ 1,547,652 14.27 % $ 853,950 21.99 % $ 45,196 12.77 % $ 2,446,798 14.82 % Amortization of the unfunded actuadal accrued liabilities ~ (0.58) (47,1361 (1.21} (1,961) (0.55) (111,351) (0.67) Total $ ~ 13.69 % $ 806,614 20,78 % $ 43,23,5 12.2_..._~2 % $ 2,335,447 14.15 % The City and Fire Distdct contributed $1,247,525 (7.56 percent of current total covered payroll); both entities also contributed on behalf of the employees required contribution $1,087,921 (6.59 percent of current total covered payroll). e. Trend Information Trend information gives an indication of the progress made in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due. Systemwide ten-year trend information is not yet available. See comments above relating to change in valuation of assets. Nine-year trend information for the City and the Fire District were as follows: 33 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 9: Pension Plan Obligation (Continued) (Amounts In thousands) 1986-87 1987-88 1988-89 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 Net assets available for benefits City $ 3.629.3 $ 4,289.8 $ 5,21 3.2 $ 7,056.2 $ 8,838.4 $ 11,102.9 $ 13,371.7 $ 17,748.1 $ 20,381.7 Fire District 4,465.2 5,115.9 6,230.4 7,548.1 8,832.0 10,407.8 11,983.7 15,519.3 17,502.0 Total $ 8.094.5 $ 9,405.7 $ 11.443.6 $ 14,604.3 $ 17,670.4 $ 21,510.7 $ 25,355.4 $ 33,267.4 $ 37,883.7 Pension benefit obligation City $ 2,636.0 $ 3,454.9 $ 4,609.8 $ 6,387.8 $ 8,160.2 $ 9,844.2 $ 11,246.5 $ 11,730.1 $ 14,246.9 Fire District 4,182.9 4,936.7 6,099.5 7,510.9 9,386.0 10,366.3 10,936.3 11,297.3 14,033.5 Total $ 6,818.9 $ 8,391.6 $ 10,709.3 $ 13,898.7 $ 17,546.2 $ 20,210.5 $ 22, 182.8 $ 23,027.4 $ 28,280.4 Net assets available for benefits expressed as a percentage of the pendon benefit obligation City 137.7 % 124.2 % 113.1% 110.5 % 108.3 % 112.8 % 118.9 % 151.3 % 143.1% Fire District 106.7 % 103.6 % 102.1% 100.5 % 94.1% 100.4 % 109.6 % 137.4 % 124.7 % Combined 118.7 % 112.1% 106.9 % 105.1% 100.7 % 106.4 % 114.3 % 144.5 % 134.0 % Assets In excess of (unfunded) pension benefit obligation City $ 993.3 $ 834.9 $ 603.4 $ 668.4 $ 898.0 $ 1,258.7 $ 2, 125.2 $ 6,018.1 $ 6, 134.9 Fire District 282.3 179.2 130.9 37.2 (554.0) 46.7 1,047.4 4,221.9 3,468.5 Total $ 1,275.6 $ 1,01 4.1 $ 734.3 $ 705.6 $ 344.0 $ 1,305.4 $ 3, 172.6 $ 10,240.0 $ 9,603.4 Annual covered payroll City $ 3,892.1 $ 5,318.0 $ 7,037.8 $ 8,515.4 $ 10,546.3 $ 10,507.8 $ 9,935.4 $ 10,415.5 $ 10,845.6 Fire District 1,841.9 2,119.8 2,499.5 2,953.3 3,561.5 4,065.4 4,062.7 4,413.7 4,236.7 Total $ 5,734.0 $ 7,437.8 $ 9,537.3 $ 11,468.7 $ 14,227.8 $ 14,573.2 $ 13,998.1 $ 14,829.2 $ 15,082.3 Assets In excess of pension beneffi expressed as a percentage of annual covered payroll City 25.5 % 15.7 % 8.6 % 7.8 % 8.5 % 12.0 % 21.4 % 57.8 % 56.6 % Fire District 15.3 % 8.5 % 5.2 % 1.3 % (15.0)% 1.1 % 25.8 % 95.7 % 81.9 % Combined 22.2 % 13.6 % 7.7 % 6.2 % 2.4 % 9.0 % 22.7 % 69.1% 63.7 % Employer contributions. These contributions were made In accordance with actuarlally determined requirements City $ 308.9 $ 349.4 $ 476.9 $ 598.1 $ 728.5 $ 811.8 $ 673.7 $ 683.5 $ 773.6 Fire District Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available 492.4 473.9 Total Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available $ 1,175.9 $ 1,247.5 Employer contributions expressed ms a percentage as a percentage of annual covered payroll City 7.9% 6.6% 6.8% 7.0% 6.9% 7.7% 6.8% 6.6 % 7.1% Fire District Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available 11.2 % 11.2 % Combined Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available Not Available 7.9 % 83 % 34 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 9: Pension Plan Obligations (Continued) For the fiscal year 1995-96, the net assets available for benefits expressed as a percentage of the pension benefit obligation and the unfunded (assets in excess of) pension benefit obligation, expressed as a percentage of annual covered payroll are not presented as the pension benefit obligation for the current year has not yet been computed. Note 10: DeferTed Revenue Deferred revenue as of June 30, 1996 consists of the following: General Fund - interest accrued on advances to Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency which is measurable but not available (See Note 6) plus other revenues received of $2,951 which have not yet been earned $ 6,453,936 Special Revenue Funds - Revenue collected in advance for Fuel Efficient Traffic Management 154 Special Revenue Funds - grant revenue received in excess of grant expenditures for California Literacy Campaign 10,961 Special Revenue Funds - development fees collected in advance from various developers for future improvement projects. They are reported as follows: Beauti~cation $ 65,396 Drainage Facilities 3,568 68,964 Total' $ 6,534,015 Note 11: Long-Term Debt a. A description of individual components of long-term debt outstanding as of June 30, 1996 follows: Certificates of Participation: $2,875,000 Certificates of Participation, Rancho Cucamonga Public Improvement Corporation - On December 29, 1988, the Rancho Cucamonga Public Improvement Corporation issued $2,875,000 in Certificates of Participation with an average interest rate of 7,03% to render financial assistance to the City by financing, acquiring, constructing, improving and leasing public improvements for its 35 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 11: Long-Term Debt (Continued) Northeast Community Park Project. With the proceeds of the Certificates, the City will acquire approximately 38 acres of land which the City intends to develop as the Community Park. The City has covenanted in its lease agreement with the Corporation to budget for, appropriate and make the lease payments to the Corporation each year during which it has use and possession of the Park. The Corporation has assigned lease payments to the Trustee. The Trustee may hold the City liable for all lease payments on an annual basis should the City default on its obligation to make lease payments. Debt service payments began June 1, 1989 and continue through December 1, 1998. The Corporation is treated as a component unit of the reporting entity and is reported as a debt service fund. Tax Allocation Bonds: 1. Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, Rancho Redevelopment Project, 1990 Tax Allocation Bonds, $107,780,000 - These bonds are dated March 1. 1990 and were issued to provide for the advance refunding of $31,215,000 Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, Rancho Redevelopment Project Tax Allocation Bonds, 1986 Series A, advance refunding of $9,300,000 Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency. Rancho Redevelopment Project Refunding Tax Allocation Bonds, 1987 Series A, and the advance refunding of $9,500,000 City of Rancho Cucamonga Certificates of Participation (Fire Facilities Project). Interest is payable semi-annually on March 1 and September I of each year commencing September 1, 1990. The bonds mature on the dates in amounts and bear interest as follows: Matudty Date Principal Interest Maturity Date Principal Interest September I Amount Rate September 1 Amount Rate 1994 $1.855.000 6.100 % 2001 $ 1.865,000 6.800 % 1995 1.965,000 6.200 2002 1,990,000 6.850 1996 2,090,000 6.300 2003 2.130,000 6.900 1997 2,220.000 6.400 2004 2,275,000 6.950 1998 2,360.000 6.550 2005 2,435,000 7.000 1999 2,520,000 6.650 2006 3,230,000 7.050 2000 2,685,000 6.750 2019 53,990,000 7.125 2020 24, 170,000 6.750 The Bonds matudng on or before September 1, 1999, are not subject to call and redemption prior to their stated maturities. Bonds matudng on or al~er September 1, 2000. are subject, at the option of the Agency, to redemption, in whole or in part, prior to their stated maturities on any date, commencing September 1, 1999. The bonds maturing September 1, 2019 and September 1, 2020 36 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 11: Long-Term Debt (Continued) are subject to mandatory redemption in part from sinking account installments on September 1, 2007, and on each September 1 thereafter up to and including September 1, 2020. Bonds from this issue amounting to $54,905,000 were defeased during fiscal year 1993-94. See Note 11 b for additional information. 2. Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency, Rancho Redevelopment Project, 1994 Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds $64,460,000. - These bonds are dated February 1, 1994 and were issued in order to advance refund $54,905,000 of the 1990 Tax Allocation Bonds. Interest is payable semi-annually on March 1 and September 1 of each year commencing September 1, 1994. The bonds mature on the dates in amounts and beadng interest as follows: Matudty Maturity Date P d n ci pal I nte rest Date P ri n ci pal I nt e re st September 1 Amount Rate September 1 Amount Rate 1994 $ 2,645,000 3.00 % 2002 $ 855,000 4.40 % 1995 1,070,000 3.00 2003 905,000 4.50 1996 1,100,000 3.30 2004 940,000 4.60 1997 1,140,000 3.70 2005 980,000 4.70 1998 1,180,000 3.90 2006 1,350,000 4.80 1999 1,230,000 4.00 2007 1,410,000 5.00 2000 1,285,000 4.20 2008 1,475,000 5.00 2001 825,000 4.30 2015 12,670,000 5.00 2023 33,400,000 5.00 1994 Bonds maturing before September 1, 2004, are not subject 'to call and redemption pdor to their stated maturities. 1994 Bonds maturing on or after September 1, 2004 are subject at the option of the Agency to redemption. Tax Revenues, except as provided below, are pledged in their entirety to the payment of principal of, and interest on and redemption premium, if any, on the bonds listed above and are referred to in the applicable series resolutions, as "Pledged Tax Revenues". Pledged Tax Revenues do not include that portion of Tax Revenues derived from the Project Area which are required by Section 33334.2 of the Redevelopment Law to be set aside by the Agency in a separate low and moderate income housing fund and be used for the purpose of increasing and improving the community's supply of low and moderate income housing. Pledged Tax Revenues also do not include that portion of Tax Revenues dedved from the Project Area which are required to be used by the Agency in accordance with the provisions of certain agreements entered into by the Agency. The Agency has entered into cooperative agreements with taxing agencies affected by the Redevelopment Project. Such agreements have been entered into 37 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 11: Long-Term Debt (Continued) with (i) the Chino Basin Municipal Water District, (ii) the County of San Bernardino on behalf of the County Free Library and the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, (iii) the Cucamonga County Water District, (iv) the Foothill Fire Protection District and (v) vadous school districts located within the project area. Under the terms of these agreements, the Agency has agreed that certain Tax Revenues attributable to those areas and which are allocated to the Agency pursuant to Section 33670(b), shall be pledged by the Agency to make cedain cash payments or in lieu of contributions to each affected taxing agency. Such payments are to be made from Tax Revenues allocated to the Agency. Pledged Tax Revenues also do not include interest income on the various funds and accounts created by the series resolutions. Any such investment income is available to the Agency to meet debt service payments on the bonds but is not specifically pledged therefore. In addition to providing for the pass-through of Tax Revenue to the County Free Library and the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, the agreement between the Agency and the County of San Bernardino also provides that Tax Revenues which would have been allocated to the County had not the Redevelopment Plan been adopted will be fully allocated to the Agency until fiscal year 1998-99. The agreement, however, further provides that the Agency must use such Tax Revenues for the development of certain regional facilities, as agreed to between the County and the Agency. The Agency anticipates satisfying this regional facilities requirement with cedain previously received bond proceeds. Developer Loans Payable 1. Dudng fiscal year 1988-89, the Agency obtained a loan from the Federal Bureau of Reclamation in connection with the Day Creek Water Project. The odginal debt amounted to $13,400,000 and in accordance with the terms of the agreement, annual payments of $672,815 have been made to the County of San Bernardino (acting as lead agency for the Federal Government). There is no interest due on this loan. 2. On November 15, 1991, the Agency executed a five year note in the amount of $1,500,000. The proceeds of the note, together with a $450,000 cash deposit, were used to acquire approximately 7.78 acres of land. The note bears interest at the rate of 9% per annum, payable in interest only installments, on the first day of each calendar month, beginning on January 1, 1992, and continuing until December 1, 1997 at which time the entire principal balance together with interest due thereon shall become due and payable. 3. In December of 1990 the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency entered into a Disposition and Development Agreement with The Pdce Company (Developer). In accordance with this agreement the Agency executed a 23 year note in the amount of $3,756,615. The note was issued to provide financing of cedain redevelopment activities which included the acquisition of approximately 13 acres of land. The note bears interest of 9% per annum. The Agency shall pay the Developer quarterly payments amounting to 50% of taxes derived from the imposition of the Bradley Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law commencing with Section 7200 of the revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California, as amended, arising from all businesses and 38 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 11: Long-Term Debt (Continued) activities conducted on the Price Parcel. In the event that the debt service payments are insufficient to fully discharge the principal and interest on this note with the 23 note years, then, in such event, the unpaid balance of principal and accrued interest, if any, shall be deemed forgiven. Therefore, accrued interest is not repoded on the financial statements. 4. On September 14, 1994 the Agency executed two term loans with Sanwa Bank. A non-taxable portion of $6,394,000 and a taxable portion of $2,300,000. The proceeds of the loans are to be used to fund the construction of the Archibald storm drain and to make housing grants to the Southern California Housing Development Corporation. Initially, the interest rate is variable, but may be fixed, in whole or in part, at the discretion of the Agency. Principal and interest accruing on the loans shall be payable semi-annually beginning March 1, 1995 and semi-annually thereafter until paid. The final maturity date is March 1, 2005 with respect to the taxable loans and September 1, 2006 with respect to the non-taxable loan. 5. On August 17, 1995, the Agency executed a three year term loan with Sanwa Bank in the amount of $21,000,000. The proceeds of the loan are to fund the Mountainside, Monterey village and Sycamore Springs Projects in conjunction with the Southern California Housing Corporation. Interest is tied to the Libor rate plus 2.25 basis points. Principal and accrued interest are payable semi- annually commencing on March 1, 1996 and thereafter until September 1, 1998. The loan is intended to be paid off with bond proceeds which were issued September 1, 1996 (See Note 19). Advances from Redevelopment A.qency: On September 16, 1987, the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency loaned the City $4,290,000 for use in financing various public safety and parking structures and offsite improvements. This loan was made to the General Fund and it is interest free. This loan is payable in 20 equal annual installment payments due on the last day of each fiscal year commencing with the first fiscal year during which the facility is fully occupied. As this loan was made to a City Capital Project Fund while the loans from the City to the Agency are carried by the General Fund, Special Revenue and Agency funds, the accounting for these transactions has recorded each individually rather than offsetting this loan against amounts advanced from the City. The facility was fully occupied in fiscal year 1990-91. The City has not repaid any pad of this loan. Capital Lease Obliqation: 1. The City entered into equipment lease purchase agreements with various vendors. The following is a schedule by years of future minimum lease payments as of June 30, 1996. 39 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 11: Long-Term Debt (Continued) Long-Term Debt Fiscal Year Account Group 1996-97 $ 114,580 1997-98 114,580 1998-99 43,072 1999-2000 42,376 2000-2001 34,558 Total Minimum Lease Payments $ 349,166 Less: Amount Representing Interest 32,985 Present Value of Net Minimum Lease Payments $ 316,181 2. The City and the District entered into a lease agreement with West End Communications Financing Authority for the lease purchase of 800 Mhz communications equipment. The following is a schedule by years of future minimum lease payments as of June 30, 1996: Fiscal Year City Fire District Total 1996-97 $ 63,775 $ 35,278 $ 428,803 1997-98 65,715 33,578 99,053 1998-99 67,215 36,828 99,293 1999-2000 63,310 34,698 104,043 2000-2001 64,350 37,538 101,888 Total Minimum Lease Payments $ 324,365 $ 177,920 $ 931,088 Less: Amount Representing Interest 59,365 .32,920 .146,088 Present Value of Net Minimum Lease Payments $ 265,000 $ 145,000 $ 785,000 Note Payable: 1. The City has entered into an agreement with San Bernardino County for withdrawal from the County Library System. The City has agreed to reimburse the County for ongoing costs associated with the withdrawal in the amount of $750,000 to be paid over ten years. 40 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 11: Long-Term Debt (Continued) b. Defeasance of Bonds In pdor years, the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency clefeased the following bond issues by placing the proceeds of new bonds in an irrevocable trust to provide for all future debt service payments on the old bonds. Accordingly. the trust account assets and the liability for the clefeased bonds are not included in the Agency's financial statements. 1984 Tax Allocation Bonds $ 7,405,000 1986 Tax Allocation Bonds, Sedes A 31,215,000 1987 Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds, Sedes A 9.100,000 1990 Tax Allocation Bonds (portion defeased) 54,905,000 Certificates of Participation - Fire Facility 9,400,000 Certificates of Participation - California Cities Financing Corporation 6,390,000 Total Defeased $118,415,000 c. The following is a schedule of changes in long-term debt of the City for the fiscal year ended June 30. 1996: Outstanding O utsta ndi ng July 1, 1995 Adjustments Additions Repayments June 30, 1996 Certificates of Participation: Public Improvement Corporation $ 1,380,000 $ - $ - $ 310,000 $ 1,070,000 Bonds: Tax Allocation Bonds - 1990 Issue $ 51,960,000 $ - $ - $ 965.000 $ 50.995.000 Tax Allocation Bonds - 1994 Issue 61,815,000 - - 1.070,000 .60,745,000 Total Bonds $ 113,775,000 $ - $ - $ 2.035.000 $ 111,740,000 Developer Loans- $ 13,685,137 $ 11,381,555 $ 21,000,000 $ 1,602,278 $ 44,464,414 Advances from Other Funds: City of Rancho Cucamonga $ 4.290.000 $ - $ '- $ - $ 4,290.000 Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency 13,578,263 - 6,1. 17,351 5,223,403 14,472,211 Total Advances to Other Funds $ 17,868,263 $ - $ 6,117,351 $ 5,223,403 $ 18,762,211 Obligation Under Capital Leases $ 979,015 $ - $ 188,870 $ 441,704 $ 726,181 Note Payable - County Agreement $ 650,000 $ - $ - $ 100,000 $ 550,000 Accrued Employee Benefits $ 1,467,880 $ - $ 80,205 $ - $ 1,548,085 Total Long-Term Debt Account Group $ 1--49,805.295 $ 1_1,381.555 $ 27,386,426 $ 9,712,385 $ 178,860,891 The adjustments above related to recording the Federal Bureau of Reclamation Loan which was previously omitted. 41 · City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 11: Long-Term Debt (Continued) d. The following schedule illustrates the debt service requirements to maturity for bonds, notes and advances outstanding as of June 30, 1996: Developer Loans and City Fiscal Year Bonds Notes Loans Total 1996-97 $ 9,128,262 $ 23,054,117 $ 18,762,211 $ 50,944,590 1997-98 9, 121,942 3,703,229 - 12,825,171 1998-99 9, 122,666 2, 135,729 - 11,258,395 1999-2000 8.721,694 2,085.729 - 10,807,423 2000-2001 8,714,498 2,085,729 - 10,800,227 Later years 237,242.458 15.815,172 - 253,057.630 Total Debt Service $ 282,051,520 $ 48,879,705 $ 18,762,211 $ 349,693,436 Total Interest 169,241,520 3.865.291 - 173,106,811 Total Principal $ 112,8.10,000 $ .45,014.414 $ 18.762,211 $ 176,586,625 Other Debt: Accrued employee benefits 1,548,085 Obligations under capital leases 726,181 Total Long-Term Debt Principal $ 178.860,891 City Loans outstanding do not have fixed amortization as funds will be repaid when available. Amounts above for these represent the loan balance as of June 30, 1996 plus matured interest due at that date. As mentioned previously, bonds were issued September 1, 1996 to retire a loan from Sanwa Bank (See Note 19). Therefore. it has been shown as due in fiscal year 1996-97. Other developer loans do not have a fixed amortization as debt service payments are based on tax revenue collections. For these, debt service has been spread equally over the term of the debt. Note 12: Other Special Obligations The following issues of Residential Mortgage Revenue Bonds, Certificates of Participation and Special Assessment Bonds are not reflected in the Long-Term Debt Account Group because these are special obligations payable solely from and secured by specific revenue sources described in the resolutions and official statements of the respective issues. Neither the faith and credit nor the taxing power of the City, the Redevelopment Agency, the State of California or any political subdivision thereof, is pledged for the payment of these bonds: 42 · City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 12: Other Special Obligations (Continued) Ori.~inal Amount Rancho Cucamonga-Palmdale-Poderville-Colton Housing Finance Agency, Single Family Modgage Revenue Bonds, Series 1986 $17,505,000 City of Rancho Cucamonga: Improvement Bonds, Improvement District 85-PD 5,915,000 Improvement Bonds, Assessment Distdct No. 82-1R 5,961,249 Community Facilities Distdct No. 84-1, 1992 Refunding Special Tax Bonds 16,530,000 Improvement Bonds, Assessment District 84-2 1,716,794 Improvement Bonds, Assessment Distdct 86-2 2,059.352 Improvement Bonds, Assessment District 89-1 4,780,673 Community Facilities Distdct 93-3 4,825,000 Community Facilities Distdct 88-2 2.920.000 Total $ .62.213.068 Note 13: Interfund Receivables and Payables The individual fund interfund receivable and payable balances at June 30, 1996 are as follows: Interfund Interfund Due from/to other funds: Receivables Payables General Fund $ 1,415,494 $ 66,160 Special Revenue Funds: Park Bond Act - 196,476 Community Development Block Grant - 241 625 SB 140 - 315 994 Masi Comr~erce Center o 4 937 Library Service - 117 466 Metrolink 1 088 Used Oil Recycling Grant - 15 647 Fire District 102,751 407 278 43 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 13: Interfund Receivables and Payables (Continued) Interfund I nterfund Due from/to other funds: Receivables Payables Debt Service Funds: Redevelopment Agency 97,859 97,931 Capital Projects Funds: Redevelopment Agency 43,868 128,525 Proprietary Fund: Sports Complex 66,783 Total $ !,659,972 $ 1,659,972 Advances from/to other funds: General Fund $14,772,211 $ Special Revenue Fund: Park Development - 300,000 Capital Projects Fund: Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency 4,290,000 - Long-Term Debt Account Group: Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency - 18,762,211 Total $19,062,211 $19,062,211 Note 14: Fund Equity a. Reservation of Fund Balance/Retained Eamings The City has established certain fund balance/retained earnings reserve accounts to report the amounts in the following funds which represent amounts restricted for a specified purpose or fund balances which are not available for appropriation in future periods. 44 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 14: Fund Equity (Continued) 1. Reserved for Advances to Other Funds: General Fund $ 8,321,226 Capital Projects Funds: Redevelopment Agency 4,290,000 Total Reserve for Advances to Other Funds $ 12,611,226 2. Reserved for Encumbrances: General Fund $ 469,002 Special Revenue Funds: Gas Tax $ 549,323 SB 325 49,000 Recreation 1,517 Park Development 139, 176 B e a utifi cati o n 9.077 Lighting District 1,298 Landscape Maintenance Distdct 394,930 System Development 5,880 Park Bond Act 167,697 Community Development Block Grant 56,920 Assessment Administration 1,975 SB 140 309,543 Air Quality Improvement 32,773 Measure l 2,636,767 Library Services 250 Metrolink 4,136 California Literacy Campaign 8,584 Total Special Revenue Funds $ 4,368,846 Capital Projects Funds: Redevelopment Agency $ 68,870 Total Reserve for Encumbrances $ 4,905,718 45 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 14: Fund Equity (Continued) 3. Reserved for Land Acquisition: Special Revenue Funds: Fire Distdct $ 300,000 4. Reserved for Employee Leave Pay Outs: Special Revenue Funds: Fire District $ . 288,160 5. Reserved for Radio System: Special Revenue Funds: Fire Distdct $ 50,000 6. Reserve for Land Held for Resale: Capital Projects Funds: Redevelopment Agency $ 10,778,871 7. Reserved for Future Fire Station: Special Revenue Funds: Fire Distdct $ 1,692,910 8. Reserved for Capital Projects: Special Revenue Funds: Landscape Maintenance Distdct $ 3,438,111 Lighting Maintenance District 566,587 Fire Distdct 30,000 Total Reserve for Capital Projects $ ~ 9. Reserved for Long-Term Loans Receivable Capital Projects Funds: Redevelopment Agency $ 9.467.500 46 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 14: Fund Equity (Continued) 10. Reserved for Vehicle and Equipment Replacement: Special Revenue Funds: Gas Tax $ 161,930 Fire Distdct 949,041 $ 1,110,971 Internal Service Fund 7,565,268 Total Reserved for Vehicle and Equipment Replacement $ 8,676,239 11. Prepaid PERS Costs: General Fund $ 1,096,403 Total Reserved $ 53,901,725 Description of Reserves: 1. Reserve for Advances to Redevelopment Agency This reserve is used to indicate that the long-term portion of Advances to Redevelopment Agency do not represent available, spendable resources even though they are a component of total assets. 2. Reserve for Encumbrances Amounts reserved for encumbrances are commitments for materials and services or purchase orders and contracts which are unperformed. 3. Reserve for Land Acquisition This reserve represents amounts specified by the Fire Distdct for future fire station land acquisition and by redevelopment agency for project area land acquisition. 4. Reserve for Employee Leave Pay Outs This reserve represents amounts segregated to aid in paying Fire District termination benefits of employees (vacation, sick, etc.). 47 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 14: Fund Equity (Continued) 5. Reserve for Radio System This reserve represents amounts segregated to aid in making future lease payments by the Fire District for the radio system described in Note 11 to the financial statements. 6. Reserve for Land Held for Resale This reserve is used to indicate that land held for resale does not represent available spendable resources even though they are a component of total assets. 7. Reserve for Future Fire Station This reserve represents amounts segregated by the Fire District for use in constructing a fire station. 8. Reserve for Capital Projects This reserve represents projects legally approved by governing boards which have not been started as of the date of this repod. 9. Reserve for Long-Term Loans Receivable This reserve represents deferred rehabilitation loans made by the Redevelopment Agency which do not represent available spendable resources even though they are a component of total assets. 10. Reserve for Vehicle and Equipment Replacement This reserve represents amounts segregated by the Fire District for use in future vehicle and equipment replacement. 11. Reserve for Prepaid PERS Costs This reserve is used to indicate that prepaid costs do not represent available spendable resources even though they are a component of total assets b. Unreserved - Designations The City has established cedain designations to indicate tentative managerial plans or intent. Designated for Self Insurance General Fund $ 5,064,630 Designated for changes in economic circumstances General Fund 9,086,100 48 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 14: Fund Equity (Continued) Designation for working capital General Fund $ 1,352,500 Special Revenue Funds: Lighting Districts 475,453 Landscape Maintenance Districts 3,135,981 LibraW Services 63,375 Fire Distdct 1,046,400 6,073,709 Designated for Continuing Projects Capital Projects Funds: Redevelopment Agency 65,450,325 Designation for Long-Term Employee Leave Pay Outs General Fund 1,824,140 Designation for Future Computer Equipment General Fund 3,250,000 Designation for Integrated Waste Management General Fund 534,078 Designation for Booking Fees General Fund 600,000 Designation for City Facilities Capital Repairs General Fund 4,264,645 Designation for Law Enforcement General Fund 1,000,000 Designation for County LibraW Agreement General Fund 300,000 Designation for Lions East and West Renovation General Fund 835,600 49 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 14: Fund Equity (Continued) Designated for Debt Service Debt Service Funds: Public Improvement Corporation $ 288,751 Redevelopment Agency 19,145,207 Total Designated for Debt Service 19,433,958 Total $117,717,185 c. Opening Fund Balance Retained Eamings Adjustments Beginning fund balances/retained earnings in the pdor year column have been restated as follows: General Fund: Restate prior sales tax receivable due to GASB 22 implementation $ 917,550 Restate prior year's accounts receivable 16,795 Total General Fund $ . 934,345 Special Revenue Funds: Gas Tax Fund: Restate prior years' revenue for monies erroneously deposited in Vehicle Replacement Fund $ 119,950 Systems Development Fund: Restate pdor year's grants receivable (76,581) SBA Tree Grant Fund: Restate pdor year's grants receivable (201) Total Special Revenue Funds $ 43 168 Total Governmental Funds $ 977,513, 50 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 14: Fund Equity (Continued) Enterprise Funds: Sports Complex: Restate prior fixed assets balances which were originally recorded in the General Fixed Assets Account Group $ 26,396 Restate prior accumulated depreciation (3,949) Total Enterprise Fund $ 22,447 Internal Service Fund: Vehicle Replacement Fund: Restate prior years' revenue for monies erroneously received as they should be Gas Tax Fund revenue $ (119,950) Correct capital lease payment recording 25,945 Total Internal Service Fund $ (94,005) Total Proprietary Funds $ (71.558) Agency Funds: The prior year's column of the Combining Balance Sheet - All Agency Funds has been restated to include Assessment District 93-3 which was erroneously reported as a special revenue fund in prior years. d. Residual Equity Transfers During 1995-96 Special Revenue Funds, 800Mhz Radio and SBA Tree Grant, were closed out by making a residual equity transfer from the General Fund. IV. OTHER DISCLOSURES Note 15: Summary Disclosure of Self-Insurance Contingencies The City is self-insured for the first $100,000 on each general liability claim. The insurance coverage in excess of the self-insured amount is provided by the Public Agency Risk Sharing Authority of California (PARSAC) UP TO A LIMIT OF $10,000,000. Also, the City is self- insured through PARSAC for workers' compensation. The coverage is for $10,000,000 with no retention amount. 51 . City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 15: Summary Disclosure of Self-Insurance Contingencies (Continued) Claims expenditures and liabilities are repoded when it is probable that a loss has occurred and the amount of that loss can be reasonably estimated. These losses include an estimate of claims that have been incurred but not reported. The City funds all claims payable, including those incurred but not reported, in the yearly deposit it pays to PARSAC. Therefore, no liability is shown on the City's financial statements. Effective June 1, 1986 the City became a member of the PARSAC, a public entity risk pool currently operating as a common risk management and insurance program for 32 California cities. The City pays an annual premium to the pool for its excess general liability insurance coverage. The agreement for information of the PARSAC provides that the pool will be self-sustaining through member premiums. The City continues to carry commercial companies for all other risks of loss, including property insurance, eadhquake and flood, auto physical damage insurance and tulip/special events insurance. The PARSAC will publish its own financial repod for the year ended June 30, 1996, which can be obtained from Public Agency Risk Sharing Authority of California, Sacramento, California. There have been no significant changes in insurance coverage from the prior year. During the past three fiscal years, the amount of settlements has not exceeded the amount of insurance coverage. The City is involved in litigation arising in the normal course of business. Although the legal responsibility and financial impact with respect to such litigation cannot be presently ascedained, based on information from the service agent and others involved with the administration of the programs, the City believes that the self-insurance designation of $5,064,630 is adequate to cover such losses. Note 16: Deferred Compensation Plan The City offers its employees a deferred compensation plan created in accordance with Internal Revenue Code Section 457. The plan, available to all employees, permits them to defer a podion of their salary until future years. The deferred compensation is not available to employees until termination, retirement, death or unforeseeable emergency. All amounts of compensation deferred under the plan, all property and dghts purchased with those amounts, and all income attributable to those amounts, property, or dghts are (until paid or made available to the employee or other beneficiary) solely the property and rights of the City (without being restricted to the provisions of the benefits under the plan), subject only to the claims of the City's general creditors. Padicipants' rights under the plan are equal to those of general creditors of the City in an amount equal to the fair market value of the deferred account for each participant. It is the opinion of legal counsel that the City has no liability for losses under the plan but does have the duty of due care that would be required of an ordinary prudent investor. As of June 30, 1996 the following balances of assets and liabilities were present: 52 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 16: DeferTed Compensation Plan (Continued) Carrying Amount (Market Value) Total Assets $ 4,541,108 Liability to Plan Participants $ 4,541,108 Note 17: West End Communications Financing Authoffiy The West End Communications Financing Authority was formed by a joint exercise of powers agreement dated February 21, 1990 and amended February 7, 1991 pursuant to the Joint Exercise of Powers Law of the State of California. It was established for the purpose of financing public improvements through the acquisition, construction and improvement thereof by the Authority. Separate financial statements may be obtained from the Authority. The Authority's membership consists of the City of Chino, the City of Ontario, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the City of Montclair, the City of Upland, the Chino Valley Fire District, the Cucamonga County Water District, Ontario International Airport and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. The City of Rancho Cucamonga's share of participation is 9.48%. The Board of Directors is comprised of the Chief Executive Officer and Finance Director of each member agency. Each Director has one vote over budgeting and financial matters, except for the Cucamonga County Water District and Ontado International Airport, who have chosen not to participate on the Board of Directors. The Authority is a public entity separate from the agencies, and is not included in the financial statements of those entities. The Authority issued two sets of 1991 Revenue Bonds on August 9, 1991 and in order to purchase 800MHZ Communications Equipment which is, in turn. to be leased to the agencies. Sedes A was issued for $4,050,000 and the equipment acquired will be leased to the City of Chino. Sedes B was issued for $5.620,000 and the equipment acquired will be leased to the Cities of Ontario and Rancho Cucamonga. Lease payments made by the member agencies are secudty for the debt and will be used to retire the debt. V. SEGMENT INFORMATION Note 18: Segment Information - Enterprise Fund a. The following schedule presents segment information for the Enterprise Fund maintained by the City. 53 City of Rancho Cucamonga Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) Note 18: Segment Information - Enterprise Fund (Continued) Sports Complex Operating revenues $ 1,052,659 Depreciation 424,662 Operating income (loss) (1,055,410) Operating transfers in 366,359 Tax revenues 202,733 Net income (loss) (481,867) Contributed capital 20,906,974 Additions to contributed capital: Property, plant, and equipment (net of accumulated depredation) 20,547,755 Additions to property, plant and equipment 464,519 Net working capital 212,155 Total assets 20,957,507 Total equity 20,759,910 b, Reconciliation of Contn'buted Capital Spods Complex Beginning balance $ 20,889,575 Additions 436,478 Depreciation related to contributed capital (419,079) Ending Balance $ 20,906,974 VI. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF SUBSEQUENT EVENTS Note 19: Bonds Issued by Redevelopment Agency On September 1, 1996, the Agency issued 1996 Housing Set-Aside Tax Allocation Bonds in the amount of $37,665,000. Proceeds of this issue were to be used to repay existing loans to Sanwa Bank in the amounts of $28,710,670 and to complete projects for which those loans were originated. The bond issue consists of $8.970,000 of sedal bonds with maturities beginning September 1, 1997 through September 1, 2006 and $28,695,000 of term bonds maturing thereafter. 54 STATISTICAL SECTION EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL GOVERNMENTAL EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION (1) Last Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal General Public Engineering Community Community Public Safety Debt Capital Year Government Safety Public Works Development Services Fire Protection Service Outla]~ Total 1986-87 $3,437,497 $4,311,304 $ - $13,755,081 $2,5 14,684 $ - $6,065,219 $8,557,666 $38,641,451 1987-88 5,496,299 6,855,023 3,988,871 (3) 5,609,291 1,473,798 8,545,419 29,425,814 61,394,934 1988-89 (2) 8,53 1,326 6, 117,980 7,769,525 3,717,641 1,228,413 4,763,673 14,566,918 30,394,512 77,089,988 1989-90 11,890,911 6,933,276 7,329,039 6,882,083 1,436,387 5,306,337 60,497,913 28,608,963 128,884,909 1990-91 15,881,940 7,311,306 8,523,472 4,607,309 2,808, 115 7,002,548 17,863,697 30,825,105 94,823,492 1991-92 10,973,782 7,401,199 12,556,739 6,903,264 2,322,517 7,462,224 21,407,802 22,177,981 91,205,508 1992-93 12,944,510 7,615,332 7,789,364 6,159,850 1,702,270 7,839,084 15,203,408 24,188,791 83,442,609 1993-94 14,115,388 8,335,701 8,091,353 6,492,001 1,762,601 8,309,526 15,874,075 15,216,092 78,196,737 1994-95 12,374,623 9,053,236 9,076,883 7,165,128 2,700,897 9,080,935 14,117,871 26,231,344 89,800,917 1995-96 8,700,927 9,417,013 8,980,967 6,488,858 3,725,252 8,951,549 19,632,773 31,168,055 97,065,394 (1) Includes all governmental fund types-General, Special Revenue, Debt Service and Capital Projects (2) The data presented represents all City activities for which the City Council has oversight responsibilities with the exception of the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District which became a component unit July 1, 1989, and for which only 1988-89 and the subsequent year's data was available. (3) Expenditures for the fiscal year 1987-88 and prior are functionally classified as presented in the financial statements for those years. Expenditures for fiscal year 1987-88 and later are classified differently to show more details as presented in the financial statements. Source: Annual Audit Report 96 EXHIBIT 2 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE BY SOURCE Last Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Taxes & Licenses & lnter- Charges for Use of Money Fines & Development Year Assessments Permits governmental Services and Propert.,/ Forfeitures Fees Other Total 1986-87 $16,877,008 $3,388,450 $2,790,180 $3,141,610 $5,905,621 $184,847 $5,243,109 $90,135 $37,620,960 1987-88 21,503,933 2,548,542 5,336,914 3,656,466 5,845,097 256,861 9,245,745 4,210,878 52,604,436 1988-89 27,187,188 2,902,943 8,453,551 4,601,110 8,593,643 264,831 8,828,353 2,413,640 63,245,259 1989-90 33,133,576 1,996,471 10,697,053 4,234,198 8,974,131 308,389 3,922,496 520,326 63,786,640 1990-91 42,126,174 1,628,195 8,293,751 2,197,625 11,237,248 251,271 3,303,543 6,3 15,718 75,353,525 1991-92 44,534,803 1,357,877 10,087,260 2,292,045 9,214,401 226,686 3,604,792 8,033,974 79,351,838 1992-93 48,385,478 1,455,537 11,041,157 2,066,010 6,899,587 391,130 2,016,608 7,434,652 79,690,159 1993-94 56,651,9 16 1,586,247 9,629,421 2,067,524 4,883,780 384, 110 3,617,971 4,177, 113 82,998,082 1994-95 53,359,823 1,613,580 13,662,447 2,123,670 6,847,563 415,196 2,797,661 3,478,201 84,298,141 1995-96 57,537,967 1,593,576 11,179,404 2,745,99 1 8,472,995 291,189 2,713,750 2,718.267 87,253,139 (1) Includes all governmental fund types-General, Special Revenue, Debt Service and Capital Projects Funds. (2) The data presented above represents all City activities for which the City Council has oversight responsibilities. Source: Annul Audit Report 97 EXHIBIT 3 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ASSESSED VALUATION OF ALL CITY PROPERTY Last Ten Fiscal Years Fiscal Secured Public Total Unsecured Full Cash Homeowners Net Taxable Year Property Utility Secured Property Total Value Exemption Value 1986-87 $2,678,753,824 $311,258,610 $2,990,012,434 $151,427,130 $3,141,439,564 $3,141,439,564 $95,133,356 $3,046,306,208 1987-88 3,276,453,488 311,545,190 3,587,998,678 175,043,138 3,763,041,816 3,763,041,816 102,509,009 3,660,532,807 1988-89 3,842,089,811 6,603,300 3,848,693, 111 212,624,063 4,061,317,174 4,061,317,174 113,470,203 3,947,846,971 1989-90 4,663,645,245 6,744,546 4,670,389,791 251,517,317 4,921,907,108 4,921,907,108 119,705,841 4,802,201,267 1990-91 5,577,509,385 15,093,655 5,592,603,040 303,321,685 5,895,924,725 5,895,924,725 125,618,428 5,770,306,297 1991-92 6,179,613,149 14,532,065 6,194,145,214 340,718,049 6,534,863,263 6,534,863,263 129,211,480 6,405,651,783 1992-93 6,484,960,928 14,386,749 6,499,347,677 367,738,678 6,867,086,355 6,867,086,355 137,890,350 6,729,196,005 1993-94 6,632,696,532 13,427,461 6,646,123,993 427,437,186 7,073,561,179 7,073,561,179 135,308,108 6,938,253,071 1994-95 6,307,539,741 10,342,631 6,317,882,372 400,383,268 6,718,265,640 6,718,265,640 136,491,999 6,581,773,641 1995-96 6,283,443,239 10,381,440 6,293,824,679 447,181,856 6,741,006,535 6,741,006,535 139,734,804 6,601,271,731 Note: Assessed valuation is based on 100 percent of full market value. New report format for the County of San Bemardino precludes property exemptions category. Source: County of San Bemardino Auditor-Controller 98 ' EXHIBIT 4 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PROPERTY TAX LEVIES AND COLLECTIONS Fiscal Total Tax Total Tax Percent of Levy Year Levy Col lect ion Collect ed 1986-87 1,106,392 1,148,006 103 1987-88 1,280,269 1,383,181 108 1988-89 1,333,498 1,399,699 105 1989-90 1,944,806 2,052,267 106 1990-91 2,282,179 2,446,699 107 1991-92 2,640,644 2,634,740 99 1992-93 2,404,766 2,395,95 1 99 1993 -94 1,779,421 1,860,297 105 1994-95 2,365,012 1,727,482 73 1995-96 2,347,820 1,772,721 76 Note: The County of San Bernardino does not provide sufficient information to determine what portion of total collections represent delinquent taxes and interest and penalties on those delinquencies. Source: Finance Department, County of San Bernardino - Auditor Controller 99 EXHIBIT 5 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING PROPERTY TAX RATE Last Ten Fiscal Years Chino Basin City of Rancho Fiscal Schools County Cucamonga Metropolitan Municipal WD Cucamonga Total Year Tax Rate Tax Rate Count;F W.D. Water Dist. Tax Rate Tax Rate Tax Rate 1986-87 0.0361 1.000 0.0111 0.0148 0.0071 0.0493 I 1184 1987-88 0.0471 1.000 0.0145 0.0164 0.0066 0.0493 1 1339 1988-89 0.0407 1.000 0.0141 0.0110 0.0046 0.0493 I 1197 1989-90 0.0435 1.000 0.0164 0.0121 0.0038 0.0493 1 1251 1990-91 0.0566 1.000 0.0156 0.0097 0.0033 0.0493 I 1345 1991-92 0.0454 1.000 0.0168 0.0089 0.0030 0.0493 I 1234 1992-93 0.0352 1.000 0.0168 0.0089 0.0028 0.0403 I 1040 1993-94 0.0404 1.000 0.0215 0.0089 0.0024 0.0283 I 1015 1994-95 O. 0340 1.000 O. 0219 O. 0089 O. 0024 O. 0389 I 1061 1995-96 0.0471 1.000 0.0098 0.0089 0.0000 0.0383 1 1041 Assessed valuation of property is stated at 100% of market value. Source: County of San Bernardino Auditor-Controller 100 EXHIBIT 6 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COLLECTIONS Ratios of Total Outstanding Fiscal Current & Prior Assessments Collections to Current and Year Assessments Due Collected Amount Due ' Delinquent Assmrs. 1986-87 $3,393,052 $3,393,052 100.00% $ - 1987-88 3,575,299 3,45 1,700 96.54 123,599 1988-89 3,304,823 3,216,001 97.31 88,822 1989-90 3,619,774 3,599,088 99.43 20,686 1990-91 3,565,936 3,520,9 12 98.74 45,024 1991-92 4,341,957 4,270,529 98.35 71,428 1992-93 4,293,316 4,237,963 98.71 55,353 1993-94 5,983,111 5,881,485 98.30 101,626 1994-95 5,938, 191 5,884,908 99.10 53,283 1995-96 5,301,182 5,253,966 99.11 47,216 Source: Finance Division, Resource Center 101 ' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Special Assessment Collections Assrots. Total Collected Assmts. Assessments 99.1% Outstanding $5,301,182 0.9% FISCAL YEAR 1995/96 102 EXHIBIT 7 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING BONDED DEBT 1995-96 Assessed Valuation: $6,741,006,535 DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING BONDED DEBT: % Applicable Debt 6130196 San Bemardino Co. General Fund &Pension Obligations 7.519 % $106,526,147 Metropolitan Water District 0.540 3,266,433 Chino Basin Mun. Water Dist. Authority 18.305 32,949 Direct Debt 0.02% Chaffey Community College Dist. Certs. of Participation 18.239 1,448,177 Chaffey Jt. Union H.S. Dist.-Certs of Participation 38.014 2,261,833 Total Gross Debt 4.66% A!ta Loma School District 98.471 8,168,169 Total Net 4.66 % Central School District & Certs. of Participation 96.811 23,839,709 Cucamonga School District -Certs of Participation 39.786 6,316,028 Cueamonga County Water District 88.806 399,627 SHARE OF AUTHORIZED AND UNSOLD BONDS; Cucamonga County Water District, I.D. #5 95.534 2,206,835 Metropoli.tan Water District -O- Rancho Cucamonga Re, development Agency 100.000 111,740,000 Alia Loma School District -O- Etiwanda School Dist. Community Facilities Dist. #1 ,#2,#3 100.000 17,535,000 Cucamonga School District -O- City of Rancho Cucamonga-Certs. of Participation 100.000 1,070,000 City of Rancho Cucamonga Cmnty. Fac. Dist. #84-1 100.000 20,595,000 City of Rancho Cucamonga 1915 Act Bonds 100.000 8,020,000 STATE SCHOOL BUILDING AID Fontana Unified School District & C.O.P. 0.460 389,819 REPAYABLE AS OF 6/30/96: $4,001,978 Upland Unified School District C.O.P. 0.120 4,302 TOTAL DIRECT &OVERLAPPING BONDED DEBT ~;313 t 820t028 Source: California Municipal Statistics, Inc. 103 EXHIBIT 8 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Legal Debt Margin (General Obligation Bonds) June 30, 1996 Assessed valuation $6,741,006,535 Debt limit - 15 % of assessed valuation $1,011,150,980 Amount of debt applicable to debt limit: Total bonded debt $0 Other debt $0 Less assets in Debt Service Fund available for payment of principal $0 $0 Legal debt margin $1,011,150,980 Source: Finance Department Note: The City has no general bonds outstanding, however, revenue bond indebtedness has been issued by the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency. See Direct & Overlapping Bonded Debt for information on these bonds. 104 EXHIBIT 9 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BUILDING PERMITS Number Of Permits Issued 1986-87 1987-88 1988-89 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 July 1,773 1,425 1,232 428 418 278 326 238 300 237 August 1,587 1,769 1,751 459 327 262 230 344 288 232 September 1,064 1,547 1,373 351 192 248 245 305 242 225 October 2,219 1,084 1,941 512 328 284 268 222 191 321 November 1,126 837 1,470 358 274 200 255 283 270 191 December 1,289 848 1,068 268 303 195 223 237 170 158 January 1,742 973 1,448 337 228 171 182 264 131 249 February 1,455 1,246 1,167 359 317 243 149 281 257 185 March 1,775 1,820 1,689 410 257 -295 298 442 196 209 April 1,468 1,225 1,649 396 335 231 315 201 214 226 May 1,294 1,708 1,927 372 313 274 262 307 307 250 June 11577 11981 11964 408 312 365 385 348 . 280 . 218 TOTAL 18,369 16,463 18,679 4,658 3,604 3,046 3,138 3,472 2,846 2,701 Source: Building and Safety Division 105 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Building Permits Thousands 20 1986-87 87-88 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 1995-96 Fiscal Year lmNo. Of Permits Issuedl 106 EXHIBIT 10 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY BUILDING PERMIT VALUATION 1986-87 1987-88 1988-89 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 July $41,935,297 $26,616,322 $19,353,555 $10,089,602 $23,599,548 $2,918,819 $11,119,619 $2,309,314 $9,862,766 $12,331,995 August 22,952,820 42,574,167 30,200,101 23,460,230 14,593,530 2,505,876 3,640,314 6,934,763 10,295,238 8,658,100 September 24,218,811 31,918,086 24,268,160 22,479,041 2,350,284 4,577,135 5,611,615 6,012,384 10,610,641 7,539,020 (ktober 9,885,316 20,870,494 48,782,828 23,647,235 7,727,450 6,382,558 3,630,620 4,005,140 14,552,820 10,501,190 November 14,416,666 24,547,794 17,614,217 11,332,216 5,654,369 2,436,103 7,572,750 7,615,600 15,978,747 3,606,830 December 25,215,286 12,117,584 16,056,186 10,147,202 23,805,734 7,140,379 2,843,800 2,346,730 7,157,443 6,256,792 January 30,521,731 17,568,702 24,774,598 15,816,216 10,283,180 8,374,060 8,407,509 12,343,088 1,717,165 15,045,410 February 12,217,137 31,608,519 38,792,235 23,738,389 7,041,748 5,401,851 1,899,579 12,671,962 17,497,339 11,201,194 March 33,979,691 43,663,631 47,229,360 16,484,505 13,445,250 5,561,660 8,499,799 14,063,158 2,101,199 11,932,433 April 41,009,272 10,056,772 35,861,166 9,156,809 6,593,123 4,686,138 11,459,265 5,158,210 8,054,910 11,378,975 May 10,459,244 32,375,301 34,206,959 9,498,383 3,910,268 5,137,236 5,231,474 17,243,990 9,403,612 15,468,092 June 24~066~664 56~408t37.4.. 60~298~893 22~989~440 71689~607 181714~994 15~177~110 121007~333 10~546t284 6t074~237 TOTAL 290,877,935 350,325,746 397,438,258 198,839,268 126,694,091 73,836,809 85,093,454 102,711,672 117,778,164 119,994,268 Source: Building and Safety Division 107 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Construction Activity Millions $300 -.' ,.oo_ - ...... l'l'l"'" $0 '/ I "1 '' I '1 ' '~ 'I 1~' I ""'1 'T" 1986-87 87-88 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 1995-96 Fiscal Year LmVa_!u?of _P _e_.r_mitsl "1 , I · 108 EXHIBIT 11 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DEMOGRAPHIC STATISTICS Average Annual San Bernardino City Population City Population County as Percent Year Population Percent Changes Population of County 1987 80,420 8.9% 1,167,175 6.9% 1988 94,614 17.9% 1,202,695 7.9% 1989 104,727 10.7 % 1,286,2 10 8.1% 1990 104,887 (1) 0.2% 1,423,800 7.4% 1991 105,100 (2) 0.2% 1,464,700 7.2% 1992 109,800 4.5% 1,508,700 7.3% 1993 111,500 1.5 % 1,539,600 7.2 % 1994 112,700 1.1% 1,559,100 7.2% 1995 114,600 1.7% 1,572,700 7.3% 1996 115,900 1.1% 1,589,500 7.3% Source: (1) U.S. Bureau of Census, California Department of Finance (2) In May, 1996 the California State Controller's Office (Demographic Research Unit) recalibrated the population count statewide retroactive to April 1990. That recalibrated count is reflected above. 109 DEMOGRAPHIC STATISTICS DEMOGRAPHIC STATISTICS City Of Rancho Cucamonga County Of San Bernardino ThOUSaRdS 410 -1510 - 310 - 1010 - 210 - 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 110 EXHIBIT 12 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PRINCIPAL TAXPAYERS (1) June 30, 1996 TOP 25 PRODUCERS Albertsons Ameron Best Buy Circle K Circuit City Claim Jumper Giorgio Inland Commercial Fueling Liquid Air McDonalds Mervyns Mobil Oil Montgomery Ward New England Newspaper Supply Office Depot Price Company Proficient Food Company Rykoff Sexton Inc. S W School Supply Service Merchandise Stater Bros. Tamco Target Vanguard Plastics Wal Mart (1) Based on sales tax revenues, listed alphabetically. Source: State Beard of Equalization . 111 EXHIBIT 13 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA PURCHASED INSURANCE POLICIES AS OF JULY 25, 1996 Coverage Maximum Coverage Company Remarks Auto Insurance $250,000 PARSAC One year policy - Expires 5/97 SFC 008585 $33,386 annual premium Boiler &Machinery Policy $9,500,000 Hartford Steam Boiler One year policy - Expires 10/26/96 BMI-LA-9934845 $9,071 annual premium Crime Policy $100,000 Aetna One year policy - Expires 7/24/98 Employee Surety 005 BY 100825831 BCA not billed as of July 25, 1996 Equipment Insurance $250,000 PARSAC One year policy - Expires 5/97 premium included in auto coverage Liability Insurance $5,000,000 PARSAC One year policy - Expires 7/1/97 $354,862 annual premium Notary Bond $10,000 Western Surety Company Effective 12/17/93 $50.00 annual premium Excess Liability $5,000,000 PARSAC One year policy - Expires 7/1/97 $46,569 annual premium Property Insurance $250,000 PARSAC One year policy - Expires 5/97 premium included in auto coverage Special Events $2,000,000 CNA Insurance Company One year policy $1,000 one time premium Workers Compensation $10,000,000 PARSAC One year policy - Expires 7/1/97 $91,682 annual premium Excess Workers' Comp $10,000,000 PARSAC One year policy - Expires 7/1/97 $109, 155 annual premium Source: Risk Management Division 112 EXHIBIT 14 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICAL INFORMATION Date of Incorporation Nov. 22, 1977 Type of City General Law Form of Government Council Manager Area 37.5 Square Miles Population 115,900 Number of Street Lights 9,145 Miles of Streets 446 Number of Signals 95 Fire Protection: · Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Number of Stations 5 Number of Firefighters &Officers 67 Police Protection: Contracted with San Bernardino Co. Number of Stations 1 Number of Sworn Officers 81 Recreation and Culture: Number of Parks 20 with 236 acres Source: City Of Rancho Cucamonga - Various Departments 113