HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003/11/19 - Agenda Packet CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
10500 Civic Center Drive + Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730~3801
909 477-2700
AGENDAS
· Redevelopment Agency
· Fire Protection District
· City Council
REGULAR MEETINGS
1st and 3rd Wednesdays + 7:00 p.m.
-I'O BE HELD AT THE CUCAMONGA COUNTY WATER DISTRICT BOARDROOM
10440 ASHFORD ST., RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA
909 987-2591
NOVEMBER 19, 2003
AGENCY~ BOARD & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
William J. Alexander .................... Mayor
Diane Williams ............... Mayor Pro Tern
Rex Gufierrez ............................ Member
Robert d. Howdyshel[ ............... Member
Donald J. Kurth, M.D ................ Member
Jack Lam ......................... City Manager
James L. Markman ............. City Attorney
Debra J. Adams ..................... City Clerk
ORDER OF BUSINESS
5:30 p.m. Closed Session .................................. CCWD
7:00 p.m. Regular Redevelopment Agency Meeting .. CCWD Boardroom
Regular Fire Protection District Meeting ... CCWD Boardroom
Regular City Council Meeting ............ CCWD Boardroom
INFORMATION FOR THE PUBLIC
' ~i ,~[~,~CHO
~UGAMONOA
TO ADDRESS THE CITY COUNCIL
The City Council encourages free expression of all points of view. To allow all persons to speak, given the length of the
Agenda, please keep your remarks brief. If others have already expressed your position, you may simply indicate that you
agree with a previous speaker. If appropriate, a spokesperson may present the views of your entire group. To encourage
all views and promote courtesy to others, the audience should refrain from clapping, booing or shouts of approval or
disagreement from the audience.
The public may address the City Council on any agenda item. Please sign in on the clipboard located at the desk behind
the staff table. Please list your name, address and phone number. Comments are limited to 5 minutes per individual.
If you wish to speak concerning an item not on the agenda, you may do so under "Public Communications". There is
opportunity to speak under this section at the beginning and the end of the agenda.
Any handouts for the City Council should be given to the City Clerk for distribution.
To address the City Council, please come forward to the podium located at the center of the staff table. State your name
for the record and speak into the microphone.
All items to be placed on a City Council Agenda must be in writing. The deadline for submitting these items is 6:00 p.m. on
Tuesday, one week prior to the meeting. The City Clerk's office receives all such items.
AGENDA BACK-UP MATERIALS
Staff reports and back-up materials for agenda items are available for review at the City Clerk's counter and the Public
Library. A complete copy of the agenda is also available at the sign-in desk located behind the staff table during the
Council meeting.
LIVE BROADCAST
Beginning with the Wednesday, July 16, 2003, City Council meeting, the meetings will not be broadcast Live, but are
scheduled to air on RCTV-3 on a tape-delayed basis the night after (Thursday) at 7:00 p.m. Normal, regularly-scheduled
replays of City Council meetings will air on RCTV-3 the second and fourth Wednesdays of each month at 11:00 a.m., and
7:00 p.m. The temporary relocation to the Cucamonga County Water District will last until after the first of the year, 2004.
The City Council meets regularly on the first and third Wednesday
of the month at 7:00 p.m. (temporarily in the CCWD Boardroom
located at 10440 Ashford St., Rancho Cucamonga, CA).
Members of the City Council also sit as the Redevelopment Agency
and the Fire District Board.
Copies of City Council agendas and minutes can be found at:
http://www.ci.rancho-cucamonga.ca.us
If you need special assistance or accommodations to participate in this meeting, please ~
contact the City Clerk's office at (909) 477-2700. Notification of 48 hours prior to the
I
meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility.
Listening devices are available for the hearing impaired.
Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers while the meeting is in session.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
NOVEMBER 19, 2003 - 7:00 P.M.
The meeting will be held at the Cucamonga County Water District at 10440 1
cRANcH Ashford St., Rancho Cucamonga, CA
UGA.MONGA
I A. CALL TO ORDER
1. Roll Call: Alexander __, Gutierrez __,
Howdyshell__, Kurth__, and Williams__.
Il B. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
1. Review of 2003 Founders Night Gala held November 1, 2003, and
announcement of "PAL" - PROMOTING ARTS AND LITERACY
CAMPAIGN, a collaborative fundraising effort between the Rancho
Cucamonga Foundation and Rancho Cucamonga Library Foundation.
2. Presentation of a Proclamation to Cindy Scheidemantle in honor of
being recognized as the "2003 L.A. County Fair Community Hero."
I[ C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
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.
IiD. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONSI
This is the time and place for reports to be made by members of the
City Council on matters not on the agenda.
II CONSENT CALENDAR Ii
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 Minutes: October 15, 2003
October 27, 2003 (Special Meeting)
2. Approve to receive and file current Investment Schedule as of October 1
31,2003.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
NOVEMBER 19, 2003 - 7:00 P.M.
2
The meeting will be held at the Cucamonga County Water District at 10440
C[~NCHO Ashford St., Rancho Cucamonga, CA
UCJL,~ONOA
3. Approval of Warrants, Register October 28, 2003, through November 7
11,2003, and Payrolt ending November 11, 2003, for the total amount
of $4,839,556.84.
4. Approval of a recommendation from the Park and Recreation
Commission for approval of Street Banner applications and schedule 32
for Calendar Year 2004.
5. Approval to appropriate $5,000 awarded by the California State 35
Library into Literacy Expenditure Accounts.
6. Approval to expend grant funding for four Deputy Sheriff positions to
form a Multiple Enforcement Team (MET) in the amount of $218,529 36
from the State Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund
(SLESF) Grant in accordance with the adopted budget for fund 354 -
COPS Program - State.
7. Approval of Map, Improvement Agreement, Improvement Securities,
Monumentation Cash Deposit and Ordering the Annexation to 37
Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B and Street Light Maintenance
District Nos. 1 and 6 for Parcel Map 15665, located north of the
terminus of Santa Anita Avenue, east of Day Creek Channel,
submitted by Paragon Santa Anita LLC, a California Limited Liability
Company.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-294 40
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP
15665, IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT,
IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES AND
MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT
RESOLUTION NO. 03-295 41
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 PARCEL MAP 15665
8. Approval of Map, Improvement Agreement, Improvement Securities,
Monumentation Cash Deposit and Ordering the Annexation to 50
Landscape Maintenance District No. 10 and Street Light Maintenance
District Nos. 1 and 7 for Tract No. 16306, locate on the southeast
corner of Day Creek Boulevard and Vintage Drive, submitted by
Young California Cucamonga, L.P.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
NOVEMBER 19, 2003 - 7:00 P.M.
The meeting will be held at the Cucamonga County Water District at 10440 3
CPu~NCHO Ashford St., Rancho Cucamonga, CA
UCAMONGA
RESOLUTION NO. 03-296 53
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TRACT NO. 16306,
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND
IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES AND
MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT
RESOLUTION NO. 03-297 54
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION
OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 10 AND
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
NOS. 1 AND 7 FOR TRACT NO. 16306
9. Approval of Map, Improvement Agreement, Improvement Securities,
Monumentation Cash Deposit and Ordering the Annexation to 64
Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Light Maintenance
District Nos. 1 and 2 for Tract No. 16431, located on the east side of
the Alta Loma Flood Channel, south side of Lemon Avenue,
submitted by Cucamonga Ventures, LLC.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-298 67
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TRACT MAP
NUMBER 16431, IMPROVEMENT
AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT
SECURITIES AND MONUMENTATION CASH
DEPOSIT
RESOLUTION NO. 03-299 68
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION
OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
NOS. 1 AND 2 FOR TRACT NO. 16431
10. Approval of a contract for the split single source purchase of tire
mounting and general vehicle maintenance and repairs to Police 76
Department vehicles from A&R Tire Service, of Rancho Cucamonga,
and R&R Automotive, of Rancho Cucamonga, for Fiscal Year
2003/04, with an option to renew the agreement for additional one (1)
year periods, upon mutual consent, up to a total of three (3) years, in
an annual amount not to exceed $70,000.00 for A&R Tire Service,
and $70,000.00 for R&R Automotive, funded from Fund 1001-701-
5250.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
NOVEMBER 19, 2003 - 7:00 P.M. 4
The meeting will be held at the Cucamonga County Water District at 10440
cRANCHO Ashford St., Rancho Cucamonga, CA
UCAMONGA
11. Approval to accept the bids received and award and authorize the 86
execution of a contract in the amount of $1,691,656.82 to the
apparent Iow bidder, Pouk & Steinle (CO 03-127), for the Electrical
Distribution System Cabling, Connections, and Equipment Project.
12. Approval to accept bids received and award and authorize tt~e 88
execution of the contract in the amount of $437,437 to the apparent
Iow bidder, All American Asphalt (CO 03-128), and authorize the
expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $43,743 for the
construction of Base Line Road Traffic and Street Improvements, to
be funded from Acct. No. 1124-303-5650/128312409 (Transportation
Fee Program Funds).
13. Approval of a Master Plan Transportation Facility Reimbursement 95
Agreement (CO 03-129) for Construction of Traffic Signal at the
Intersection of Base Line Road and Ellena West in connection with
development of Tract 16239, submitted by DPDG Fund III, LLC, to be
funded from Transportation Reimbursement Acct. No.
11243035650/1026124-0.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-300 98
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MASTER PLAN
TRANSPORTATION FACILITY
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE
INSTALLATION OF A TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT
THE INTERSECTION OF BASE LINE ROAD
AND ELLENA WEST
14. Approval for award and authorize the execution of the contract in the
amount of $195,000 to Dan Guerra and Associates (CO 03-130), and 99
authorize the expenditure of a '10% contingency in the amount of
$19,500 for Construction Survey and Administration Services for
Phase 3A of Community Facilities District 2003-01, to be funded from
Fund 614 - CFD 2003-01, Acct. No. 16143035300/1442614-0.
15. Approval to accept the bids received and award and authorize the 100
execution of the contract in the amount of $75,865.00 to the apparent
Iow bidder, Silvia Construction, Inc. (CO 03-131), and authorize the
expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $7,586.50 for the
Haven Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation from Alta Loma Drive to
Lemon, to be funded from Measure "1" funds, Acct. No.
11763035650/1376176-0.
16. Approval to execute a Right of Entry Agreement with Southern
California Edison Company (CO 03-132) by the City Manager or his 104
duly appointed representative for the Construction of the Electrical
Substation within the Epicenter expanded parking lot, located at the
southeast corner of Rochester Avenue and Stadium Parkway.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
NOVEMBER 19, 2003 - 7:00 P.M.
The meeting will be held at the Oucamonga County Water District at 10440 5
C[~'CHO Ashford St., Rancho Cucamonga, CA
17. Approval to accept the bids and award and authorize the execution of 112
the contract in the amount of $153,900.00 to the apparent Iow bidder,
Steiny and Company, Inc. (CO 03-133), and authorize the
expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $15,390.00 for the
Construction of Traffic Signals and Safety Lighting at the Intersection
of Victoria Street and Etiwanda Avenue, to be funded from
Transportation Funds, Acct. No. 11243035650/1285124-0 and
appropriate an additional amount of $44,290.00 to Acct. No.
11243035650/1285124-0 from Transportation fund balance.
18. Approval to accept Improvements, release the Faithful Performance
Bond, accept a Maintenance Bond, and file a Notice of Completion for 116
Improvements for DRC2001-00423, located on the west side of Santa
Anita Avenue, north of 4th Street, submitted by Master Development
Corporation.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-301 1 18
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS FOB DRC2001-00423 AND
AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF
COMPLETION FOR THE WORK
19. Approval of Improvement Agreement, Improvement Security and
Ordering the Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 119
and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 2 for DRC2002-
00601, located on the west side of Vineyard Avenue, approximately
600 feet south of Foothill Blvd., submitted by Sommervile-Conzelman
Company, a Limited Partnership.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-302 122
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT
AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR
DRC2002-00601
RESOLUTION NO. 03-303 123
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEXATION
OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT
NOS. 1 AND 2 FOR DRC2002-00601
20. Approval to accept Improvements, release the Faithful Performance
Bond, accept a Maintenance Bond, and file a Notice of Completion for 131
Improvements for DR 00-24, submitted by Darrell D. Clendenen,
located at the northeast corner of Elm Avenue and White Birch Drive.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
NOVEMBER 19, 2003 - 7:00 P.M.
The meeting will be held at the Cucamonga County Water District at 10440 6
c~cHo Ashford St., Rancho Cucamonga, CA
RESOLUTION NO. 03-304 133
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS FOR DR 00-24 AND
AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF
COMPLETION OF WORK
21. Approval to accept Improvements, release the Faithful Performance
Bond, accept a Maintenance Bond, and file a Notice of Completion for 134
Improvements for Tract 14162, located on the south side of 19th
Street, at the western city limits, submitted by Walton Development,
LLC.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-305 136
A RESOLUTION OF THE CiTY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT NO. 14162
AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A
NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK
22. Approval to accept Improvements, release the Faithful Pedormance
Bond, accept a Maintenance Bond, and file a Notice of Completion for 137
Improvements for Tract No. 15174, located on the southwest corner of
Chumh Street and Rochester Avenue, submitted by KB Home Greater
Los Angeles, Inc.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-306 139
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT NO. 15174
AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A
NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK
23. Approval to accept Improvements, release the Faithful Performance
Bond, accept a Maintenance Bond, and file a Notice of Completion for 140
Improvements for Tract No. 15492, located on the southeast corner of
Milliken Avenue and Terra Vista Parkway, submitted by KB Home
Greater Los Angeles, Inc.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-307 142
A RESOLUTION OF THE CiTY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT NO. 15492
AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A
NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
NOVEMBER 19, 2003 - 7:00 P.M. 7
The meeting will be held at the Cucamonga County Water District at 10440
cR~'~cHo Ashford St., Rancho Cucamonga, CA
II F. 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. The Council will act upon them at one time without
discussion. The City Clerk will read the title. Any item can be
removed for discussion.
1. CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT
DRC2003-00709 - CHARLES JOSEPH ASSOCIATES - A proposed
amendment to the text of the Development Code to allow self-storage
facilities within residential zones, under specific circumstances, with the
approval of a Conditional Use permit.
ORDINANCE NO. 719 (second reading) 143
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT
CODE AMENDMENT DRC2003-00709,
AMENDING PORTIONS OF SECTION 17.08-
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS OF THE RANCHO
CUCAMONGA DEVELOPMENT CODE,
ALLOWING PUBLIC STORAGE FACILITIES
WITHIN RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DISTRICTS
UNDER SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES WITH
THE APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN
SUPPORT THEREOF
Ii G. 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 APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16038 - 151
CARNEY - A request to subdivide .817 acres of land into four
parcels in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per acre)
located on the west side of Klusman Avenue, north of Diamond
Avenue- APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files: Development Review
DRC2003-00015, Variance DRC2003~00017, Tree Removal Permit
DRC2003-00419, and Minor Exception DRC2003-00016.
(CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 5, 2003)
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
NOVEMBER 19, 2003 - 7:00 P.M.
The meeting will be held at the Cucamonga County Water District at 10440 8
cR&,qc~o Ashford St., Rancho Cucamonga, CA
UC3.MONGA
RESOLUTION NO. 03-290 212
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF
THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND
APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
SUBTPM16038, A SUBDIVISION OF FOUR
LOTS ON 1.1 GROSS ACRES OF LAND IN
THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, LOCATED
ON THE WEST SIDE OF KLUSMAN AVENUE
NORTH OF DIAMOND AVENUE, AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN:
1062-401-05
2. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAl
ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00015 - 151
CARNEY - A request to develop four single family homes on .817
acres of land in the Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre)
District located on the west side of Klusman Avenue, north of
Diamond Avenue - APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files: Minor
Exception DRC2003-00016, Variance DRC2003-00017, Tree
Removal Permit DRC2003-00419 and Tentative Parcel Map
SUBTPM16038. (CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 5, 2003)
RESOLUTION NO. 03-291 300
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF
THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND
APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
DRC2003-00015, THE DEVELOPMENT
REVIEW OF FOUR HOMES WITHIN
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO.
SUBTPM16038, ON 1.1 GROSS ACRES OF
LAND LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF '
KLUSMAN AVENUE, NORTH OF DIAMOND
AVENUE IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN
SUPPORT THEREOF- APN: 1062-401-05
3. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF VARIANCE DRC2003-00017 -
CARNEY - A request for a variance to reduce the required lot depth 151
and reduce the required front setback for four proposed single family
residences in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units per
acre), located on the west side of Klusman Avenue, north of Diamond
Avenue - APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files: Development Review
DRC2003-00015, Minor Exception DRC2003-00016, Tree Removal
Permit DRC2003-00419, and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16038.
(CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 5, 2003)
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
NOVEMBER 19, 2003 - 7:00 P.M.
9
The meeting will be held at the Cucamonga County Water District at 10440
cRANCH Ashford St., Rancho Cucamonga, CA
RESOLUTION NO. 03-292 319
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF
THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND
APPROVING VARIANCE DRC2003-00017 TO
REDUCE THE LOT DEPTH FROM 100 FEET
TO 80 FEET FOR THE 1.1 ACRE PROPERTY
IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT,
LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF KLUSMAN
AVENUE, NORTH OF DIAMOND AVENUE,
AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF - APN: 1062-401-05
4. APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL 323
INDUSTRIES - A request to operate a non-profit second hand store
of 9,500 square feet within an existing shopping center in the
Neighborhood Commercial District located at 9749 Base Line Road.
APN: 1077-011-50.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-308 408
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,
CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL OF,
AND UPHOLDING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION'S DECISION, TO DENY
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468
REQUESTING TO OPERATE A NON-PROFIT
SECOND HAND STORE OF 9,500 SQUARE
FEET WITHIN AN EXISTING SHOPPING
CENTER IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL DISTRICT LOCATED AT 9749
CASE LINE ROAD AND MAKING FINDINGS IN
SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1077-011-50
5. CONSIDERATION OF PUBLIC INTEREST, CONVENIENCE AND 411
NECESSITY IN GRANTING A TAXICAB SERVICE PERMIT TO
AAA INLAND EMPIRE CAB (CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 6,
2003)
6. CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 2002-
2004 CONSOLIDATED PLAN AND 2003-2004 ANNUAL ACTION 447
PLAN - A proposed amendment to establish a new job center activity
to be funded through the Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) program.
,_~ CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
NOVEMBER 19, 2003 - 7:00 P.M. 10
The meeting will be held at the Cucamonga County Water District at 10440
c~R~a~cHo Ashford St., Rancho Cucamonga, CA
IIH. PUBLIC HEARINGS
The following items have no legal publication or posting
requirements. The Chair will open the meeting to receive public
testimony.
No Items Submitted.
III. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS I
The following items do not legally require any public testimony,
although the Chair may open the meeting for public input.
1. GRAND PRIX FIRE RECOVERY, RESTORATION AND HAZARD
MITIGATION UPDATE (Oral)
IIj. COUNCIL BUSINESS I
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.
1. PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES 449
UPDATE
K. IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR THE 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.
IIL. B, ic CO MCATIONS
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 Council may
receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting.
Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual.
.~ CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
NOVEMBER 19, 2003 - 7:00 P.M.
The meeting will be held at the Cucamonga County Water District at 10440
(~[~NCttO Ashford St., Rancho Cucamonga, CA
UCA~IONC~
M. ADJOURNMENT
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 November 13, 2003, seventy two (72) hours
prior to the meeting per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic
Center Drive.
October 15, 2003
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY COUNCIL CLOSED SESSION MINUTES
A. CALL TO ORDER
The Rancho Cucamonga City Council held a closed session on Wednesday, October 15, 2003, at the
Cucamonga County Water District facilities located at 10440 Ashford Street, Rancho Cucamonga,
California. The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Mayor William J. Alexander.
Present were Councilmembers: Rex Gutierrez, Robert J. Howdyshell, Diane Williams and Mayor William
J. Alexander.
Also present were: Jack Lam, City Manager; Craig Fox, Deputy City Attorney; Pamela Easter, Deputy
City Manager; Brad Buller, City Planner; and Joe O'Neil, City Engineer.
Absent was Councilmember: Donald J. Kurth, M.D.
Il B. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S) I
Mayor Alexander announced the closed session item.
B1. CONFERENCE WITH PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS PER GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION
54956.8 FOR PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, WEST OF
1-15, GARY SAFADY, O&S HOLDINGS, AND JOE O'NEIL, CITY ENGINEER, NEGOTIATING PARTY,
REGARDING TERMS OF AGREEMENT - CITY'
l[ C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEM(S) I
No one was present to comment on the closed session item.
II D. CONDUCT OF CLOSED SESSION
Closed session began at 5:35 p.m.
The closed session recessed at 6:33 p.m. with no action taken.
City Council Minutes
October 15, 2003
Page 2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Regular Meeting
A regular meeting of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council was held on Wednesday, October 15, 2003, at
the Cucamonga County Water District Board Room, located at 10440 Ashford Street, Rancho
Cucamonga, California. Mayor William J. Alexander called the meeting to order at 7:11 p.m.
Present were Councilmembers: Rex Gutierrez, Robed J. Howdyshell, Diane Williams and Mayor William
J. Alexander.
Also present were: Jack Lam, City Manager; Pamela Easter, Deputy City Manager; Craig Fox, Deputy
City Attorney; Linda D. Daniels, RDA Director; Flavio Nunez, Assistant RDA Analyst; ,lames C. Frost, City
Treasurer; Larry Temple, Administrative Services Director; Tamara Layne, Finance Office; Joe Kamrani,
Sr. Information Systems Analyst; Sam Davis, Information Systems Specialist; Jon Gillespie, Traffic
Engineer; Brad Buller, City Planner; Nancy Fong, Sr. Planner; Alan Warren, Associate Planner; Trang
Huynh, Building Official; Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director; Dave Moore, Recreation
Superintendent; Francie Martindale, Marketing Manager; Paula Pachon, Management Analyst III; Bill
Pallotto, Recreation Supervisor; Deborah Clark, Library Director; Captain Pete Ortiz, Rancho Cucamonga
Police Department; Deputy Chief Bob Corcoran, Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District; Duane
Baker, Assistant to the City Manager; Michelle Dawson, Management Analyst III; Kimberly Thomas,
Management Analyst II; Shirr'l Griffin, Office Specialist II - City Clerk's Office; and Debra J. Adams, City
Clerk.
Absent was Councilmember: Donald J. Kurth, M.D.
II ~. ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS [
B1. Presentation of a Proclamation declaring October 23 -31, 2003, as Red Ribbon Week in Rancho
Cucamonga.
Mayor Alexander presented the Proclamation to Paula Pachon, Management Analyst III, and also the
Chairperson of RCCASA.
B2. Presentation of Certificates to Red Ribbon Week Design Winner and Honorable Mention Recipients.
A power point presentation was given by Paula Pachon, Management Analyst III, and Chairperson of
RCCASA. She also assisted with the presentation of the cedificates to the contest winners.
B3. Presentation of the Highlights of the Central Park Groundbreaking Event held October 13, 2003.
A power point presentation was given by Francie Martindale, Marketing Manager.
Mayor Alexander added that the City works with the YMCA and that they are very supportive of this
facility and that they are excited about what it will offer the community.
City Council Minutes
O~ober 15, 2003
Page 3
[] C. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Item L1 was done at this time.
L1. UPDATE FROM SENIOR ADVISORY FUNDRAISING SUBCOMMI'rTEE REGARDING THE
CENTRAL PARK SENIOR CENTER (Oral)
Janet Rierson congratulated the City on the successful groundbreaking event. She stated their dream is
becoming a reality. She stated members of the Senior Advisory Fundraising Committee were also
present. She stated they welcome contributions and commented on the Legacy Tree that will be at the
Senior Center. She added this fundraising is for the fitness center that will be part of this project. Ms.
Rierson stated the donations are tax deductible.
C1. John Lyons reported that his Mother had passed away on October 5. He talked about the response
time of the fire department in responding to this incident and thanked them and AMR for their assistance.
C2. Paul Irvine stated the Police Department has failed to respond to his calls when his family has
needed assistance. He felt this should be looked into because nothing is being done to help his family.
C3. Melanie Ingram, Rosebud, stated the recall failed to get the required number of signatures to quality
it for the ballot. She stated they will still be keeping tabs on the City Council and that they will keep the
same website - ranchorecall.org. She stated the website went down right before the election and also in
August. She said she was not sure why that happened, but are pursuing to find out why. She stated it is
illegal to tamper in this manner. She stated the new website is ranchorecall.net, but that there is also a
ranchorecall.com which has been purchased as a domain name. She stated they were able to buy the
".net" name. She stated they believe in good, open government. She added she can be reached at 944-
5988 if anyone wants to contact her.
C4. Gwyn Frost stated her son was born 23 years ago tomorrow. She added Todd has only missed one
Founder's Day parade and that was when he was 10 days old. She stated she and Jim are very blessed
to have been part of this City.
C5. Jim Frost talked about the approval of the trash franchises that were being developed 25 years ago.
He added there would be a Veteran's Day ceremony at Alta Loma High School on November 9.
C6. A gentleman (did not give name) brought up the grocery workers strike. He did not think the
prevailing wages should be lowered and asked people to shop Starer Brothers in order to support the
strike.
~,. COUNClI~ COMMUNICATIONS
D1. Councilmember Williams stated Councilmember Kurth is in Portland for his business. She stated he
was named President of the California Society of Addictive Medicine Providers and felt this went in hand
with Red Ribbon Week. She stated she attended a legislative reception through the California League of
Cities and the Inland Empire Economic Partnership (IEEP). She commented that the Grape Harvest
Festival was a very fun event. She stated she will be happy to help people with their concerns if they
City Council Minutes
October 15, 2003
Page 4
contact her. She stated she had attended an event at Los Osos High School for an exhibition game of
the Chinese Junior Olympic Basketball team and that she presented them with a Proclamation. She had
attended the opening event of the CCWD Maintenance Building and commented how nice it was. She
stated the Central Park Groundbreaking ceremony was a very nice event and felt it was very successful.
D2. Councilmember Gutierrez commented on the new Day Creek Park and how beautiful it is. He
commented on the success of the mall project and Central Park. He stated this is peak football season
and the high schools need to be recognized. He commented on the mamhing bands and the great show
they put on and how hard they work all summer. He stated the City is still very concerned about all of the
issues relating to the freeway. He thanked Captain Ortiz for the survey he did for the security at banking
institutions. He stated one of the banks that did not have security has agreed to put something in. He
mentioned crime in neighboring cities does affect Rancho Cucamonga. He commented about people
speeding throughout the City streets. He added he also sees people running red lights. He stated the
City will look into the matter of the man that did not get a response from the Police Department. He
stated he was in a Marketing Subcommittee and that the City wants to create more jobs so people do not
have to commute and will have more time for their family. He congratulated everyone that worked at the
Grape Harvest Festival.
D3. Councilmember Howdyshell stated he went to the Homecoming Game at Los Osos High School and
that it was a great event.
D4. Mayor Alexander reported that the young girl that had been missing from Rancho Cucamonga has
been found and that this was very good news.
l[ E. CONSENT CALENDAR I
El. Approval of Minutes: September 22, 2003 (Special Meeting)
E2. Approval of Warrants, Register September 24 through October 6, 2003, and Payroll ending October
6, 2003, for the total amount of $3,364,634.25.
E3. Approve to receive and file current Investment Schedule as of September 30, 2003.
E4. Approval of an appropriation of $25,000.00 to Acct. No. 1001305-5200 for Tract 13812 Vintage
Avenue Extension, and authorization to refund Panda Development.
ES. Approval of a $50,000.00 appropriation to Acct. No. 1025001-5200 for various operation and
maintenance expenditures, including storage costs, equipment rental, material handling,
landscape/hardscape materials, and supplies; and approval of a $50,000.00 appropriation to Acct. No.
1025001-5300 for various contract services expenditures, including surveying, electrical, civil design and
soils/material testing related to the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility. REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION
BY HOWDYSHELL.
E6. Approval to purchase one (1) message board from the manufacturer, Advanced Safety Products of
Fallbrook, California, as a single source purchase in the amount of $24,097.21, to be funded from the
Equipment~Vehicle Replacement Fund, Acct. No. 1712001-5603. REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION BY
HOWDYSHELL.
City Council Minutes
October 15, 2003
Page 5
ET. Approval to seek bids from the pre-qualified bidders for the Rancho Cucamonga Cultural Center
Parking Structures and Building Foundation project, to be funded from Redevelopment Agency funds.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-256
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE "RANCHO CUCAMONGA CULTURAL
CENTER PARKING STRUCTURES AND BUILDING FOUNDATION
PROJECT" IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE
CITY CLERK TO RECEIVE BIDS
E8. Approval of a Resolution of the City of Rancho Cucamonga modifying the Rancho Cucamonga
Municipa~ Utility Tariff for Temporary Construction Power.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-257
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, MODIFYING THE RANCHO
CUCAMONGA MUNICIPAL UTILITY TARIFF FOR TEMPORARY
CONSTRUCTION POWER
E9. Approval of a Resolution to apply for grant funds for the Per Capita Grant Program under the
California Clean Water, Clean Air, Safe Neighborhood Parks and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2002.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-258
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE APPLICANT TO
APPLY FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR PER CAPITA GRAND PROGRAM
UNDER THE CALIFORNIA CLEAN WATER, CLEAN AIR, SAFE
NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND COASTAL PROTECTION BOND ACT
OF 2002
El0. Approval of a Resolution to apply for grant funds for the Roberti-Z'Berg-Harris Block Grant Program
under the California Clean Air, Safe Neighborhood Parks and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2002.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-259
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE APPLICANT TO
APPLY FOR GRANT FUNDS FOR THE ROBERTI-Z'BERG-HARRIS
BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM UNDER THE CALIFORNIA CLEAN WATER,
CLEAN AIR, SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND COASTAL
PROTECTION BOND ACT OF 2002
E11. Approval of a Resolution of Intention to vacate remaining portions of two alleys, generally within the
Northtown area, located on the south side of Feron Boulevard, west of Hermosa Avenue, and setting the
date of the public hearing for November 5, 2003.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-260
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONOA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO
VACATE REMAINING PORTIONS OF ALLEYS GENERALLY WITHIN
THE NORTHTOWN AREA, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
FERON BOULEVARD, WEST OF HERMOSA AVENUE
City Council Minutes
October 15, 2003
Page 6
E12. Approval to summarily vacate a 10-foot wide easement for street tree maintenance purposes,
located on the south side of Terra Vista Parkway, east of Coyote Canyon Park, submitted by KB Home -
APN: 1077-831-32 (V-194).
RESOLUTION NO. 03-261
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SUMMARILY ORDERING THE
VACATION OF A 10-FOOT WIDE EASEMENT FOR STREET TREES
MAINTENANCE PURPOSES, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
TERRA VISTA PARK~VAY, EAST OF COYOTE CANYON PARK - APN:
1077-831-32 (V-194)
E13. Approval for the award of an annual contract for Street Striping and Pavement Marking
Maintenance for fiscal year 2003/04, with an option to renew, upon mutual consent, for additional one (1)
year periods, up to a total of an additional four (4) years, to Traffic Operations, Inc. (CO 03-116) of
Pomona, in the amount of $102,555.00, and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the
amount of $10,255.00, funded from Fund 1170-303-5300.
E14. Approval of a contract renewal with U.S. Guards, Inc. (CO 01-060) to June 30, 2004, in the amount
of $159,333, and approval of an additional $73,217 for anticipated extra work related to construction and
additional facilities, to be funded from Acct. Nos. 1001312-5304 ($25,750); 1133303-5304 ($117,800);
1700201-5304 ($69,000), and 1290601-5300 $20,000); and approval of an appropriation of $28,497 from
Capital Reserve balance to Acct. No. 1025001-55650-10251382-0 for temporary security service at the
12kV Electrical Substation project to be located at the southeast corner of Rochester Avenue and
Stadium Parkway. REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION BY HOWDYSHELL.
E15. Approval of a contract renewal with Coastal Building Services (CO 00-102) to June 30, 2004, in the
amount of $180,500, and approval of an additional $62,500 for anticipated extra work related to
construction, remodeling and additional facilities, to be funded from Acct. No. 1001312-5304 ($240,000),
and 1700201-5304 ($3,000). REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION BY HOWDYSHELL
E16. Approval of a contract renewal with JDC, Inc. of Rancho Cucamonga (CO 01-075), to June 30,
2004, for the "City Wide Concrete Repair, Tree Removal and Tree Planning Annual Maintenance
Agreement" for repair of City sidewalks, curb and gutters in the amount of $350,000, to be funded from
Acct. No. 1176303-5300. REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION BY HOWDYSHELL.
E17. Approval to accept the bids received and award and authorize the execution of the contract in the
amount of $1,275,114.00 to the apparent Iow bidder, Double D Pipeline, Inc. (CO 03-117), and authorize
the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $127,511.40 for the Mall On-Site Water and
Sewer of Community Facilities District 2003-01, to be funded from CFD 2003-01 funds, Acct. No.
16143035650. REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION BY HOWDYSHELL.
E18. Approval to accept improvements, release the Faithful Performance Bond, and file a Notice of
Completion for improvements for DR 99-40, located on the northwest corner of Fourth Street and
Archibald Avenue, submitted by Airport Corporate Center, LLC.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-262
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS FOR DR 99-40 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF
A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK
E19. Approval to release a $195,300.00 Maintenance Guarantee Bond for Tract Map 12659-4, located at
the southwest corner of Etiwanda and Wilson Avenues, submitted by Centex Homes.
City Council Minutes
October 15, 2003
Page 7
E20. Approval to release a Maintenance Bond for Tract 14380, located at the northwest corner of Wilson
and Etiwanda Avenues, submitted by Mastercraft.
E21. Approval to release a Maintenance Bond for Tract 15911, located on the east side of East Avenue
south of Victoria Street, submitted by Ryland Homes.
E22. Approval to release a $32,000.00 Maintenance Guarantee Bond for Tract No. 15963, located west
of London Avenue and north of Lemon Avenue, submitted by Crestwood Corporation.
Discussion of Item E5. Approval of a $50,000.00 appropriation to Acct. No. 1025001-5200 for
various operation and maintenance expenditures, including storage costs, equipment rental,
material handling, landscape/hardscape materials, and supplies; and approval of a $50,000.00
appropriation to Acct. No. 1025001-5300 for various contract services expenditures, including
surveying, electrical, civil design and soils/material testing related to the Rancho Cucamonga
Municipal Utility.
Councilmember Howdyshell felt this project should be kept within budget and wanted to comment on that.
MOTION: Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Alexander to approve item E5. Motion carried
unanimously 4-0-1 (Kurth absent).
Discussion of Item E6. Approval to purchase one (1) message board from the manufacturer,
Advanced Safety Products of Fallbrook, California, as a single source purchase in the amount of
$24,097.21, to be funded from the EquipmentNehicle Replacement Fund, Acct. No. 1712001-5603.
Councilmember Howdyshell stated he did not see any reason for this and asked for justification.
Jon Gillespie, Traffic Engineer, stated this is for standardization for the maintenance workers to use and
that it would be used quite a bit for safety purposes.
Discussion of Item E14. Approval of a contract renewal with U.S. Guards, Inc. (CO 01-060) to
June 30, 2004, in the amount of $159,333, and approval of an additional $73,217 for anticipated
extra work related to construction and additional facilities, to be funded from Acct. Nos. 1001312-
5304 ($25,750); 1133303-5304 ($117,800); 1700201-5304 ($69,000), and 1290601-5300 $20,000); and
approval of an appropriation of $28,497 from Capital Reserve balance to Acct. No. 1025001-55650-
10251382-0 for temporary security service at the 12kV Electrical Substation project to be located
at the southeast corner of Rochester Avenue and Stadium Parkway.
Councilmember Howdyshell stated he had questions about this and was not sure what they would be
providing.
Jon Gillespie, Traffic Engineer, stated this will be extra service for the mall site and that it is renewing the
existing contract.
Discussion of Item E15. Approval of a contract renewal with Coastal Building Services (CO 00-
102) to June 30, 2004, in the amount of $180,500, and approval of an additional $62,500 for
anticipated extra work related to construction, remodeling and additional facilities, to be funded
from Acct. No. 1001312-5304 ($240,000), and 1700201-5304 ($3,000).
Councilmember Howdyshell stated this has more than a 10% contingency and stated he did not agree
with that.
Jon Gillespie, Traffic Engineer, stated it is because of the construction work being done at City Hall and
the Police facility and the amount of clean up this project will require. He stated there will also be trailers
to be cleaned.
City Council Minutes
October 15, 2003
Page 8
Councilmember Howdyshell felt staff really needs to keep on top of this.
Discussion of Item Et6. Approval of a contract renewal with JDC, Inc. of Rancho Cucamonga (CO
01-075), to June 30, 2004, for the "City Wide Concrete Repair, Tree Removal and Tree Planning
Annual Maintenance Agreement" for repair of City sidewalks, curb and gutters in the amount of
$350,000, to be funded from Acct. No. 1176303-5300.
Councilmember Howdyshell stated he was concerned how this was priced and controlled.
Jon Gillespie, Traffic Engineer, stated this was competitively bid with a renewable clause. He said this is
a little different than some contracts because of the side walk repairs to be done and the public relations
required to complete the job.
Discussion of Item E17. Approval to accept the bids received and award and authorize the
execution of the contract in the amount of $1,275,114.00 to the apparent Iow bidder, Double D
Pipeline, Inc. (CO 03-117), and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of
$127,511.40 for the Mall On-Site Water and Sewer of Community Facilities District 2003-01, to be
funded from CFD 2003-01 funds, Acct. No. 16143035650.
Councilmember Howdyshell stated the agenda says it is 10%, yet the staff report shows a figure, which is
about twice that amount. He asked which one is correct and stated he would approve it at the 10% figure.
Jon Gillespie, Traffic Engineer, stated there is an error and that it should be the 10% figure at
$127,511.40.
MOTION: Moved by Gutierrez, seconded by Williams to approve all of the staff recommendations in the
staff reports contained within the Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1 (Kurth absent).
[] [
No Items Submitted.
II ADVERTISED PUBLIC HEARINGS
G.
Gl. CONSIDERATION OF ADDENDUM TO CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 2001 GENERAL PLAN
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT GPA2002-0000? -
FOOTHILL CROSSING, LLC - A request to amend the General Plan Transportation Section of Chapter
III to re-designate portions of Day Creek Boulevard south of Foothill Boulevard from a Secondary Street
to a Collector Street and Modified Collector Street - APN: 0229-021-62, 63 and 64. Related Files:
Development Code Amendment DRC2003-00616, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16033, Conditional
Use Permit DRC2002-00839, and Development Agreement DRC2003-00858. An Environmental Impact
Report was previously certified in October 2001. The addendum is being prepared in accordance with
the California Environmental Quality Act.
City Council Minutes
October 15, 2003
Page 9
CONSIDERATION OF ADDENDUM TO CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 2001 GENERAL PLAN
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2003-
00616 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - A request to amend Chapter 17.30 of the Development
Code to redesignate the Industrial Districts Subarea 8 portion of Day Creek Boulevard south of Foothill
Boulevard, east of Rochester Avenue from a Secondary Street to a Modified Local Collector Street -
APN: 0229-021-20, 34, 47, 53, 54, and 55. Related Files: General Plan Amendment GPA2002-00002,
Tentative Parcel Map SBUTPM16033, Conditional Use Permit DRC2002-00839, and Development
Agreement DRC2003-00858. An Environmental Impact Report was previously certified in October 2001.
The addendum is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
CONSIDERATION OF ADDENDUM TO CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 2001 GENERAL PLAN
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16033 -
FOOTHILL CROSSING, LLC - A request to subdivide 60 acres of land into ~2- 15 parcels and public
right-of-way dedication as part of a proposed shopping center on the southeast and southwest corners of
Foothill Boulevard and Day Creek Boulevard within the Regional Related Office/Commercial district of the
Victoria Community Plan - APN: 0229-021-62, 63, and 64. Related files: General Plan Amendment
GPA2002-00002, Development Code Amendment DCA2003-00616, Conditional Use Permit DRC2002-
00839, and Development Agreement DRC2003-00858. An Environmental Impact Report was previously
certified in October 2001. The addendum is being prepared in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act.
CONSIDERATION OF ADDENDUM TO CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 2001 GENERAL PLAN
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2002-0083,q -
FOOTHILL CROSSING, LLC - A review of the site plan and architectural elevations for a proposed
shopping center of up to 315,000 square feet, including in-line retail stores and individual retail pad
buildings on 6~ 36 acres of land on the southeast and southwest corners of Foothill Boulevard and Day
Creek Boulevard within the Regional Related Office/Commercial District of the Victoria Community Plan.
APN: 0229-021-62, 63 and 64. Related Files: General Plan Amendment GPA2002-00002, Development
Code Amendment DCA2003-00616, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16033, and Development Agreement
DRC2003-00858. An Environmental Impact Report was previously certified in October 2001. The
addendum is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
CONSIDERATION OF ADDENDUM TO CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 2001 GENERAL PLAN
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2003-0085R -
FOOTHILL CROSSING, LLC - The review of a Development Agreement for a proposed shopping center
of up to 315,000 square feet that includes in-line retail stores and individual retail pad buildings on 60
acres of land on the southeast and southwest corners of Foothill Boulevard and Day Creek Boulevard
within the Regional Related Office/Commercial District of the Victoria Community Plan - APN: 0229-021-
62, 63, and 64. Related Files: General Plan Amendment GPA2.002-00002, Development Code
Amendment DCA2003-00616, Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16033, and Conditional Use Permit
DRC2002-00639. An Environmental Impact Report was previously certified in October 2001. The
addendum is being prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
Staff report presented by Alan Warren, Associate Planner.
Mayor Alexander opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing the City Council was:
Michael Lawson, Foothill Crossing, corrected the number of parcels of land the number of acres
as indicated above. He thanked the staff for all of their work with this project.
Councilmember Gutierrez inquired if they are still having a single user.
Michael Lawson stated they are and will be announcing this soon.
There being no further comments, the public hearing was closed.
City Council Minutes
October 15, 2003
Page 10
Debra J. Adams, City Clerk, read the titles of Ordinance Nos. 717 and 718.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-263
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT GPA2002-00002, TO CHANGE DAY CREEK
BOULEVARD FROM A SECONDARY ARTERIAL TO A COLLECTOR
AND A MODIFIED COLLECTOR BETWEEN FOOTHILL BOULEVARD
AND ROCHESTER AVENUE ON THE GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION
PLAN, EXHIBIT 111-4, TABLE II1-11, AND THE CLASSIFICATIONS OF
GENERAL PLAN ROADWAYS, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF-APN: 0229-021-62, 63 AND 64
ORDINANCE NO. 717 (first reading)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT CODE
AMENDMENT DRC2003-00616, AMENDING SECTION 17.30 OF THE
RANCHO CUCAMONGA DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHANGING THE
CLASSIFICATION OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD, EAST OF ROCHESTER
AVENUE IN THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS, TO A MODIFIED LOCAL
COLLECTOR AS DEPICTED IN FIGURES 17.30.080-J AND 17.30.040-B
AND TEXT CHANGES TO SECTION 17.30.080.1.4 AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0229-021-20, 34, 47, 53, 54
AND 55
RESOLUTION NO. 03-264
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP
SUBTPM16033, A SUBDIVISION OF 15 PARCELS AND PUBLIC RIGHT-
OF-WAY DEDICATION ON 60 ACRES OF LAND WITHIN THE REGIONAL
RELATED OFFICE/COMMERCIAL DISTRICT OF THE VICTORIA
COMMUNITY PLAN, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST
CORNERS OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND DAY CREEK BOULEVARD,
AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 0229-02%62, 63
AND 64
RESOLUTION NO. 03-265
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
DRC2002-00839, AUTHORIZING THE DEVELOPMENT, AND APPROVING
THE SITE, CONCEPTUAL LANDSCAPING, AND ARCHITECTURAL
ELEVATIONS OF A SHOPPING CENTER OF UP TO 315,000 SQUARE
FEET, INCLUDING IN-LINE RETAIL STORES AND RETAIL PAD
BUILDINGS, WHICH INCLUDE RESTAURANT SITES WITH A DRIVE-
THRU LANE, ON APPROXIMATELY 45.5 ACRES OF LAND AT THE
SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST CORNERS OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD
AND DAY CREEK BOULEVARD WITHIN THE REGIONAL RELATED
OFFICE/COMMERCIAL DISTRICT OF THE VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN,
AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF-APN: 0229-021-62, 63
AND 64
City Council Minutes
October 15, 2003
Page 11
ORDINANCE NO. 718 (first reading)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT DRC2003-00858 WITH FOOTHILL CROSSING, LLC, TO
ESTABLISH A PROCESS FOR FINANCING THE CONSTRUCTION OF
DAY CREEK BOULEVARD WITHIN THE FOOTHILL CROSSING
SHOPPING CENTER, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST AND
SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF DAY CREEK AND FOOTHILL
BOULEVARDS AS PROVIDED FOR IN SECTION 65864 OF THE
CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE FOR REAL PROPERTY
DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF -APN: 0210-082-53 THRU 57
MOTION: Moved by Williams, seconded by Howdyshell to approve Resolution Nos. 03-263, 264 and
265. Motion carried unanimously4-0-1 (Kurth absent).
MOTION: Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Gutierrez to waive full reading and set second reading of
Ordinance Nos. 717 and 718 for the November 5, 2003 meeting. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1
(Kurth absent).
G2. CONSIDERATION OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT DRC2003-00712 - CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA - A request to amend the Regional Center Land Use Mix Table 111-4 by modifying the land
use acreage ranges and the density ranges to be consistent with the approved Master Plan that is
generally bounded by Foothill Boulevard, Base Line Road, the 1-15 Freeway, and Day Creek Channel. In
accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21166 or Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, no
subsequent or supplemental Environmental Impact Report or Mitigated Negative Declaration is required
to be prepared.
Staff report presented by Nancy Fong, Sr. Planner.
Mayor Alexander opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing
was closed.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-266
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT DRC2003-00712, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE
REGIONAL CENTER LAND USE MIX TABLE 111-4 BY MODIFYING THE
LAND USE ACREAGE RANGES AND THE DENSITY RANGES TO BE
CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
WITHIN THE REGIONAL CENTER THAT IS GENERALLY BOUNDED
BY FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, BASE LINE ROAD, 1-15 FREEWAY, AND
DAY CREEK CHANNEL, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT
THEREOF
MOTION: Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Gutierrez to approve Resolution No. 03-266. Motion
carried unanimously 4-0-1 (Kurth absent).
City Council Minutes
October 15, 2003
Page 12
II .. PUBLIC HEARINGS I
No Items Submitted.
II ~. CITY MANAGER'S STAFF REPORTS I
No Items Submitted.
II J. COUNCIL BUSINESS I
J1. CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE ANIMAL SHELTER AD HOC,
SUBCOMMITTEE
Staff report presented by Michelle Dawson, Management Analyst III. She indicated there was a revised
Resolution, which had been distributed to the Council and is on file in the City Clerk's office.
Councilmember Howdyshell thanked Supervisor Biane's office for their assistance with this and also
thanked the volunteers and City staff for their work.
Councilmember Gutierrez stated he appreciates everything that has been done. He pointed out that it is
probably more cost effective to keep the contract with the County. He stated he would like to study the
Resolution more and hear more from the public.
Councilmember Williams felt the people should be educated so they know they are responsible for their
pets and that includes keeping them in their own yards. She felt a program should be developed to get
the word out to people.
Mayor Alexander opened the meeting for public comments. Addressing the City Council were:
Tim Johnson, representing Supervisor Biene's office, commented on the Rancho Cucamonga
shelter and the good adoption rate. He stated Supervisor Biane supports the efforts being made
for this program.
Jeanne Kruger thanked Councilmembers Gutierrez and Howdyshell, Michelle Dawson, Duane
Baker and Michael Arms for their work on this. She stated even though things are being done
right, there is always room for improvement. She felt the spade/neuter voucher program was
most important. She stated she is part of the only business she knows that is trying to put
themselves out of business.
Pat Dunaway, Pet Assistance Foundation, stated she has had a long relationship with the
Rancho Cucamonga Shelter and stated she is very proud of it and feels it is a great shelter. She
stated they are present to support the City to lead them through this.
City Council Minutes
October 15, 2003
Page 13
Nicole Myerchin stated Daniel Hernandez of Supervisor Biane's office and also Councilmembers
Gutierrez and Howdyshell have been great to work with. She commented on the Upland Shelter
stating it is a muni shelter. She felt some changes should be made to the Resolution as far as
defining "adoptable animal". She felt there should be a timeframe put on this. She appreciated
the Council's help with this issue.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-267
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING AS A GOAL OF THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA TO WORK WITH THE COUNTY OF
SAN BERNARDINO TO FIND HOMES FOR ALL ADOPTABLE ANIMALS
AT THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA ANIMAL SHELTER SO THAT NO
ADOPTABLE ANIMAL IS EUTHANIZE
MOTION: Moved by Williams, seconded by Howdyshell to supped the recommendations in the staff
reports, but place the Resolution on a future agenda for further needed action. Motion carried
unanimously 4-0-1 (Kurth absent).
J2. PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES UPDATF
ACTION: Report received and filed.
II IDENTIFICATION OF ITEMS FOR THE NEXT MEETING ]
K1. Councilmember Howdyshell stated he would like an item on the next agenda to consider oversized
parking spaces for the new mall, which could accommodate all vehicle sizes.
Il L. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS I
L1. UPDATE FROM SENIOR ADVISORY FUNDRAISING SUBCOMMITTEE REGARDING THF
CENTRAL PARK SENIOR CENTER (Oral)
*** This item was done under Item C. ***
City Council Minutes
October 15, 2003
Page 14
MOTION: Moved by Williams, seconded by Howdyshell to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously 4-0-1
(Kurth absent). The meeting adjourned at 9:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Debra J. Adams, CMC
City Clerk
Approved: *
October 27, 2003
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
Special MeetinR
A special meeting of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council was held on Monday, October 27, 2003, in the
Tapia Room of the Civic Center, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California.
Mayor William J. Alexander called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.
Present were Councilmembers: Rex Gutierrez, Robert J. Howdyshell, Donald J. Kurth, M.D., Diane
Williams and Mayor William J. Alexander.
Also present were: Jack Lam, City Manager; Pamela Easter, Deputy City Manager; and Debra J. Adams,
City Clerk.
II B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS I
No communication was made from the public.
C1. CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF NECESSARY ACTIONS TO DECLARE A LOCAl
EMERGENCY FOR THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AS A RESULT OF THE GRAND PRIX FIRF
Staff report presented by Jack Lam, City Manager.
MOTION: Moved by Howdyshell, seconded by Kurth to approve the declaration of a local emergency for
the City of Rancho Cucamonga as a result of the Grand Prix Fire. Motion carried unanimously 5-0.
C2. TOUR BY RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE DISTRICT STAFF OF THE FIRE DAMAGE THAT HAR
AFFECTED THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
At 4:03 p.m., the City Council, City Manager and Deputy City Manager left for a tour and briefing of the
City to be conducted by Fire Protection District staff.
City Council Minutes
October 27, 2003
Page 2
The tour concluded at 5:25 p.m. with the meeting adjourning.
Respectfully submitted,
Debra J. Adams, CMC
City Clerk
Approved: *
T H E C I T Y 0
I~ANCH 0 CUCAH ONGA
Memorandum
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Rex Gutierre,~,~C. ou~cilmember '-
FROM: Pam Eas~eputy City Manager
SUBJECT: Warran~ Review for Council Meet,ng--Novernber' 19, 2003
The City Attorney has had an opportunity to review the Summary of Warrants for the
November 19, 2003, Council meeting and has found no conflict of interest.
If you have any questions, please give me a call at extension 2003.
c: Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
Jim Markman, City Attorney
Debbie Adams, City Clerk ~-~
Lawrence I. Temple, Administrative Services Director
Tamara Layne, Finance Officer
Ann Haworth, Accounting Services Supervisor
T H E C I T Y 0 F
I~AN CHO CU CAHONGA
Memorandum
DATE: November 13, 2003
TO: Debbie Adams, City Clerk
CC: Jack Lam, City Manager
Pamela Easter, Deputy City Manager
Jim Markman, City Attorney
Lawrence I. Temple, Administrative Services Director
Ann Haworth, Accounting Services Supervisor
FROM: Tamara L. Layne, Finance Officer
SUBJECT: Summary of Warrants Issued to Vendors Representing Possible
Conflict of Interest for Councilmember Gutierrez - Council Meeting Date: Nov 13,
2003
Attached for your reference is a summary of warrants by entity that were issued to
vendors representing a possible conflict of interest for Councilmember Gutierrez due
to his personal business dealings with them. These warrants are included in the
Consent Calendar section of each entity's agenda. If you have any questions
regarding the attached, please give me a call at extension 2430. Thank you.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r
SUMMARY OF WARRANTS
COUNClLIVIEMBER GUTIERREZ SHOULD ABSTAIN FROIVi VOTING ON
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Nov 19, 2003
VENDOR CHECK # DATE AMOUNT
Arrowhead Credit Union 203607 10/28/2003 $7,120.36
Arrowhead Credit Union 203611 10/30/2003 $45.85
Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce 203741 11/5/2003 $200.00
Southern Cai Edison 203567 10/29/2003 $10,097.28
Southern Cai Edison 203769 11/5/2003 $67,142.03
i:ifinancetaccounts payableicouncil warrant list. xls CITY- 1
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
SUMMARY OF WARRANTS
COUNCILI~EMBER GUTIERREZ SHOULD ABSTAIN FROM VOTING ON
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Nov 19, 2003
VENDOR CHECK # DATE AMOUNT
Arrowhead Credit Union 203607 10/28/2003 $151.95
Arrowhead Credit Union 203811 10/30/2003 $658.57
Southern Gal Edison 202560 10/1/2003 $1,492~20
Southern Cai Edison 202836 10/8/2003 $735.67
Southern Cai Edison 203057 10/15/2003 $793.00
Southern Cai Edison 203315 10/22/2003 $2,345.87
Southern Cai Edison 203567 10/29/2003 $2,715.34
i:ifinancelaccounts payabletcouncil warrant list. xls FI RE-1
RANCHO CUCAMONGA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
SUMMARY OF WARRANTS
COUNClLMEMBER GUTIERREZ SHOULD ABSTAIN FROM VOTING ON
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Nov 19, 2003
VENDOR CHECK # DATE AMOUNT
Arrowhead Credit Union 203607 10/28/2003 450.73
Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce 203741 11/5/2003 4472.00
hlfinancetaccounts payablelcouncil warrant list. xls RDA-1
~,¥ ith a generot s donation, key elemems of lhe Cultural Center
will be named fbr their s~onsor, including:
Playhouse
~ Library
Celebranon Hall
Children's StoFy Room
lrnagmadon Tower
* lmaginauon Cou~] ard
' ' - areas
locaruns wi'fl recogn ze' ~ donors m spec tic' ' '
sponsolshlp, nlcludnlg.
Crossroads Rotunda
ihbraD, Young kdult Center
I ib~aO Liicracx ('cnte~
- Library Popular Materials Markc~placc
Playhot~e Grand Stairs
Playl~ouse Rehearsal Room
Plax' ~house- ('~ CCh Room
Playhouse .... Box Offc~ e
, - Cente~ allow for more
Donanon progranls at
~ ' includin~
modcsl contributions. :
l~lbmr~' Stack Dedic
L~blm3 Fable and Chan~
Adopt a Magazine
Pla. house Scat Dedicatio
En~aved Brick Donor's Plaza
Adopt a Book
San Bernardino County
2nd District Supervisor
Paul Biane B~-, Jacob & Sandra Temer
Arbor Cou~t
Playhouse Lobby ,
Friends of the Library
Bookstore and Gift Shop
Dutton F~mi{y = ,
Celebration Hail ~ SoCal Housirlg
Lobby Cot/cession Cafe
George & AudreyVoigt
Csryr~ Dilorio
City of Rancho Cucamonga
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Portfolio Management
Portfolio Summary
October 31, 2003
Par Market Book % of Days to Y'FM YTM
Investments Value Value Value Portfolio Term Maturffy 360 Equiv. 365 Equiv.
Local Agency investment Funds 36,552.,080.87 36,552,080.87 36,552,080.87 23.21 I I 1.574 1.596
Certificates of Deposit/Neg. - Bank 1 ,$15,000.00 1,517,492.63 1,515,(300.00 0.96 733 667 2.150 2.180
Commercial Paper - Discount 5,000,000.00 5,000,000.00 4,991,608.33 3.17 57 12 1.062 1.077
Federal Agency Issues - Coupon 114,500,000.00 114,327,330.94 114,444,631.25 72.66 1,546 1 ~89 3.273 3,319
Investments 157,567,080.87 167,396,904.44 157,503,320.45 100.00% 1,132 944 2.79~ 2.837
Cash and Accrued Interest
Passbook/Checking 175,087.27 175,087.27 175,087.27 1 1 0.493 0.500
(not included in yield calculations)
Accrued Interest at Pumhase 7,455.55 7,455.55
Subtotal 182,542.82 182,542.82
Total Cash and Investments
167,742,168.14 157,879,447.26 157,685,863.27 1,1 32 944 2.798 2.837
Total Eamlnga October 31 Month Ending Fiscal Year To Date
Current Year 367,433.16 1,433,694.62
Average Dally Balance 155,700,422.09 158,372,237.02
Effective Rate of Return 2.78% 2.69%
I certify that this report accurately reflects all City pooled In~,~stments and is in co~formity with the investment policy adopted Mamh 5, 2003. A copy of the investment policy is available in the
Administrative Services Depart~nent. The Investment Program herein shown provides sufficient cash flow liquidity to meet the next six months estimated expenditures. The month-end market values
were obtained from (IDC)-lnteractive Data Corporation pricing service.
The attached Summary of Cash and Investments with Fiscal Agents as of the prior month's end is provided under the City official Investment Policy. The provisions of the individual bond documents
govem the management of these funds.
Poffi~olie CITY
C~
Run Date: 11/13~2003 - 07:49 PM (PRF_PM1) SynIRept V6.21
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Portfolio Management Page 2
Portfolio Details - Investments
October 31, 2003
Local Agency Investment Funds
Certificates of Deposlt~Neg. - Bank
Federal Agency Issues - Coupon
Portfolio CITY
CP
City o! Rancho Cucamonga
Portfolio Management Page 3
Portfolio Details - Investments
October 31, 2003
Federal Agency Issues - Coupon
3128X1FG7 1203 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG, CORP. 0.5/28/2003 3,0(X),000.00 2,987,558.90 3,000,000.00 2.500 2.466 1,123 11/28/2006
3128XlDK0 1204 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG. CORP. 05/28/2003 4,~00,000.00 3,984,320.07 4,000,000.00 3.100 3.058 1,488 11/28/2007
3128XIJD0 t2~ FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG. CORP. 06/12/2003 5,0(]0,000.00 4,910,54E,.35 4,998,500.00 3.030 2.995 1,684 (~/11/'2008
3128X1JN8 1209 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG. CORP. 0E/I~ 2,000,000.00 1,976,015.93 2,000,000.00 2.400 2.367 1,318 06/11/2007
3128X1L96 1233 FEDERAL HOME LOAN MORTG. CORP. 10~8/2003 4,000,(X]0.00 4,023,296.90 3,997,600.00 2.800 2.782 1,051 09/17/2006
3136FOAL6 10~5 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 04/04/2001 4,000,000.~0 4,063,750.00 3,994,375.00 5.300 6.259 879 03/29/2006
3136FOLU4 1101 FEDERAL NATL MTG ASSN 05/24/2001 2,000,000.~0 2,049,375.00 2,000,0~0.00 6.710 5.632 935 0~24/2006
Portfolio CITY
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Portfolio Management Page 4
Portfolio Details - Cash
October 31, 2003
Savings/Miscellaneous Accounts
Portfolio CITY
Run Date: 11/13/2(X)3 - 07:49 CP
PM (PRF_PM2) SymRepl I/6.21
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Portfolio Management Page 5
Activity By Type
October 1, 2003 through October 31, 2003
Beginning Stated Transaction Pumhases Redemptlon~ Ending
Local Agency Investmeflt Funds (Monthly Summary)
SavlngtJMIscallaneous Accounts (Monthly Summary)
Certificates of DeposltJNeg. - Bank
portfolio CITY
CP
(~lDate: 11113/2003 - 07:49 PM (PRF_PM3) SymRept V6.21
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Summary of Cash and Investments with Fiscal Agents
For the Month Ended September 30, 2003
Trustee and/or Purchase Maturity Cost
Bond Issue Pavine Aoent Account Name Investment Date Date Yield Value
Assessment District No 93-1 US Bank Irnprvmnt Fund First American Treasury Obligation 8/4/1997 N/A* 0.49% $ 257,311.78
Ma$i Plaza Imprvmnt Fund Cash N/A N/A N/A
Reserve Fund First American Treasury Obligation 8/4/1997 N/A* 0.49% 242,610.82
Reserve Fund Cash N/A N/A N/A
Redemp. Fund First American Treasury Obligation 8/411997 N/A 0.85% 117.78
Redemp. Fund Cash N/A N/A N/A
$ 500,040.38
PFA RFDG Rev Bonds series US Bank Expense Fund First American Treasury Obligation 7/1/1999 N/A* 0.00% $ 0.04
Cash N/A N/A N/A
1999 A (Sr) & 1999 B (Subord) Sub Resrv. Fund First American Treasury Obligation 7/1/1999 N/A* 0.49% 580,746.04
Cash N/A N/A N/A
Sr. Resrv. Fund First Amedcan Treasury Obligation 7/1/1999 N/A* 0.49% 1,091,001.81
Cash N/A N/A N/A
Redemption Fund First Amedcan Treasury Obligagon 7/1/1999 N/A* 0.00%
Cash N/A N/A N/A
Revenue Fund First Amedcan Treasury Obligation 3/2/2000 N/A* 0.00%
Cash N/A N/A N/A
Residual Fund First American Treasury Obligation 1/16/2001 N/A* 0.49% 60,306.79
Cash N/A N/A N/A
$ 1,732,054.68
TOTAL CASH AND iNVESTMENTS WITH FISCAL AGENTS $ 2~232~095.06
· Note: These investments are money market accounts which have no stated matudty date as they may be liquidated upon demand.
k~nancelCash with Fiscal Agents.xls 11/13/2003 8:52 AM
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203353 10/29/2003 42ND STREET BAGEL CAFE #5 368.36
AP ~ 00203354 10/29/2003 A AND K 30 MIN PHOTO LAB INC 11.63
AP - 00203355 10/29/2003 AA EQUIPMENT 53.83
AP - 00203356 10/29/2003 ABC LOCKSMITHS 24.82
AP- 00203357 10/29/2003 ABLAC 16.39
AP - 00203358 10/29/2003 ABLETRONICS 16.97
AP - 00203358 10/29/2003 ABLETRONICS 20.36
AP - 00203359 10/29/2003 ACDAN, FERDIE 200.00
AP - 00203361 10/29/2003 ALPHAGRAPHICS 138.19
AP - 00203363 10/29/2003 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP 1,335.00
AP - 00203363 10/29/2003 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP 1,100.00
AP - 00203363 10/29/2003 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP 90.00
AP - 00203363 10/29/2003 ARCHITERRA DESIGN GROUP 3,345.00
AP - 00203364 10/29/2003 ARRELANO, GABRIEL 30.00
AP - 00203365 10/29/2003 AYALA, IRENE 102.50
AP - 00203366 10/29/2003 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 123.40
AP - 00203366 10/29/2003 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 24.20
AP - 00203366 10/29/2003 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 49.74
AP - 00203366 10/29/2003 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 169.15
AP - 00203366 10/29/2003 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 19.58
AP - 00203367 10/29/2003 BAKER, DELORES 34.00
AP - 00203368 10/29/2003 BANEGES, SILVA 87.50
AP - 00203369 10/29/2003 BARNES AND NOBLE 230.12
AP - 00203369 10/29/2003 BARNES AND NOBLE 491.59
AP - 00203370 10/29/2003 BEARD PROVENCHER AND ASSOC 5,130.00
AP - 00203371 10/29/2003 BELL, BONNIE 40.00
AP - 00203372 10/29/2003 BILL BLANCHARDS LITTLE BIG BAND 300.00
AP - 00203372 10/29/2003 BILL BLANCHARDS LITTLE BIG BAND 100.00
AP ~ 00203373 10/29/2003 BIRC 85.00
AP - 00203375 10/29/2003 BOOKS ON TAPE INC 12.93
AP - 00203376 10/29/2003 BRANDMAN ASSOCIATES INC, MICHAEL 8,886.60
AP- 00203378 10/29/2003 BROWN, JACK 45.25
AP - 00203380 10/29/2003 BUSINESS PRESS, THE 59.00
AP - 00203381 10/29/2003 BUSINESS WEEK 59.97
AP - 00203383 10/29/2003 CAL PERS LONG TERM CARE 278.77
AP - 00203383 10/29/2003 CAL PERS LONG TERM CARE 278.77
AP - 00203384 10/29/2003 CALIFORNIA CURB AND LANDSCAPE 5,214.24
AP - 00203386 10/29/2003 CALIFORNIA LIBRARY ASSOCIATION 215.00
AP - 00203387 10/29/2003 CALIFORNIA MORTGAGE ALLIANCE 332.38
AP - 00203388 10/29/2003 CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' 69,223.01
AP - 00203389 10/29/2003 CAMP FIRE USA 6,700.00
AP - 00203390 10/29/2003 CAPCA 400.00
AP - 00203391 10/29/2003 CAPE 2004 CONFERENCE C/O NANCY BARONE 185.00
AP - 00203392 10/29/2003 CARDENAS, SERGIO 10.00
AP - 00203393 10/29/2003 CERTIFIED AUTO CARE 4,338.70
AP - 00203394 10/29/2003 CHAMPION AWARDS AND SPECIALIES 64.65
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 135.38
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 135.78
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 1,083.05
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 947.67
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 C1NGLrLAR INTERACTIVE LP 270.76
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 439.99
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 C1NGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 33.94
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 1 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Report: EK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 10:23:2
7
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through l l/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 33.85
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CLNGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 33.94
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 33.85
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 203.67
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 203.05
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 237.61
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 236.92
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 441.28
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 271.55
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 950.44
AP - 00203395 10/29/2003 CINGULAR INTERACTIVE LP 1,086.22
AP - 00203396 10/29/2003 CITRUS BELT CHAPTER 25.00
AP - 00203397 10/29/2003 CITY NATIONAL BANK 53,259.11
AP - 00203398 10/29/2003 CIVIC SOLUTIONS [NC 9,200.00
AP - 00203398 10/29/2003 CIVIC SOLUTIONS INC 240.00
AP - 00203399 10/29/2003 CLABBY, SANDRA 1,000.00
AP - 00203400 10/29/2003 CLARY, ROSA 17.00
AP - 00203401 10/29/2003 COAST RECREATION [NC 1,662.30
AP - 00203402 I0/29/2003 COLTON TRUCK SUPPLY 271.62
AP - 00203403 10/29/2003 COLUM, ROSALIND 110.80
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 7,684.00
AP ~ 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 1,634.98
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 447.52
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 236.76
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 178.67
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 144.59
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 78.92
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 105.57
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 109.90
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 78.92
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 78.92
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 184.06
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 290.26
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 213.06
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 103.09
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 103.09
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 137.47
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 98.94
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 111.88
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 276.22
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 111.88
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 86.92
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 105.57
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 78.92
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 86.92
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 78.92
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 78.92
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 167.82
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 103.09
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 151.41
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 625.01
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 113.30
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 115.35
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 2 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: ~, 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 115.35
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 78.92
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 90.80
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 113.30
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 78.92
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 1,198.41
AP - 00203405 I0/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 78.92
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 213.33
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 153.08
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 289.68
AP - 00203405 10/29/2003 COMPUTER SERVICE CO 78.92
AP - 00203406 10/29/2003 COPP CRUSHING CORP, DAN 10.00
AP - 00203408 10/29/2003 COUNTS UNLIMITED 1,375.00
AP - 00203411 i0/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 182.43
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 106.63
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 21.03
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 134.38
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 268.33
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 470.53
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 692.93
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 452.03
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 329.93
AP ~ 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 258.43
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 312.33
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 65.93
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,867.63
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CU'CAMONGA CO WATER DIST 320.03
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 902.93
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,557.43
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 767.63
AP ~ 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 659.83
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 425.53
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 450.83
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 805.03
AP ~ 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 800.63
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 633.43
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 119.83
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 47.48
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CIJCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 140.63
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 136.23
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 172.63
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 195.63
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 207.83
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 114.23
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 115.68
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 192.33
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 264.93
AP - 00203411 t0/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 200.33
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 167.13
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 99.18
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 76.08
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 171.78
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 226.43
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 3 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Repor~ :CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: ~ 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 41.98
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 116.53
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 249.53
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 257.23
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 120.08
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 190.23
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 91.23
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 230.93
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 184.73
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 281.43
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 85.98
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,133.93
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 990.93
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,005.23
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,019.53
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 952.43
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 337.53
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 263.83
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 205.88
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCA_MONGA CO WATER DIST 624.98
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 502.88
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 125.23
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 280.68
AP- 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,083.68
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 982.13
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 515.73
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 142.93
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 41.93
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 207.73
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 452.03
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 2,432.93
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 128.43
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 118.98
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 168.23
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 4,968.43
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 151.53
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CLICAMONGA CO WATER DIST 236.33
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 62.88
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 515.83
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 171.43
AP - 00203411 10/29/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 55.18
AP ~ 00203412 10/29/2003 CYBERCOM RESOURCES INC 105.00
AP - 00203412 10/29/2003 CYBERCOM RESOURCES INC 350.00
AP - 00203412 10/29/2003 CYBERCOM RESOURCES INC 245.00
AP - 00203412 10/29/2003 CYBERCOM RESOURCES INC 3,745.00
AP - 00203413 10/29/2003 D AND K CONCRETE COMPANY 926.12
AP - 00203413 10/29/2003 D AND K CONCRETE COMPANY 475.72
AP - 00203414 10/29/2003 DAN GUERRA AND ASSOCIATES 24,800.00
AP - 00203414 10/29/2003 DAN GUERRA AND ASSOCIATES 16,684.50
AP - 00203414 10/29/2003 DAN GUERRA AND ASSOCIATES 9,272.00
AP - 00203414 10/29/2003 DAN GUERRA AND ASSOCIATES 45,140.00
AP - 002034~4 10/29/2003 DAN GUERRA AND ASSOCIATES 17,280.00
AP - 00203415 10/29/2003 DANKO INC 4,050.00
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 4 Current Date: 11/12/20t~
Report: 2K_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC. CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 10:23:2
/O
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203416 10/29/2003 DAY TIMERS INC 49.54
AP - 00203417 10/29/2003 DE LEISE, JENAE 519.24
AP - 00203418 10/29/2003 DELTA MICRO1MAGING INC 9,088.73
AP - 00203419 10/29/2003 DELTA MICROIMAG1NG INC 1,137.00
AP ~ 00203419 10/29/2003 DELTA MICROIMAGING INC 1,138.10
AP - 00203420 10/29/2003 DENTAL HEALTH SERVICES 225.90
AP - 00203421 10/29/2003 EASI FILE MANUFACTURING CORP 148.99
AP - 00203422 10/29/2003 EDDIE MARINE INC. 488.24
AP - 00203423 10/29/2003 EMBEE TECHNOLOGIES 41.20
AP - 00203423 10/29/2003 EMBEE TECHNOLOGIES 120.00
AP - 00203424 10/29/2003 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS 371.94
AP - 00203424 10/29/2003 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS 557.90
AP ~ 00203425 10/29/2003 EMPIRE ENTERTAINMENT 2,000.00
AP ~ 00203426 10/29/2003 EMPIRE HOMES 2,299.50
AP - 00203427 10/29/2003 EN POINTE TECHNOLOGIES 111.92
AP - 00203428 10/29/2003 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 306.54
AP - 00203428 10/29/2003 EWING IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 153.11
AP - 00203428 10/29/2003 EW1NG IRRIGATION PRODUCTS 475.82
AP - 00203429 10/29/2003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 19.00
AP - 00203429 10/29/2003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 19.14
AP - 00203429 10/29/2003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 25.59
AP - 00203429 10/29/2003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 10.82
AP - 00203429 10/29/2003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP .22.36
AP - 00203429 10/29/2003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 19.77
AP - 00203429 10/29/2003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 14.82
AP - 00203429 10/29/2003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 17.14
AP - 00203429 10/29/2003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 18.25
AP - 00203429 10/29/2003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 14.71
AP - 00203429 10/29/2003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 18.39
AP - 00203430 10/29/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 358.88
AP - 00203430 10/29/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 486.00
AP - 00203430 10/29/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 1,026.00
AP - 00203430 10/29/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 569.50
AP - 00203430 10/29/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 653.20
AP - 00203430 10/29/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 89.80
AP - 00203430 10/29/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 425.40
AP - 00203430 10/29/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 663.00
AP - 00203430 10/29/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 518.50
AP - 00203433 10/29/2003 FIRST HOTEL INVESTMENT CORPORATION 58,241.46
AP - 00203434 10/29/2003 FLORES, MICHELLE 40.00
AP - 00203435 10/29/2003 FOOTHILL AUTO BODY 6,993.67
AP - 00203436 10/29/2003 FOOTHILL FAMILY SI-IELTER 417.00
AP - 00203436 10/29/2003 FOOTHILL FAMILY SHELTER 417.00
AP - 00203437 10/29/2003 FOOTHILL PUMPKIN & TREES 400.00
AP - 00203438 10/29/2003 GAIL MATERIALS 1,082.78
AP - 00203440 10/29/2003 GALLARDO, RICK 63.00
AP - 00203441 10/29/2003 GARCIA, VIVIAN 26.28
AP - 00203443 10/29/2003 GENERATOR SERVICES CO 390.27
AP - 00203444 10/29/2003 GEOGRAPHICS 491.34
AP - 00203444 10/29/2003 GEOGRAPI-I~CS 935.27
AP - 00203445 10/29/2003 GIRON, SABINO 20.00
AP - 00203447 10/29/2003 GOLDEN WEST DISTRIBUTING 60.60
AP - 00203447 10/29/2003 GOLDEN WEST DISTRIBUTING 103.56
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 5 Current Date: I 1/12/20C
Report :CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203448 10/29/2003 GRAHAM, SALLY 69.00
AP - 00203449 10/29/2003 GRAINGER, WW 24.88
AP - 00203449 10/29/2003 GRAINGER, WW 71.46
AP - 00203450 10/29/2003 GRAYSTONE CATERING 1,500.00
AP - 00203451 10/29/2003 GUARDADO, SILVIA 56.00
AP - 00203452 10/29/2003 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO 268.80
AP - 00203452 10/29/2003 HAAKER EQUIPMENT CO 468.72
AP - 00203453 10/29/2003 HARALAMBOS BEVERAGE COMPANY 645.64
AP - 00203454 10/29/2003 HOFER & SONS, PAUL B. 54.00
AP - 00203455 10/29/2003 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 90.00
AP - 00203455 10/29/2003 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 274.77
AP - 00203455 10/29/2003 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 600.18
AP - 00203455 10/29/2003 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO 1NC 400.56
AP - 00203455 10/29/2003 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 137.12
AP - 00203455 10/29/2003 HOLLIDAY ROCK CO INC 79.44
AP - 00203456 10/29/2003 HOME DEPOT/GECF 19.31
AP - 00203456 10/29/2003 HOME DEPOT/GECF 19.30
AP - 00203457 10/29/2003 HOSE MAN INC 6.32
AP - 00203457 10/29/2003 HOSE MAN EEC 595.76
AP - 00203458 10/29/2003 HOUSE OF RUTH 633.00
AP - 00203460 10/29/2003 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 50.02
AP - 00203461 10/29/2003 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 28.20
AP ~ 00203461 10/29/2003 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 16.37
AP - 00203461 10/29/2003 HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS INC 39.76
AP - 00203462 10/29/2003 ICI DULUX PAINT CENTERS 409.40
AP - 00203463 10/29/2003 INDUSTRY GRAPHIX 452.55
AP - 00203464 10/29/2003 INLAND FAIR HOUSING AND MEDIATION 922.67
AP - 00203464 10/29/2003 INLAND FAIR HOUSING AND MEDIATION 963.39
AP - 00203464 10/29/2003 INLAND FAIR HOUSING AND MEDIATION 799.26
AP - 00203464 10/29/2003 INLAND FAIR HOUSING AND MEDIATION 822.88
AP - 00203466 10/29/2003 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 91.35
AP - 00203469 10/29/2003 ISA 105.00
AP - 00203469 10/29/2003 ISA 30.00
AP - 00203471 10/29/2003 JONES AND MAYER LAW OFFICES OF 3,902.00
AP - 00203471 10/29/2003 JONES AND MAYER LAW OFFICES OF 1,957.11
AP - 00203471 10/29/2003 JONES AND MAYER LAW OFFICES OF 312.50
AP - 00203471 10/29/2003 JONES AND MAYER LAW OFFICES OF 1,430.14
AP - 00203472 10/29/2003 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC 56,400.32
AP - 00203472 10/29/2003 KAISER FOIjNDATION HEALTH PLAN 1NC 619.08
AP - 00203473 10/29/2003 KB HOME 6.25
AP - 00203474 10/29/2003 KC PRINTING & GRAPHICS INC 114.16
AP - 00203475 10/29/2003 KERREY CONSULTING, JULES 420.00
AP - 00203475 10/29/2003 KERREY CONSULTING, JULES 420.00
AP - 00203475 10/29/2003 KERREY CONSULTING, JULES 420.00
AP - 00203475 10/29/2003 KERREY CONSULTING, JULES 140.00
AP - 00203477 10/29/2003 KORANDA CONSTRUCTION 524.00
AP - 00203477 10/29/2003 KORANDA CONSTRUCTION 4,825.00
AP - 00203477 10/29/2003 KORANDA CONSTRUCTION 3,130.00
AP - 00203478 10/29/2003 KORANDA CONSTRUCTION 250.00
AP ~ 00203479 10/29/2003 KRAZAN AND ASSOCIATES INC 4,365.00
AP - 00203480 10/29/2003 LA CLIPPERS 3,200.00
AP - 00203481 10/29/2003 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY INC 108.00
AP - 00203482 10/29/2003 LAIRD CONSTRUCTION CO 6,750.00
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 6 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Report: UK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 10:23:2
12.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203484 10/29/2003 LEE JONES, JESSIE 100.00
AP - 00203485 10/29/2003 LEII~I~ER, LUKAS 85.50
AP - 00203486 10/29/2003 LEMON, ROBERT 750.00
AP - 00203487 10/29/2003 LIEBERT CASSIDY WHITMORE 3,116.04
AP - 00203489 10/29/2003 LOS ANGELES TIMES 39.92
AP - 00203490 10/29/2003 LUQUE, MICHAEL 16.00
AP - 00203491 10/29/2003 MALOY, PATTY 500.00
AP - 00203492 10/29/2003 MCMASTER CARR SUPPLY COMPANY 377.44
AP - 00203493 10/29/2003 MCVEDA, JANET 348.00
AP - 00203494 10/29/2003 MDS CONSULTING 4,825.00
AP - 00203495 10/29/2003 MENARD, DEBORAH 200.00
AP - 00203496 10/29/2003 MIDWEST TAPE 83.96
AP - 00203496 10/29/2003 MIDWEST TAPE 27.97
AP - 00203496 10/29/2003 MIDWEST TAPE 167.92
AP - 00203496 10/29/2003 MIDWEST TAPE 29.98
AP - 00203496 10/29/2003 MIDWEST TAPE 136.93
AP - 00203496 10/29/2003 MIDWEST TAPE 73.95
AP - 00203497 10/29/2003 MONTOYA, ANGLE 55.00
AP - 00203498 10/29/2003 MOULDINGS AND MILLWORK 86.66
AP - 00203499 10/29/2003 MULBERRY EARLY LEARNING 1,500.00
AP - 00203500 10/29/2003 MUSIC THEATRE INTERNATIONAL 50.00
AP - 00203501 10/29/2003 NAPA AUTO PARTS 33.57
AP - 00203501 10/29/2003 NAPA AUTO PARTS 40.28
AP - 00203501 10/29/2003 NAPA AUTO PARTS 17.74
AP - 00203501 10/29/2003 NAPA AUTO PARTS 10.85
AP - 00203501 10/29/2003 NAPA AUTO PARTS 13.19
AP - 00203501 10/29/2003 NAPA AUTO PARTS 10.85
AP - 00203501 10/29/2003 NAPA AUTO PARTS 86.79
AP - 00203501 10/29/2003 NAPA AUTO PARTS 113.85
AP - 00203501 10/29/2003 NAPA AUTO PARTS 264.59
AP - 00203502 10/29/2003 NATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION 25.00
AP - 00203503 10/29/2003 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTALS INC 261.84
AP - 00203504 10/29/2003 NATIONAL DEFERRED 10,780.37
AP - 00203506 10/29/2003 NATIONS RENT 356.45
AP - 00203506 10/29/2003 NATIONS RENT 48.49
AP - 00203507 10/29/2003 NAVARRO, ANGELIC 40.00
AP - 00203508 10/29/2003 NESTOR TRAFFIC SYSTEMS 16,920.00
AP - 00203509 10/29/2003 NINYO AND MOORE GEOECHNICAL 2,372.50
AP - 00203511 10/29/2003 OCLC INC 57.30
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 15.68
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 229.92
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 68.79
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 199.99
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 2.17
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 199.59
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 308.27
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 264.94
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 60.48
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 151.96
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 13.68
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 8.81
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 4.84
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OI~FICE DEPOT 16.87
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 7 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: ~ 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 3.59
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 14.99
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 36.34
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 14.14
AP- 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 15.18
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 201.43
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 33.96
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 133.11
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 24.83
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 44.48
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 59.37
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 231.24
AP ~ 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT -26.79
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 7.93
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 11.25
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 32.24
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 5.24
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 21.64
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 162.22
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 25.86
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 15.47
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 251.42
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 28.83
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 170.58
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 324.52
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 26.12
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 13.62
AP - 00203513 10/29/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 70.21
AP - 00203514 10/29/2003 OTT, LAURA 99.00
AP - 00203514 10/29/2003 OTT, LAURA 122.50
AP - 00203514 10/29/2003 OTT, LAURA 315.00
AP - 00203515 10/29/2003 OWEN ELECTRIC 95.59
AP - 00203515 10/29/2003 OWEN ELECTRIC 109.92
AP - 00203516 10/29/2003 OXNARD POLICE DEPARTIv~NT 900.00
AP - 00203517 10/29/2003 P A P A 330.00
AP - 00203518 10/29/2003 PACIFIC PLUMBING SPECIALTIES 704.69
AP - 00203519 10/29/2003 PACIFICARE OF CALIFORNIA 55,788.31
AP - 00203520 10/29/2003 PACIFICARE OF CALIFORNIA 1,802.12
AP - 00203521 10/29/2003 PACIFICARE OF CALIFORNIA 56,049.80
AP - 00203523 10/29/2003 PATTON SALES CORP 352.99
AP - 00203525 10/29/2003 PEP BOYS 25.81
AP - 00203526 10/29/2003 PERCHEZ, LISA 154.00
AP - 00203527 10/29/2003 PETES ROAD SERVICE INC 15.00
AP - 00203530 10/29/2003 POMONA INLAND VALLEY COUNCIL OF CHUR~ 742.50
AP - 00203530 10/29/2003 POMONA INLAND VALLEY COUNCIL OF CHUR~ 472.50
AP - 00203530 10/29/2003 POMONA INLAND VALLEY COUNCIL OF CHUR; 472.50
AP - 00203531 10/29/2003 POWER PLUS 25.00
AP - 00203531 10/29/2003 POWER PLUS 25.00
AP - 00203532 10/29/2003 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES INC 6.81
AP - 00203534 10/29/2003 PRINCIPAL LIFE 1,857.25
AP - 00203535 10/29/2003 PRINCIPAL LIFE 13,623.15
AP - 00203536 10/29/2003 PROJECT SISTER 3,408.09
AP - 00203537 10/29/2003 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 7.00
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 8 Current Date: 11/12/2013
Report :CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: ,I 10:23:2
/
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203537 10/29/2003 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 7.00
AP - 00203538 10/29/2003 PURCELL, TANYA 16.00
AP - 00203540 10/29/2003 RAMOS, LORENA 22.00
AP - 00203540 10/29/2003 RAMOS, LORENA 5.00
AP - 00203540 10/29/2003 RAMOS, LORENA 170.00
AP - 00203541 10/29/2003 RCPFA 6,628.49
AP - 00203542 10/29/2003 READING, DANIEL 38.50
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 128.21
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 150.00
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 132.79
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 128.21
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 150.00
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 137.37
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 132.79
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 150.00
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 150.00
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 141.95
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 128.21
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 141.95
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 132.79
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 150.00
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 132.79
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 150.00
AP - 00203543 10/29/2003 RED WING SHOE STORE 134.69
AP - 00203544 10/29/2003 RH TECHNOLOGY 1,056.00
AP - 00203545 10/29/2003 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 195.57
AP - 00203545 10/29/2003 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 316.43
AP - 00203545 10/29/2003 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 21.72
AP - 00203545 10/29/2003 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 57.86
AP - 00203545 10/29/2003 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 137.38
AP - 00203545 10/29/2003 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 369.96
AP - 00203545 10/29/2003 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 67.56
AP - 00203546 10/29/2003 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 695.31
AP - 00203546 10/29/2003 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 46.74
AP - 00203546 10/29/2003 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 183.28
AP - 00203546 10/29/2003 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 106.48
AP - 00203546 10/29/2003 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 642.30
AP - 00203547 10/29/2003 ROBLES SR, RAUL P 60.00
AP - 00203548 10/29/2003 RUBEL, CORYNN 63.00
AP - 00203549 10/29/2003 S B AND O INC 4,356.00
AP - 00203549 10/29/2003 S B AND O INC 7,200.00
AP - 00203550 10/29/2003 SAFETY FIRST 580.49
AP - 00203551 10/29/2003 SAL1NAS, IRIS 40.00
AP - 00203552 10/29/2003 SAN DIEGO ROTARY BROOM CO INC 450.40
AP - 00203555 10/29/2003 SCWMF 85.00
AP - 00203556 10/29/2003 SENCHAL, CAL 276.50
AP - 00203556 10/29/2003 SENCHAL, CAL 79.00
AP - 00203557 10/29/2003 SHARP IMAGE COLLISION 353.60
AP - 00203558 10/29/2003 SI-IOETERIA IND INC 116.35
AP - 00203558 10/29/2003 SHOETERIA IND INC 150.00
AP - 00203559 10/29/2003 SIERRA SPRINGS 197.55
AP - 00203560 10/29/2003 SMIDERLE, BEA 800.00
AP - 00203561 10/29/2003 SOUTH COAST AQMD 313.60
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 9 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time:__ 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2,581.06
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.99
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 6.41
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.52
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 13.85
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.18
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 63.93
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 48.20
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.07
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.13
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.60
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.63
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.05
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.21
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 20.47
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19.69
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 38.24
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19.50
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.50
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTIrlERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.32
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 16.49
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.74
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.14
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTI-~RN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 34.25
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 18.94
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 33.54
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.23
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 46.05
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 25.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 140.62
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 33.17
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 17.03
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.91
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.72
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 9.68
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.07
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.61
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.52
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.21
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.02
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 160.12
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 114.38
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19.26
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 10 Current Date: 11/12/20¢
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Tim~ 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 35.94
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.52
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.04
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 14.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.30
AP- 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.76
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 31.49
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.05
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 34.32
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.58
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 35.60
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.85
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.62
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 11.34
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 10.93
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.49
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 50.75
AP ~ 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 53.83
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.44
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 . 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.17
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.03
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.86
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.78
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.03
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 23.13
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 43.11
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.48
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.63
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.91
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 55.27
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOIJTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.45
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.48
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.33
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.13
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.76
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.79
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19.43
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 20.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 11.93
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 10.80
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.89
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.58
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 40.51
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 11 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 1 I/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 31.45
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.40
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 47.13
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 28.80
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 14.76
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 41.54
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 25.21
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.75
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 27.52
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 32.70
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 42.18
AP- 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.75
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 21.74
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 21.75
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.52
AP ~ 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 70.75
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 42.25
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 30.17
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 21.74
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.89
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 40.46
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.89
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.78
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 73.09
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 40.78
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.29
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.29
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.59
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.75
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.32
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 65.88
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 14.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.20
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 41.77
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.76
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.97
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 21.60
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 21.24
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON I2.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.33
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 112.46
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 109.71
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.33
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 22.28
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 12 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Report: CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time; ~ 10:23:2
!
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.24
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.30
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.32
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 49.55
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.28
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.76
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.47
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.76
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.87
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOIJTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.47
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 30.39
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 52.47
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 30.61
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 24.34
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 28.26
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 62.67
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.51
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.39
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 136.05
AP ~ 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 2.69
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.00
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.00
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.96
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.98
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.19
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.66
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.92
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.5 !
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.52
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 19.22
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.89
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.56
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.37
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS ON 14.10
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.64
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.27
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.18
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 43.74
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 34.51
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 10.48
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 32.45
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.38
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.69
AP ~ 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.42
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.31
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.89
AP - 00203567 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.89
AP - 00203568 10/29/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL 515.00
AP - 00203569 10/29/2003 SPARKLETTS 72.00
AP - 00203570 10/29/2003 STEELWORKERS OLDTIMERS FOUNDATION 708.33
AP - 00203570 10/29/2003 STEELWORKERS OLDTIMERS FOUNDATION 708.33
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 13 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Timea/1 10:23:2
I
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203571 10/29/2003 STERICYCLE INC 198.00
AP - 00203572 10/29/2003 STERLING COI~EE SERVICE 45.75
AP ~ 00203572 10/29/2003 STERLING COI~I~EE SERVICE 427.36
AP - 00203573 10/29/2003 SUKANI, AHMAD 200.00
AP - 00203574 10/29/2003 SUNGARD BI TECH INC 59,309.36
AP - 00203575 10/29/2003 SUNRISE FORD 34.93
AP - 00203575 10/29/2003 SLrNRISE FORD 5.73
AP - 00203575 10/29/2003 SUNRISE FORD 32.48
AP ~ 00203578 10/29/2003 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCTS 2,185.79
AP - 00203578 10/29/2003 TARGET SPECIALTY PRODUCTS 2,452.16
AP - 00203579 10/29/2003 TEMECULA VALLEY DRYWALL [NC 167.43
AP - 00203580 10/29/2003 THORPE, ELIZABETH 60.00
AP - 00203581 10/29/2003 TMP HOMES 1,000.00
AP - 00203582 10/29/2003 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 11,576.00
AP - 00203583 10/29/2003 UNDERGROUND TECHNOLOGY INC. 202.31
AP - 00203583 10/29/2003 UNDERGROUND TECHNOLOGY INC. 208.77
AP - 00203583 10/29/2003 UNDERGROUND TECHNOLOGY INC. 136.77
AP - 00203584 10/29/2003 UNII~'LRST UNIFORM SERVICE 19.50
AP ~ 00203585 10/29/2003 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA 3,280.20
AP q 00203587 10/29/2003 UNIQUE MANAGEMENT SERVICES [NC 551.56
AP - 00203588 10/29/2003 UNITED PUMPING SERVICE INC 48.60
AP - 00203589 10/29/2003 UNITED WAY 55.00
AP - 00203591 10/29/2003 VERIZON 22.97
AP - 00203591 10/29/2003 VERIZON 29.50
AP - 00203591 10/29/2003 VERIZON 20.95
AP - 00203591 10/29/2003 VERIZON 29.50
AP - 00203591 10/29/2003 VERIZON 28.51
AP - 00203591 10/29/2003 VERIZON 21.40
AP - 00203591 10/29/2003 VERIZON 20.89
AP - 00203591 10/29/2003 VERIZON 29.50
AP - 00203591 10/29/2003 VERIZON 220.54
AP - 00203591 10/29/2003 VERIZON 21.22
AP - 00203591 10/29/2003 VERIZON 22.68
AP - 00203591 10/29/2003 VERIZON 21.08
AP - 00203591 10/29/2003 VERIZON 23.64
AP - 00203591 10/29/2003 VERIZON 20.89
AP - 00203592 10/29/2003 VIGILANCE, TERRENCE 312.37
AP - 00203593 10/29/2003 WAXIE 467.49
AP - 00203593 10/29/2003 WAXIE 508.94
AP - 00203594 10/29/2003 WEISSKER INC, HERMAN 153.74
AP - 00203595 10/29/2003 WEREWOLVES OF CLAREMONT 400.00
AP - 00203596 10/29/2003 WEST END YMCA/WEST END KIDS CLUB 2,825.50
AP - 00203598 10/29/2003 WILLDAN ASSOCIATES 60,605.00
AP - 00203599 10/29/2003 WILLIAMS, VICTORIA 100.00
AP - 00203601 10/29/2003 WOODRUFF SPRADLIN AND SMART 5,456.07
AP - 00203603 10/29/2003 YEAGER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC, E L 32,802.00
AP - 00203603 10/29/2003 YEAGER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY [NC, E L -3,280.20
AP - 00203604 10/29/2003 YORK, SHERYL 63.00
AP - 00203605 10/29/2003 YWCA OF THE WEST END 2,119.09
AP - 00203606 10/29/2003 ZEP MANUFACTURING COMPANY 1,521.05
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 1,112.59
AP - 00203607 I0/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 210.11
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHiEAD CREDIT UNION 163.20
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 14 Current Date: 11/12/20E
Report :CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time:___ 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 48.27
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 49.50
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 1,746.00
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 37.00
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 85.49
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 1,862.12
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 173.45
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 89.38
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 59.40
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 106.16
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 13.86
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 36.47
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 572.58
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 8.13
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 39.88
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 219.74
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 427.07
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 15.52
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 34.94
AP - 00203607 10/28/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 9.50
AP - 00203608 10/28/2003 BOVA CONTRACTING 408.00
AP - 00203609 10/28/2003 K B HOMES 11,400.00
AP - 00203610 10/28/2003 KB HOME 2,750.00
AP - 00203611 10/30/2003 ARROWHEAD CREDIT UNION 45.85
AP - 00203612 10/30/2003 VERIZON INTERNET SOLUTIONS 32.45
AP - 00203613 10/30/2003 VERIZON WIRELESS - LA 4,063.90
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 28.12
AP-00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 181.33
AP- 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 30.14
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 29.50
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 128.00
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 31.53
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 28.95
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 394.77
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 91.95
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 91.95
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP- 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 130.12
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 91.95
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 91.95
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 91.95
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 28.51
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 116.84
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 41.24
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 28.51
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 15 Current Date: 11/12/20~
Repot t:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 29.50
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 86.57
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 468.10
AP- 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 52.25
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 54.47
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 44.77
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 29.50
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZQN 91.93
AP- 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP-00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 57.01
AP-00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 29.31
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP-00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 28.51
AP 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 114.02
AP 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 155.09
AP 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 28.94
AP 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 29.53
AP 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 28.94
AP 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 575.37
AP 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 56.93
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 0.96
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 91.91
AP-00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 91.91
AP- 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 409.62
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 29.96
AP- 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 89.88
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 39.00
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 39.00
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 28.94
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 543.76
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 28.51
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 36.69
AP- 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 228.91
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP-00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 61.02
AP- 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 91.95
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 91.95
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 91.95
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 30.49
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 90.48
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 91.95
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 29.97
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 28.95
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 29.97
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 29.97
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 29.97
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 29.97
AP-00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 178.34
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 6.17
AP-00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 193.74
Use~: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 16 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Repor t:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Thne: 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name. Amount
I AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 1,304.34
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 468.10
AP-00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 468.10
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON ~91.95
AP-00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 91.95
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 93.88
AP- 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 329.50
AP - 00203616 10/30/2003 VERIZON 4.75
AP - 00203617 10/30/2003 DAVIES INC, ALBERT 166,466.60
AP- 00203617 10/30/2003 DAVIES INC, ALBERT -21,784.40
AP - 00203618 11/4/2003 FELIFES TAQUERIA 750.00
AP - 00203619 11/5/2003 A AND K 30 MIN PHOTO LAB INC 82.91
AP - 00203620 11/5/2003 A JONTUE, ROSEANN 3,668.40
AP-00203621 11/5/2003 ABLAC 285.87
AP - 00203622 11/5/2003 ACCENT COMPUTER SOLUTIONS INC 1,350.00
AP - 00203623 11/5/2003 ALLEN, SYLVESTER R 45.48
AP - 00203625 11/5/2003 ALTA FIRE EQUIPMENT CO 26.62
AP - 00203625 11/5/2003 ALTA FIRE EQUIPMENT CO 25.00
AP - 00203626 11/5/2003 ALTA LOMA PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATES 3,700.00
AP - 00203627 11/5/2003 AMAZON.COM CREDIT 75.75
AP - 00203629 11/5/2003 ARCH WIRELESS 1,293.46
AP - 00203630 11/5/2003 ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS 9,780.00
AP - 00203631 11/5/2003 B AND K ELECTRIC WHOLESALE 765.07
AP - 00203632 11/5/2003 BAKER, SHARI 149.50
AP - 00203633 11/5/2003 BARNES AND NOBLE 174.04
AP - 00203634 11/5/2003 BOISE CASCADE OFFICE PRODUCTS CORP 820.84
AP - 00203635 11/5/2003 BOOKS ON TAPE INC 6.47
AP - 00203636 11/5/2003 BOUCH, CHERYL 62.00
AP - 00203639 11/5/2003 CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL STATISTICS INC 400.00
AP - 00203640 1 I/5/2003 CALIFORNIA SCHOOL BAND & ORCHESTRA AS 1,900.00
AP - 00203641 11/5/2003 CALIFORNIA, STATE OF 40.27
AP - 00203642 11/5/2003 CARL WARREN & COMPANY 329.28
AP - 00203644 11/5/2003 CENTRAL DIVISION 73.72
AP - 00203645 11/5/2003 CHA~E¥ COLLEGE 60.00
AP - 00203645 11/5/2003 CHA~I~E¥ COLLEGE 20.00
AP - 00203646 11/5/2003 CHAMPION AWARDS AND SPECIAL/ES 1,690.00
AP - 00203647 11/5/2003 COURT TRUSTEE 200.00
AP - 00203647 11/5/2003 COURT TRUSTEE 118.50
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 158.23
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 60.58
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 650.68
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 374.26
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,324.43
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,627.43
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,229.43
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,653.13
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 70.48
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 292.43
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 98.93
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 325.43
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,929.23
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,152.98
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 443.48
U~er: ~-X~v~ORTH- Ann Haworth
Page: 17 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Report: CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 10:23:2
2.3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 425.88
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 824.08
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 789.63
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 2,547.33
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 414.63
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 680.73
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 511.33
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 73.78
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,768.43
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 2,389.03
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,033.83
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 44.18
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 88.93
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 2,889.43
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 18.40
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 324.68
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 118.63
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 36.80
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 276.28
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 215.66
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,842.33
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 3,496.93
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 133.05
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 32.03
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 27.63
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 485.28
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,306.98
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,525.53
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 71.58
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 2,442.93
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 765.78
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 996.78
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 63.98
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 262.73
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 443.13
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 464.03
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,803.83
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 2,808.03
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 109.83
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 605.93
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 633.53
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 599.68
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 120.08
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 28.73
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 27.63
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 471.83
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 696.13
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 159.33
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 165.18
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 610.43
AP ~ 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 214.68
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 597.13
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 2,133.83
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 18 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Report :CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: __10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 371.73
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 2,712.43
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 300.13
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 43.03
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 345.58
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 38.63
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 122.28
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 1,539.93
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 65.93
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 200.03
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 131.93
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 237.78
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 132.18
AP - 00203650 ! 1/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 79.38
AP - 00203650 ! 1/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 70.33
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 126.33
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 100.03
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 138.43
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 334.23
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 839.13
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 51.83
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 351.83
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 54.03
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 24.33
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 10,826.18
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 72.78
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 73.63
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 126.33
AP - 00203650 11/5/2003 CUCAMONGA CO WATER DIST 33.18
AP - 00203651 11/5/2003 DAN GUERRA AND ASSOCIATES 15,865.00
AP - 00203652 11/5/2003 DAPPER TIRE CO 210.49
AP - 00203652 11/5/2003 DAPPER TIRE CO 171.21
AP - 00203653 11/5/2003 DATA QUICK 93.50
AP - 00203653 11/5/2003 DATA QUICK 93.50
AP - 00203653 11/5/2003 DATA QUICK 93.50
AP - 00203654 11/5/2003 DELTA DENTAL 32,898.76
AP - 00203655 11/5/2003 DENISON, KAREN 52.00
AP - 00203656 11/5/2003 DIRECTV 29.99
AP - 00203657 11/5/2003 DUGAN, ALLISON 586.50
AP - 00203658 11/5/2003 ESPINO'S COP SHOP INC 150.21
AP - 00203659 11/5/2003 FAUST PRINTING [NC 3,237.89
AP - 00203660 11/5/2003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 17.27
AP - 00203660 11/5/2003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 11.00
AP - 00203660 11/5/2003 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP 11.00
AP - 00203661 11/5/2003 FILARSKY AND WATT 2,343.62
AP - 00203662 11/5/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 578.00
AP - 00203662 11/5/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 480.94
AP - 00203662 11/5/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 864.56
AP - 00203662 11/5/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 0.80
AP - 00203662 11/5/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 720.00
AP - 00203662 11/5/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 815.63
AP - 00203662 11/5/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 720.00
AP - 00203662 11/5/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 486.00
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 19 Current Date: 11/12/20¢
Report :CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203662 11/5/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 298.20
AP - 00203662 11/5/2003 FINESSE PERSONNEL ASSOCIATES 720.00
AP - 00203663 11/5/2003 FORD OF UPLAND INC 62.78
AP - 00203663 11/5/2003 FORD OF UPLAND [NC 73.86
AP - 00203663 11/5/2003 FORD OF UPLAND INC 75.81
AP - 00203664 11/5/2003 GALE GROUP,THE 175.05
AP - 00203664 11/5/2003 GALE GROUP,THE 53.16
AP - 00203665 11/5/2003 GARCIA, VIVIAN 27.36
AP - 00203667 11/5/2003 GENTRY BROS INC 229,905.96
AP - 00203667 11/5/2003 GENTRY BROS INC -22,990.60
AP - 00203668 11/5/2003 GEOGRAPHICS 610.94
AP - 00203669 11/5/2003 GONZALEZ, STEVE 43.75
AP - 00203671 11/5/2003 GUARDIAN 2,758.01
AP - 00203672 11/5/2003 GUTIERREZ, REX 343.72
AP - 00203673 11/5/2003 HAKIMI, SUSAN 227.40
AP - 00203674 11/5/2003 HAMS, KlM . 32.00
AP - 00203675 11/5/2003 HARDY, BRADLEY 260.50
AP - 00203676 11/5/2003 HI STANDARD AUTOMOTIVE 20.20
AP - 00203677 11/5/2003 HURST, CHERYL 288.50
AP - 00203678 11/5/2003 IBM CORPORATION 417.38
AP - 00203678 11/5/2003 IBM CORPORATION 1,104.43
AP - 00203680 11/5/2003 INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY COMPANY 66.46
AP - 00203680 11/5/2003 INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY COMPANY 160.70
AP - 00203682 11/5/2003 INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULLETIN 180.68
AP - 00203686 11/5/2003 IRON AGE CORPORATION 150.00
AP - 00203687 11/5/2003 IRON MOUNTAIN OSDP 357.50
AP - 00203688 11/5/2003 IRON MOUNTAIN OSDP 438.73
AP - 00203689 11/5/2003 KC PRINTING & GRAPHICS [NC 356.78
AP - 00203690 11/5/2003 KILLION, WENDY 80.00
AP - 00203692 11/5/2003 KRAZAN AND ASSOCIATES INC 3,180.00
AP - 00203693 11/5/2003 LASER TECHNOLOGY INC 61.18
AP 00203694 11/5/2003 LEIFI~ER, LUKAS 193.50
AP 00203695 11/5/2003 LETS STOR IT 55.00
AP 00203696 11/5/2003 LEXINGTON TECHNOLOGY INC 522.20
AP 00203697 11/5/2003 LIBERTY VEHICLE SALES 105.00
AP 00203700 1 i/5/2003 LOMEN, CHRISTINE 48.43
AP 00203701 11/5/2003 LOPEZ, ELIZABETH 21.00
AP 00203702 11/5/2003 LOS ANGELES TIMES 21.64
AP 00203703 11/5/2003 LOWER, DARLENE 251.00
AP 00203704 11/5/2003 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT [NC 497.46
AP 00203704 11/5/2003 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT INC 2,559.06
AP 00203704 11/5/2003 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT [NC 4,282.99
AP 00203704 11/5/2003 MARIPOSAHORTICULTURALENTINC 4,845.19
AP 00203704 11/5/2003 MARIPOSA HORTICULTLrRAL ENT [NC 2,930.08
AP 00203704 11/5/2003 MARIPOSAHORTICULTURALENT[NC 1,631.13
AP - 00203704 11/5/2003 MARIPOSA HORTICULTURAL ENT INC 10,718.70
AP - 00203705 11/5/2003 MARSHALL PLUMBING 1,126.00
AP - 00203706 11/5/2003 MARTINEZ UNION SERVICE 50.00
AP - 00203707 11/5/2003 MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE 59.44
AP - 00203709 11/5/2003 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 72.25
AP - 00203709 11/5/2003 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 144.50
AP - 00203709 11/5/2003 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 144.50
AP - 00203709 11/5/2003 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 144.50
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 20 Current Date: 11/12/20C
RepoeI:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203709 11/5/2003 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 216.75
AP - 00203709 11/5/2003 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 269.83
AP - 00203709 11/5/2003 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 144.50
AP - 00203709 11/5/2003 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART -1,161.38
AP - 00203709 1 I/5/2003 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 275.20
AP - 00203709 11/5/2003 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 216.75
AP - 00203709 11/5/2003 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 216.75
AP - 00203709 11/5/2003 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 81.10
AP - 00203709 11/5/2003 MICROAGE COMPUTERMART 144.50
AP - 00203710 11/5/2003 MIDWEST TAPE 297.83
AP - 00203711 11/5/2003 MIJAC ALARM COMPANY 1,107.84
AP - 00203712 11/5/2003 MOUNTAIN VIEW GLASS AND MIRROR 535.19
AP - 00203713 11/5/2003 N M A DUES C/O NAOMI ROBERTS 11.08
AP - 00203715 11/5/2003 NATIONAL DEFERRED 24,684.07
AP - 00203716 11/5/2003 NBSGOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP 5,750.00
AP - 00203717 11/5/2003 NEC BUSINESS NETWORK SOLUTIONS INC 100.00
AP - 00203717 11/5/2003 NEC BUSINESS NETWORK SOLUTIONS INC 150.00
AP - 00203718 11/5/2003 NEW GENERATION LANDSCAPE COMPANY IN( 76,934.08
AP - 00203718 11/5/2003 NEW GENERATION LANDSCAPE COMPANY IN( -16,395.81
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 35.49
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 18.36
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 322.66
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 37.03
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 399.81
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 940.87
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OI~YICE DEPOT 60.56
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OPI~ICE DEPOT 25.11
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OlqqCE DEPOT 42.51
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 11.08
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 36.26
AP- 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 121.76
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 85.47
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 247.05
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 5.11
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 23.26
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 153.13
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 5.89
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT -5.89
AP - 00203719 11/5/2003 OFFICE DEPOT 123.52
AP - 00203720 11/5/2003 OFFICE MAX 32.26
AP - 00203721 11/5/2003 P A P A 55.00
AP - 00203722 11/5/2003 PACIFIC PLUMBING SPECIALTIES 673.44
AP - 00203723 11/5/2003 PATTON SALES CORP 29.69
AP - 00203723 11/5/2003 PATTON SALES CORP 45.26
AP - 00203724 11/5/2003 PEP BOYS 10.75
AP - 00203726 11/5/2003 PETES ROAD SERVICE INC 69.00
AP - 00203727 11/5/2003 PGP PARTNERS INC 19.99
AP - 00203728 11/5/2003 PHOENIX GROUP INFORMATION SYSTEMS 275.41
AP - 00203729 11/5/2003 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 569.10
AP - 00203729 11/5/2003 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 1,679.38
AP - 00203729 11/5/2003 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 2,834.12
AP - 00203731 11/5/2003 POMA DISTRIBUTING CO 1,855.12
AP - 00203732 11/5/2003 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION INC 258.98
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 21 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Report :CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time:__ 10:23:2
27
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 1 I/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP ~ 00203733 11/5/2003 PRE-PAID LEGAL SERVICES [NC 183.87
AP - 00203734 11/5/2003 PRITCHETT, ,IOANN 68.00
AP - 00203735 11/5/2003 PROTECTION SERVICE INDUSTRIES 93.70
AP - 00203735 1 I/5/2003 PROTECTION SERVICE INDUSTRIES 93.70
AP - 00203735 1 I/5/2003 PROTECTION SERVICE INDUSTRIES 681.08
AP - 00203736 11/5/2003 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 7.00
AP - 00203736 11/5/2003 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 7.00
AP - 00203738 11/5/2003 QUINTANA, ZITA 193.00
AP - 00203739 11/5/2003 R AND R LIGHTING 147.73
AP - 00203740 1 I/5/2003 R C EMPLOYEE ACTIVITIES COMMITTEE 13,000.00
AP - 00203741 11/5/2003 RANCHO CUCAMONGA CHAMBER OF COMMEI 200.00
AP - 00203742 11/5/2003 RECORDED BOOKS LLC 339.26
AP - 00203743 11/5/2003 REINHARDT, RITA 312.00
AP - 00203744 11/5/2003 REINHARDTSEN, DEBRA 282.50
AP - 00203745 11/5/2003 RH TECHNOLOGY 957.00
AP - 00203746 11/5/2003 RIVERSIDE BLUEPRINT 358.81
AP - 00203747 11/5/2003 RIVERSIDE CO DEPT CHILD SUPPORT 226.00
AP - 00203748 11/5/2003 ROC-LOC 49,306.20
AP - 00203748 11/5/2003 ROC-LOC -4,930.62
AP - 00203749 11/5/2003 SAFELITE GLASS CORP 206.08
AP - 00203749 11/5/2003 SAFELITE GLASS CORP I92.88
AP - 00203750 11/5/2003 SAN BERN COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENr 289.68
AP - 00203751 11/5/2003 SAN BERN COUNTY CHILD SUPPORT PAYIVIEN' 233.50
AP - 00203753 11/5/2003 SAN BERN COUNTY SHERIFFS 1,138,963.00
AP - 00203753 11/5/2003 SAN BERN COUNTY SHERIFFS 12,680.00
AP - 00203753 11/5/2003 SAN BERN COUNTY SHERIFFS 16,424.00
AP - 00203754 11/5/2003 SAN BERN COUNTY SHERIFFS 156.00
AP - 00203755 11/5/2003 SAN BERN COUNTY 65.00
AP - 00203756 11/5/2003 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY AUDITOR CONTR( 307.50
AP - 00203756 11/5/2003 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY AUDITOR CONTR( 307.50
AP - 00203756 11/5/2003 SAN BERNARD[NO COUNTY AUDITOR CONTR( 410.00
AP - 00203757 11/5/2003 SAN BERNARD[NO COUNTY OFFICE OF ASSES,~ 1,614.37
AP - 00203758 11/5/2003 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY NEWSPAPER 1,353.52
AP - 00203758 11/5/2003 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY NEWSPAPER 1,353.52
AP - 00203758 11/5/2003 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY NEWSPAPER 1,353.52
AP - 00203758 11/5/2003 SAN GABRIEL VALLEY NEWSPAPER 1,353.54
AP - 00203759 11/5/2003 SANTIAGO, MICHELLE 54.95
AP - 00203760 11/5/2003 SBC/PACIFIC BELL 55.48
AP - 00203760 11/5/2003 SBC/PACIFIC BELL 55.48
AP - 00203761 11/5/2003 SHERIFFS COURT SERVICES 115.00
AP - 00203763 11/5/2003 SIMS, DIANA LAURIE 250.00
AP - 00203765 11/5/2003 SMART AND FINAL 20.47
AP - 00203765 11/5/2003 SMART AND FINAL 18.73
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 28.52
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.83
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 930.79
AP - 00203769 1 I/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.74
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.86
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 436.66
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 109.23
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 118.61
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON I4.19
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 23.02
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 22 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/1112003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTI-~RN CALIFORNIA EDISON 98.71
AP ~ 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.33
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.76
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 102.96
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 124.09
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 135.44
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.76
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 78.00
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 86.50
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 126.73
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 32.56
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.76
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 24.29
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 35.67
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 29.96
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORN/A EDISON 15,831.15
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 37.58
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.55
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 108.80
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.76
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 57.51
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 48.14
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.76
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 6,769.49
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 56.81
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.76
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 0.65
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 18.92
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 18.92
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.76
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.42
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.17
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 57.71
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 90.03
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 3,560.24
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 141.73
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.60
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 464.95
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 58.75
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.19
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.33
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.33
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 498.22
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.90
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 194.37
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 214.41
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 12.46
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 187.22
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 172.31
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 166.10
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 72.48
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 116.38
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 21.98
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth
Page: 23 Current Date: 11/12d20C
Report:CK_AGENDA REG PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: __ 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 16.52
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.62
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 44.97
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 106.47
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 163.53
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 22.30
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 132.00
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 6,158.94
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 189.73
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.76
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.76
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 173.17
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 9.08
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.76
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.03
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.56
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 15.62
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.75
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.17
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 14.03
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 9.92
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 95.63
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 48.62
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 93.31
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.43
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.86
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 13.86
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 27,496.10
AP - 00203769 11/5/2003 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON 11.25
AP - 00203770 11/5/2003 SPEEDWAY MUI~FLER INC 15.00
AP- 00203771 11/5/2003 STOFA, JOSEPH 19.00
AP - 00203774 11/5/2003 TECHNOLOGY GRANT NEWS 85.00
AP - 00203776 11/5/2003 TIME WARNER TELECOM INC 1,282.20
AP - 00203777 11/5/2003 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 20,794.02
AP - 00203777 11/5/2003 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 16,087.24
AP - 00203777 11/5/2003 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 48.72
AP - 00203777 11/5/2003 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 59,343.12
AP - 00203777 11/5/2003 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 15,415.77
AP - 00203777 11/5/2003 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 581.00
AP - 00203777 11/5/2003 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 116.55
AP - 00203777 11/5/2003 TRUGREEN LANDCARE 12,737.26
AP - 00203779 11/5/2003 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA 5,160.34
AP - 00203780 11/5/2003 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA TRUSTEE FOR P, 2,662.60
AP - 00203780 11/5/2003 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA TRUSTEE FOR P, 20,192.31
AP - 00203780 11/5/2003 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA TRUSTEE FOR P, 22,632.14
AP - 00203781 11/5/2003 UNITED STATES TREASURY 150.00
AP - 00203782 11/5/2003 UNITED WAY 611.32
AP - 00203784 11/5/2003 UPS 23.36
AP - 00203784 11/5/2003 UPS 645.96
AP- 00203784 11/5/2003 UPS 116.98
AP - 00203786 11/5/2003 US IDENTIFICATION MANUAL 88.48
AP - 00203787 11/5/2003 VEND U COMPANY 101.49
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 30.02
User: AHAWOI~TH - Ann Haworth Page: 24 "' Current Date: 11/12/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 10:23:2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Agenda Check Register
10/28/2003 through 11/11/2003
Check No. Check Date Vendor Name Amount
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 207.13
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERLZON 468.10
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 91.91
AP ~ 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 91.95
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 29.98
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 4.75
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 29.32
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 28.12
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 193.15
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 48.93
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERLZON 47.44
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 50.44
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 394.66
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 27.67
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 91.95
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 29.96
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 328.03
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 28.94
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 91.95
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 29.96
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 30.07
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 468.10
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 42.90
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 31.36
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 28.52
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 83.43
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 28.52
AP - 00203790 11/5/2003 VERIZON 29.70
AP - 00203791 11/5/2003 VERIZON 1,128.00
AP - 00203792 11/5/2003 VIGILANCE, TERRENCE 401.85
AP - 00203792 11/5/2003 VIGILANCE, TERRENCE 357.00
AP - 00203793 11/5/2003 VISION SERVICE PLAN CA 6,965.37
AP - 00203794 11/5/2003 VOLM, LIZA 112.50
AP - 00203795 11/5/2003 WELLS FARGO BANK 3,800.00
AP - 00203795 11/5/2003 WELLS FARGO BANK 3,800.00
AP - 00203796 11/5/2003 WELLS FARGO BANK 1,750.00
AP - 00203796 11/5/2003 WELLS FARGO BANK 1,750.00
AP - 00203797 11/5/2003 WEST GROUP 129.30
AP - 00203797 11/5/2003 WEST GROUP 150.85
AP - 00203798 I 1/5/2003 WHITE, HAROLD 125.00
AP ~ 00203800 11/5/2003 WILLHOLT, KATHY 116.00
AP - 00203801 11/5/2003 WOODHOUSE, CLAUDETTE 1,000.00
AP - 00203802 11/5/2003 XEROX CORPORATION 12,136.14
AP - 00203803 11/5/2003 YEAGER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC, E L 51,603.44
AP - 00203803 11/5/2003 YEAGER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC, E L -5,160.34
AP - 00203805 11/5/2003 PALMIERI TYLER WIENER WILHELM AND WAI 421,759.30
AP - 00203806 11/6/2003 PALMIERI TYLER WIENER WILHELM AND WAI 421,759.30
Total for Check ID AP: 4,072,421.20
Total for Entity: 4,072,421.20
User: AHAWORTH - Ann Haworth Page: 25 Current Date: 11/12/20C
Report:CK_AGENDA_REG_PORTRAIT_RC - CK: Agenda Check Register Portrait Layout Time: 10:23:2
/
~ A N C H O C U C A M O N G A
COHHUNITY SERVICES
StaffRel: rt
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: Kevin UcArdle, Community Services DirH~ctoJ'
BY: Nettle Nielsen, Recreation Supervisor~w~j[A
SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION FROM PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION FOR
APPROVAL OF STREET BANNER APPLICATIONS AND SCHEDULE FOR
CALENDAR YEAR 2004
RECOMMENDATION
The Park and Recreation Commission recommends that the City Council approve the
attached street banner and schedule for calendar year 2004.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSI~
Annually, the Community Services Department requests applications for banner di.splays on
Base Line Road and Archibald Avenue. According to City policy, only City sponsored events
and activities are eligible to display banners. The only exception to this rule applies to those
organizations that are supported by the City and have already been advertising specific
events on street banners for years. These groups have been grand fathered into the regular
calendar and provide us a ready-made banner at their cost.
The Park and Recreation Commission reviewed the street banner applications and schedule
for calendar year 2004 at their October 16, 2003, meeting and recommended approval.
FISCAL IMPACT
No fiscal impact.
itted,
ommunity Servic s Director
Attachments: Park and Recreation Staff Report
Schedule of Banner Displays for Calendar Year 2004
RANCHO C U CA M O N GA
COMMUNITY ~EI2VICE&
DATE: October 16, 2003
TO:. Park and Recreation Commission
FROM: Kevin McArdle, Community Services Direc/t~
BY: Nettle Nielsen, Recreation Superviso~,-"%(i., ~JJ/I
Jennifer Hunt, Recreation Coordinator
SUBJECT.' APPROVAL OF STREET BANNER APPLICATION AND SCHEDULES
FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2004 ·
RECOMMENDATION
it is recommended that the Park and Recreation Commission review the attached street
banner schedule for calendar year 2004 and recommend approval to the City Council.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
Annually the Community Services Department requests applications for banner displays
on Base Line Road and Archibald Avenue. In June 2003 the Park and Recreation
Commission approved changes to the Street Banner Policy, clarifying language on
eligibility. The policy states that only City sponsored events are eligible to apply for a
banner space. 'The applications for all of the requests are attached to this report along
with the banner calendar for the year 2004. The policy also allows department
administration to approve additional banners during the year if they meet the policy
criteria.
· Staff is requesting your review and approval of the attached banner display schedule for
calendar year 2004. Your recommenda~tion will be forwarded to the City Council at their
November 2003 meeting.
Kevin'~Ardle-~
Comm'unity Services Director
cc: Dave Moore, Recreation Superintendent
Attachments
Schedule of Banner Displays for Calendar Year 2004
Street Banner Applications Received
I:~COMMSERWCouncil&BoardsU:'ark & Rec~Stalf Report~003~street banner allocatkm.10.03.doc
SCHEDULE OF BANNER DISPLAYS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2004
Or.qanization Event Event Date. Display Dates Location
City Registration Mamh 15, 2004 Mamh 8 - March 22 Both
City Quakes Opening Day April 16, 2004 March 22 - March 29 Archibald
Mamh 22 - April 12 Base Une
RC Library Telethon 2004 April 16-18, 2004 April 5 - April 19 Archibald
Search/Rescue 8th Annual/Run/Walk April 24, 2004 March 29 - April 5 Archibald
April 12 - Apd126 Base Line
City Health Fair May 1, 2004 April 19 - May 3 Archibald
RDA Business Appreciation May 10-14, 2004 May 3- May 17 Both
City Registration May 31,2004 May 24- June 7 Both
City 4t~ of July July 4, 2004 June 14 - July 5 Base Line
June 28 -July 5 Amhibald
City Concerts/Movies July 1-August 31,2004 July 5 - July 26 Base Une
City Quakes August 2004 July 26 - August 16 Archibald
RCPD National Night Out August 3, 2004 July 26 - August 9 Base Line
City Concerts/Movies July 1-August 31,2004 August 9 - August 16 Base Line
City Registration August 23, 2004 August 16- August 30 Both
City Mark Christopher September 20-26, 2004 September 13 - September 27 Amhibald
Chadty Classic
ChamP)er of Grape Harvest October 1 - 3, 2004 September 20 - October 4 Base Line
Commerce Festiva/ September 27- October 4 Archibald
RC Fir~ Fire Prevention October 4-10, 2004 October 4- October 11 Both
City Red Ribbon Week October 23 - 31, 2004 October 18 - October 25 Both
City Founder's Day November 6, 2004 October 25 - November 8 Both
City Tree Lighting November 18, 2004 November 8 - November 22 Base Line
RC Fqr,~ Spark of Love November 22- Dec 23, 2004 November 15 - November 29 Archibald
November 29 - December 13 Base Line
City Registration December 20, 2004 December 13 - December 27 Both
Waitin,t: on paperwork with oJ~ficia/ dates.
R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A
PUBLIC LIBRARY
Staff Repor
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: Deborah Kaye Clark, Library Director
SUBJECT: APPROVAL TO APPROPRIATE $5,000 AWARDED BY THE
CALIFORNIA STATE LIBRARY INTO LITERACY EXPENDITURE
ACCOUNT
RECOMMENDATION
Approval to receive $5,000 into the LSTA Grant Income Account 1298000-4740 and
approval to appropriate into expenditure accounts 1298601 in the following manner:
5010 Part time Salaries $ 270
Maintenance & Operations $4,730
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
For 2003/2004, the Rancho Cucamonga Public Library applied for and was granted a
"Speaking of Reading" Adult Learner Book Discussion Group in the amount of $5,000.
These funds, awarded through the Library Services and Technology Act, are to be used
to support a group discussion program designed to bolster the reading and
communication skills of adult learners enrolled in the literacy program.
Approval of this action will place these funds into an operations account, to purchase
multiple copies of the discussion books for the literacy students and into a salaries
account to support part time staffing for the new program.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No negative impact.
RCspecC/ully~su bmitted CD
D'e{'/'(~b;'o r a~/'~l K~-a/y e~C r a~/'r k, Lib r a ry Director
T H C I T Y 0 F
I~AN CFiO (~[JCA~IO N CA
DATE: November I~/, 2003
~: Mayor and Members of the Rancho Cucamonga City Council
Jack Lam, A.I.C.P., Ci~ Manager
~M: Pedro O~iz, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZATION TO EXPEND GRANT FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT
OF $218,529 FROM THE STATE SUPPLEMENTAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FUND (SLESF) GRANT IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE ADOPTED BUDGET FOR FUND 354 -
COPS PROGRAM - STATE.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff respectfully recommends that Council provide authorization to expend grant
funding in the amount of $218,529 from the State Supplemental Law Enforcement
Services Fund (SLESF) Grant in accordance with the adopted budget for fund 354 -
COPS Program Grant- State.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
This is the third fiscal year the city has been receiving the State Supplemental Law
Enforcement Services Fund (SLESF) Grant. To comply with Government Code
section 30061-30065 (SLESF reporting requirements), the recipient agency shall
establish an approved expenditure plan to be approved by the governing board of
that agency. The approved expenditure plan must be submitted to the Supplemental
Law Enforcement Oversight Committee prior to the transfer of funds to the recipient
agency.
The Council authorization requested above is to comply with the SLESF reporting
requirements.
[HE CITY OF
]~AN CH O CU CAH O N C.A
Staff Report
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO:. Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Willie Valbuena, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF MAP, IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT
SECURITIES, MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT AND ORDERING THE
ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B AND
ST~T LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 FOR PARCEL
MAP 15665, LOCATED AT THE TERMINUS OF SANTA ANITA AVENUE, EAST
OF DAY CREEK CHANNEL, SUBMITTED BY PARAGON SANTA ANITA LLC, A
CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolutions approving Parcel Map
15665, accepting the subject agreement, securities and monumentation cash deposit, ordering the
annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B and Street Light Maintenance District
Nos. 1 and 6 and authorizing the Mayor to sign said agreement and the City Clerk to cause said
map to record.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
Tentative Parcel Map 15665, located at the terminus of Santa Anita Avenue, east of Day Creek
Channel, in the General Industrial District (Subarea 14), was approved by the Planning
Commission on February 27, 2002. This project is for a subdivision of 4 parcels on 33.77 acres
of land.
The Developer, Paragon Santa Anita LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, is
submitting an agreement, securities and monumentation cash deposit to guarantee the
construction of the public improvements in the following amounts:
Faithful Performance Bond $1,264,200.00
Labor and Material Bond $ 632,100.00
Monumentation Cash Deposit $ 2,600.00
d7
C1TY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
PARCEL MAP NO. 15665 - PARAGON SANTA ANITA LLC
November 19, 2003
Page 2
Copies of the agreement and securities are available in the City Clerk's Office.
A letter of approval has been received from Cucamonga County Water District. The Consent
and Waiver to Annexation forms signed by the Developer are on file in the City Clerk's Office.
Respectfully submitted,
Willi~v~. O'Neil
City Engineer
WJO:WV:dlw
Attachments
N
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA 'l'Tl'q'.~.:
E]~(]IN~.~G DIVISION
REsoLuTio NO. C - -.276/
A RESOLUTION OF TI-IE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
PARCEL MAP NO. 15665, IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT,
IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES AND MONUMENTATION
CASH DEPOSIT
WHEREAS, Tentative Parcel Map 15665, submitted by Paragon Santa Anita LLC, a
California Limited Liability Company, and consisting of a subdivision of 33.77 acres of land into
4 parcels, located at the terminus of Santa Anita Avenue, east of Day Creek Channel, in the
General Industrial District (Subarea 14) was approved by the Planning Commission of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga on February 27, 2002; and
WHEREAS, Parcel Map No. 15665 is the final map of the division of land approved as
shown on the Tentative Parcel Map; and
WHEREAS, all the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the final map
by the City Council of said City have now been met by posting the Improvement Securities and
Monumentation Cash Deposit by Paragon Santa Anita LLC, a California Limited Liability
Company, as developer; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, HEREBY RESOLVES, that said Improvement Agreement, Improvement
Securities and Monumentation Cash Deposit submitted by said developer be and the same are
hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on
behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and that said Parcel Map No. 15665 be and the same is
hereby approved and the City Engineer is authorized to present same to the County Recorder to
be filed for record.
RESOLtmON r O.
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 PARCEL
MAP NO. 15665
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 (referred to collectively as the "Maintenance Districts"); 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 Districts; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation
resolutions, an assessment engineer's report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority
protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within
the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the 1972 Act related to the
annexation of territory to the Maintenance District, Article XIIID of the Constitution of the State
of California ("Article XIIID") establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization
to levy assessments which apply to the levy of annual assessments for the Maintenance Districts
on the territory proposed to be annexed to such districts; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference have requested that such property (collectively, the
"Territory") be annexed to the Maintenance Districts in order to provide for the levy of annual.
assessments to finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto
(the "Improvements"); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly
executed forms entitled "Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A
Maintenance District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property" (the
"Consent and Waiver"); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act to the
annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts and have expressly consented to the
annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts; and
RESOLUTION NO.
PARCEL MAP 15665
November 19, 2003
Page 2
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act and/or
Article XIlID applicable to the authorization to the levy the proposed annual assessment against
the Territory set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and
have declared support for, consent to and approval of the authorization of levy such proposed
annual assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and
WIIEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory
to the Maintenance Districts and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory
in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto.
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: The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the Territory do not
exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each
such pamel from the Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the
Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the cost of the
maintenance of the Improvement.
c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of the proposed
annual assessments.
SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation of the Territory to the
Maintenance Districts, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from the
proceeds of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders the
levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth
in Exhibit B.
SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the Maintenance Districts, including the levy of
all assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory.
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property
To Be Annexed
The Owner of the Property is:
PARAGON SANTA ANITA LLC,
A California limited partnership
The legal description of the Property is:
SEE EXHIB~ "ONE"
THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PARCELS ARE SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "A-2" ATTACHED
HEREWITH AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.
A-1
EXHIBIT "ONE"
PARCEL A:
THAT PORTION OF LOTS 92 AND 93, MAP OF ROCHESTER, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER PLAT
RECORDED IN BOOK 9 OF MAPS, PAGES 20, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED
AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE WEST LINE OF SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP
1 SOUTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN AND THE NORTH
LINE OF LOT 93; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LOT 93, A DISTANCE
OF 661.99 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE WEST LINE OF THE LAND CONVEYED TO THE
CUCAMONGA LAND COMPANY BY A DEED RECORDED APRIL 1, 1966,1N BOOK 6600,
PAGE 347, OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE WEST LINE OF THE
LAND CONVEYED TO THE CUCAMONGA LAND COMPANY TO A POINT 100 FEET
SOUTH OF THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 92; THENCE WEST AND PARALLEL
WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 92 TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 17;
THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID SECTION LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE WEST 70 FEET, AS CONVEYED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO
COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT BY A DEED RECORDED JANUARY 7, 1942, IN
BOOK 1509, PAGE 431, OFFICIAL RECORDS.
APN NO: 0229-283-23
PARCEL B:
PARCEL 16 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 4749, IN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, IN THE
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN
BOOK 47 OF PARCEL MAPS, PAGES 28 AND 29, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY
RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
· APN NO: O229-283-48
Assessor's Parcel No: 0229-283-23 and 0229-283-48
£2ftf lglF' ~ ~ "
ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. ! AND 6
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WO~T.
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
STATE OF CALIFO~IA
Exhibit "B" continued
Proposed additions to Work Program (Fiscal Year 2003/2004)
For Project: Parcel Map 15665
Number of Lamps
Street Lights 5800L 9500L 16,000L 22,000L 27,500L
SLD # 1 .... 17 ....
SLD#6 -12 ....
Community Trail Turf Non-Tuff Trees
Landscaping DGSF SF SF EA
LMD #3B __.
--- --~ -214-
*Existing items installed with original project
Assessment Units by District
Parcel ACRES S 1 S6 L3B
1 7.13 14.26 7.13 7.13
2 5.87 11.74 5.87 5.87
3 12.74 25.48 12.74 12.74
4 9.04 18.08 9.04 9.04
Exhibit B
To
Description of the District Improvements
.Fiscal Year 2003/2004
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B (COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL)
Landscape Maintenance District No. 3B (LIVID #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 associated with the Adult Sports Park (not including the stadium, parking lots or the
maintenance building).
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS):
Street Light Maintenance District No. I (SLD #1)) is used to fund the maintenance and/or
installation of street lights ~ind 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.
The 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.
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 (COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL)
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.
Exhibit C
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 200312004
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3B (COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL)
The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $352.80 for the fiscal year 2003/04. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Landscape Maintenance Dish-ict No. 3B
(Commercial/Industrial):
# of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Unit Tvo¢ Units Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Comm/Ind Acre 2115.92 1.0 2115.92 $352.80 $746,496.58
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (Parcel map 15665) is:
Parcel 1 7.13 Acres x 2 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $2,515.46 Annual Assessment
Parcel 2 5.87 Acres x 2 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $2,070.94 Annual Assessment
Parcel 3 12.74 Acres x 2 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $4,494.67 Annual Assessment
Parcel 4 9.04 Acres x 2 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $3,189.31 Annual Assessment
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS):
The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $17.77 for the fiscal year 2003/04. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (Arterial Streets):
# of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Unit Tv~e Units Units Factor Units Il'nit Revenue
Single
Family Parcel 19,803 1.00 19,803 $17.77 $351,899.31
Multi-
Family Unit 7,402 1.00 7,402 $17.77 $131,533.54
Commercial Acre 2,288.82 2.00 4,577.64 $17.77 $81,344.66
TOTAL $564,777.51
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (Parcel Map 15665) is:
Parcel 1 7.13 Acres x 2 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $253.40 Annual Assessment
Parcel 2 5.87 Acres x 2 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $208.62 Annual Assessment
Parcel 3 12.74 Acres x 2 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $452.78 Annual Assessment
Parcel 4 9.04 Acres x 2 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $321.28 Annual Assessment
Exhibit "C" continued
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 (COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL)
The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $51.40 for the Fiscal Year 2003/04. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 6
(Commercial/Industrial):
# of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land ll~e Unit Tyne Unit~ Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Comm/Ind Acre 1,994.74 1.00 1,994.74 $51.40 $102,529.64
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (Parcel Map 15665) is:
Parcel 1 7.13 Acres x 2 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $366.48 Annual Assessment
Parcel 2 5.87 Acres x 2 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $301.72 Annual Assessment
Parcel 3 12.74 Acres x 2 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $654.84 Annual Assessment
Parcel 4 9.04 Acres x 2 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $464.66 Annual Assessment
THE CITY OF
I~AN Cll 0 C U CAM 0 NGA
Staff Report
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Rene Guerrero, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECr: APPROVAL OF MAP, IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT
SECURITI]~S, MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT AND ORDERING THE
ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 10 AND
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 7 FOR
TRACT NO. 16306, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF DAY
CREEK BOULEVARD AND VINTAGE DRIVE, SLrBMITTED BY YOUNG
CALIFORNIA CUCAMONGA, L.P.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolutions approving Tract No.
16306, accepting the subject agreement, securities and monumentation cash deposit, ordering the
annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 10 and Street Light Maintenance District
Nos. 1 and 7 and authorizing the Mayor to sign said agreement and the City Clerk to cause said
map to record.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The Planning Commission approved tentative Tract No. 16306, located on the southeast corner
of Day Creek Boulevard and Vintage Drive, in the Low Residential District, on January 8, 2003.
This project is for a subdivision of 26 lots on 6.85 acres.
The Developer, Young California Cucamonga, L.P., is submitting an agreement, securities and
monumentation cash deposit to guarantee the construction of the public improvements in the
following amounts:
Faithful Performance Bond $ 434,100.00
Labor and Material Bond $ 217,050.00
Monumentation Cash Deposit $ 3,700.00
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
TRACT NO. 16306 - YOUNG CALIFORNIA CUCAMONGA, L.P.
November 19, 2003
Page 2
Copies of the agreement and securities am available in the City Clerk's Office.
A letter of approval has been received from Cucamonga County Water District. The Consent
and Waiver to Annexation forms signed by the Developer are on file in the City Clerk's Office.
Respectfully submitted, .
Wi~j~m J. O'Neil
City Engineer
WJO:RG:dlw
Attachments
,5/
X WILSON AVE.
VINTAGE DR.
V~Y MAP
NOT TO SCALE
·
NORTH
CI!TY OF iTEM: TgAE'F Iq,Ap /6306
P~kNCHO CUCAMONGA TITLE: Wt/M/'FY' MAt>
ENGINEERING DIVISION EXHIBIT: .~
soi uTio .2 qb
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING TRACT MAP
NUMBER 16306, IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND
IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES AND MONUMENTATION
CASH DEPOSIT
WHEREAS, Tentative Tract No. 16306, submitted by Young California Cucamonga,
L.P., and consisting of a subdivision of 26 lots on 6.85 acres, located on the southeast corner of
Day Creek Boulevard and Vintage Drive, in the Low Residential District, was approved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on January 8, 2003; and
WHEREAS, Tract No. 16306 is the final map of the division of land approved as shown
on the Tentative Tract Map; and
WHEREAS, all the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the final map
by the City Council of said City have now been met by posting the Improvement Securities and
Monumentation Cash Deposit by Young Califomia Cucamonga, L.P. as developer; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, HEREBY RESOLVES, that said Improvement Agreement, Improvement
Securities and Monumentation Cash Deposit submitted by said developer be and the same are
hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on
behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and that said Tract No. 16306 be and the same is
hereby approved and the City Engineer is authorized to present same to the County Recorder to
be filed for record.
5.5
RESOLUTION NO. ~)~ "~¢ 7
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING TH~
ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 10 AND STREET LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 7 FOR TRACT 16306
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. 10, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Lighting Maintenance
District No. 7 (referred to collectively as the "Maintenance Districts"); 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 Districts; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation
resolutions, an assessment engineer's report, notices of public heating and the right of majority
protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within
the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the 1972 Act related to the
annexation of territory to the Maintenance District, Article XIIID of the Constitution of the State
of California ("Article XIIID") establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization
to levy assessments which apply to the levy of annual assessments for the Maintenance Districts
on the territory proposed to be annexed to such districts; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference have requested that such property (collectively, the
"Territory") be annexed to the Maintenance Districts in order to provide for the levy of annual
assessments to finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto
(the "Improvements"); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly
executed forms entitled "Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A
Maintenance District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property" (the
"Consent and Waiver"); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act to the
annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts and have expressly consented to the
annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts; and
RESOLUTION NO.
TRACT 16306
November 19, 2003
Page 2
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as proscribed in the 1972 Act and/or
Article XIIID applicable to the authorization to the levy the proposed annual assessment against
the Territory set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and
have declared support for, consent to and approval of the authorization of levy such proposed
annual assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory
to the Maintenance Districts and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory
in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto.
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: The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the Territory do not
exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each
such parcel from the Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the
Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the cost of the
maintenance of the Improvement.
c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of the proposed
annual assessments.
SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation of the Territory to the
Maintenance Districts, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from the
proceeds of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders the
levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth
in Exhibit B.
SECTION 4: All futura proceedings of the Maintenance Districts, including the levy of
all assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory.
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property
To Be Annexed
The Owner of the Property is:
YOUNG CALIFORNIA CUCAMONGA, L.P.
The legal description of the Property is:
SEE ATTACHED EXHIBIT "A" (pages A-2 and A-3)
The above-described parcels are shown on sheet A-4 attached herewith and by this reference
made a part hereof.
EXHIBIT "A"
PARCEL A:
PARCEL ;2 OF CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE NO. 552 FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT, AS
SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B", RECORDED OCTOBER 16, 2003 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2003-
782864 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE MONO POWER COMPANY, A CORPORATION, ITS
SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS ALL URANIUM, THORIUM AND OTHER FISSIONABLE
MATERIALS, ALL OIL, GAS, PETROLEUM, ASPHALTUM AND OTHER HYDROCARBON
SUBSTANCES AND OTHER MINERALS AND MINERAL ORES OF EVERY KIND AND
CHARACTER, WHETHER SIMILAR TO THESE HEREIN SPECIFIED OR NOT, WITHIN OR
UNDERLYING, OR WHICH MAY BE PRODUCED FROM THE HEREINBEFORE DESCRIBED
LAND; TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT TO USE THAT PORTION ONLY OF SAID LAND
WHICH UNDERLIES A PLANE PARALLEL TO AND 500 FEET BELOW THE PRESENT
SURFACE OF SAID LAND, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROSPECTING FOR, DEVELOPING
AND/OR EXTRACTING SAID URANIUM, THORIUM AND OTHER FISSIONABLE
MATERIALS, 0IL, GAS, PETROLEUM, ASPHALTUM AND OTHER MINERAL OR
HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES FROM SAID LAND, IT BEING EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD
AND AGREED THAT SAID GRANTOR. ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, SHALL HAVE
NO RIGHTTO ENTER UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, OR TO USE SAID LAND OR
ANY PORTION THEREOF TO SAID DEP-rH OF 500 FEET, FOR ANY PURPOSE
WHATSOEVER, AS RESERVED IN THE; DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 805¢,'PAGE 1 SO.OF
OFFICIAL RECORDS.
PARCEL B:
PARCEL 1 ¢ OF CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE NO. 496, FOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
RECORDED OCTOBER 31, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT/FILE NO. 20010496033OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS;
THAT PORTION OF THE WESTERLY 330.00 FEET OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF
THE SOUTHEAST.QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29,
TOWNSHIP I NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDIN0, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, MOR'E PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE
SOUTHWEST-QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER
OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE SOUTH 00 o 02' 19" WEST, 448.59 FEET TO THE ~RUE
POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE LEAVING SAID WESTERLY LINE, SOUTH B9° 57' 37"
EAST, 330.00 FEET TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAiD WESTERLY 330.00 FEET; THENCE
SOUTH 00o 02' 19" EAST, ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE, 541.26 FEET TO THE
NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA ROUTE 30 PER INSTRUMENT
NO. 1999-0191468 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS; THENCE, ALONG SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT
OF WAY, NORTH 71 o lO/4~" WEST 70.81 FEET; THENCE NORTH 73° 58' 40" WEST,
132.96 FEET; THENCE NORTH 47 ~ 44' 31" WEST, 44.1 ¢ FEET; THENCE NORTH 89° 07'
04" WEST. 94.39 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01 = 03' 29" WEST, 242.1S FEET; THENCE
NORTH 89o 27' 55" WEST, 3.¢1 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID WESTERLY
330.00; THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY NORTH 00o 02' 19" EAST
ALONG THE SAID WESTERLY LINE, 20B.77 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNII~G.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE MONO POWER COMPANY, A CORPORATION, ITS
SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS ALL URANIUM, THORIUM AND OTHER FISSIONABLE
MATERIALS, ALL 0IL, GAS, PETROLEUM, ASPHALTUM AND OTHER HYDROCARBON
SUBSTANCES AND OTHEP~MINERALS AND MINERAL ORES OF EVERY KIND AND
EXHIBIT "A" (CONTINUED)
CHARACTER, WHETHER SIMILAR TO THOSE HEREIN SPECIFIED OR NOT, WITHIN OR
UNDERLYING, OR WHICH MAY SE PRODUCED FROM THE HEREINBEFORE DESCRIBED
LAND; TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT TO USE THAT PORTION ONLY OF SAID LAND
WHICH UNDERLIES A PLANE PARALLEL TO AND SOO FEET BELOW THE PRESENT'
SURFACE OF SAID .LAND, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROSPECTING FOR, DEVELOPING
AND/OR EXTRACTING SAID URANIUM, THORIUM AND OTHER FISSIONABLE
MATERIALS, OIL, GAS, PETROLEUM, ~,SPHALTUM AND OTHER MINERAL OR
HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES FROM SAID LAND, IT BEING EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD
AND AGREED THAT SAID GRANTOR, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, SHALL HAVE
NO RIGHTTO ENTER UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, OR TO USE SAID LAND OR
ANY PORTION THEREOF TO SAID DEPTH OF §00 FEET, FOR ANY PURPOSE
WHATSOEVER. AS RESERVED IN THE DEED RECORDED IN BOOK 8054, PAGE 18§ OF
OFFICIAL RI~CORDS. '
A-3 TR 16306~
EXHIBIT "A"- &
ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 7
ST~T LIC~HT$ qEA.
CITY OF ~NCHO CUCAMONGA ~OR~
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
STATE OF CALIFO~IA r~-16~00~0
Exhibit B
To
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 2003~2004
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 10 (RANCHO ETIWANDA)
Landscape Maintenance District No. 10 (LMD #10) represents landscape sites throughout the
Rancho Etiwanda 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 l~or this district are charged to those parcels
within that district.
The various sites maintained by the district consist of parkways, median islands, street trees and
a neighborhood park.
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS):
Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (SLD 91)) 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.
The 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.
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 (NORTH ETIWANDA ):
Street Light Maintenance District No. 7 (SLD 97) 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 deten-nined 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 streets within the North Etiwanda area.
Exhibit "B" continued
Proposed additions to Work Program (Fiscal Year 2003/2004)
For Project: Tract 16306
Number of Lamps
Street Lights 5800L 9500L 16,000L 22,000L 27,500L
SLD# 1 ...............
SLD # 7 -9 .............
Community Trail Turf Non-Turf Trees
Landscaping DGSF SF SF EA
LMD #10 ...... 7,025 95
*Existing items installed with original project
Assessment Units by District
Parcel DU S 1 S7 L10
26 26 26
Exhibit C
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2003~2004
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 10 (RANCHO ETIWANDA)
The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $597.09 for the fiscal year 2003/04. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Landscape Maintenance District No. 10 (Rancho Etiwanda):
# of 4/of Rate Per
Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Type Units Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Single Parcel 602 1.00 602 $597.09 $359,448.18
Family
TOTAL $359,448.18
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (TR 16306) is:
26 Parcels x 1 A.U. Factor x $597.09 Rate Per A.U. = $15,524.34 Annual Assessment
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS):
The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $17.77 for the fiscal year 2003/04. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (Arterial Streets):
# of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land 1 lse Ii'nit Tvne Units Units Factor Units I Init Revenue
Single Parcel 19,803 1.00 19,803 $17.77 $351,899.31
Family
Multi-
Unit 7,402 1.00 7,402 $17.77 $131,533.54
Family
Commercial Acre 2,288.82 2.00 4,577.64 $17.77 $81,344.66
TOTAL $564,777.51
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (TR 16306) is:
26 Parcels x 1 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $462.02 Annual Assessment
Exhibit "C" continued
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 (NORTH ETIWANDA)
The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $33.32 for the fiscal year 2003/04. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 7 (North Etiwanda):
# of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Unit Tvt~e Units Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Single Parcel 1804 1.00 1804 $33.32 $60,109.28
Family
Comrn/Ind Acre 5 2.00 10 $33.32 $333.20
TOTAL $60,442.48
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (TR 16306) is:
26 Parcels x 1 A.U. Factor x $33.32 Rate Per A.U. = $866.32 Annual Assessment
I H E CiTY OF
I~AN ClIO C 1I C AH 0 N GA
StaffRe rt
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO:. Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FEOM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Rene Guerrero, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF MAP, IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT
SECURITIES, MONUMENTATION CASH DEPOSIT AND ORDERING THE
ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 FOR
TRACT NO. 16431, LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE ALTA LOMA
FLOOD CHANNEL, SOUTH SIDE OF LEMON AVENUE, SUBMITTED BY
CUCAMONGA VENTURES, LLC
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolutions approving Tract No.
16431, accepting the subject agreement, securities and monumentation cash deposit, ordering the
annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Light Maintenance District Nos.
1 and 2 and authorizing the Mayor to sign said agreement and the City Clerk to cause said map
to record.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
Tentative Tract No. 16431, located on the east side of the Alta Loma Flood Channel, south side
of Lemon Avenue, in the Low Residential District, was approved by the Planning Commission
on April 9, 2003. This project is for a subdivision of 15 lots on 3.92 acres.
The Developer, Cucamonga Ventures, LLC, is submitting an agreement, securities and
monumentation cash deposit to guarantee the construction of the public improvements in the
following amounts:
Faithful Performance Bond $148,400.00
Labor and Material Bond $ 74,200.00
Monumentation Cash Deposit $ 3,150.00
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
TRACT NO. 16431 - CUCAMONGA VENTURES, LLC
November 19, 2003
Page 2
Copies of the agreement and securities are available in the City Clerk's Office.
A letter of approval has been received from Cucamonga County Water District. The Consent
and Waiver to Annexation forms signed by the Developer are on file in the City Clerk's Office.
Respe~ctfully submitted,
City ~ngineer
WJO:RG:dlw
Attachments
~ cucA~oNc~ ~
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
CITY OF rr~: ;rFACT h~,47 144-51
RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~ WclA/IT)~ /Y~
EN~INR~RRINfi DIVISION EXIq/R1T: ,~
RESOLUTION NO. ~,~-'2 ~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING TRACT MAP
NUMBER 16431, IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND
IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES AND MONUMENTATION
CASH DEPOSIT
WHEREAS, Tentative Tract No. 16431, submitted by Cucamonga Ventures, LLC, and
consisting of a subdivision of 15 lots on 3.92 acres, located on the east side of the Alta Loma
Flood Channel, south side of Lemon Avenue, in the Low Residential District, was approved by
the Planning Commission of the City or' Rancho Cucamonga on April 9, 2003; and
WHEREAS, Tract No. 16431 is the final map of the division of land approved as shown
on the Tentative Tract Map; and
WHEREAS, all the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the final map
by the City Council of said City have now been met by posting the Improvement Securities and
Monumentation Cash Deposit by Cucamonga Ventures, LLC as developer; and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
'CUCAMONGA, HEREBY RESOLVES, that said Improvement Agreement, Improvement
Securities and Monumentation Cash Deposit submitted by said developer be and the same are
hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on
behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and that said Tract No. 16431 be and the same is
hereby approved and the City Engineer is authorized to present same to the County Recorder to
be filed for record.
A RESOLUTION OF TI-~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE
ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND STREET LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 FOR TRACT 16431
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. 1, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Lighting Maintenance
District No. 2 (referred to collectively as the "Maintenance Districts"); 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 Districts; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation
resolutions, an assessment engineer's report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority
protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within
the territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the 1972 Act related to the
annexation of territory to the Maintenance District, Article XIIID of the Constitution of the State
of California ("Article XIIID") establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization
to levy assessments which apply to the levy of annual assessments for the Maintenance Districts
on the territory proposed to be annexed to such districts; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference have requested that such property (collectively, the
"Territory") be annexed to the Maintenance Districts in order to provide for the levy of annual
assessments to finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto
(the "Improvements"); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly
executed forms entitled "Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A
Maintenance District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property" (the
"Consent and Waiver"); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act to the
annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts and have expressly consented to the
annexation of the Territory to the Maintenance Districts; and
RESOLUTION NO.
TRACT 1643 !
November 19, 2003
Page 2
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act and/or
Article XIIID applicable to the authorization to the levy the proposed annual assessment against
the Territory set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and
have declared support for, consent to and approval of the authorization of levy such proposed
annual assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory
to the Maintenance Districts and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory
in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto.
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: The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the Territory do not
exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each
such parcel from the Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the
Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the cost of the
maintenance of the Improvement.
c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of the proposed
annual assessments.
SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation of the Territory to the
Maintenance Districts, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from the
proceeds of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders the
levy of annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth
in Exhibit B.
SECTION 4: All future proceedings of the Maintenance Districts, including the levy of
all assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory.
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property
To Be Annexed
The Owner of the Property is:
CUCAMONGA VENTURES, LLC
The legal description of the Property is:
Real property in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bemardino, State of California,
described as follows:
Parcels 2, 3 and 4 of Parcel Map No. 3384, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San
Bemardino, State of California, as per plat recorded in Book 31 of Parcel Maps, page(s) 11,
records of said county.
EXHIBIT "A"- ~..
ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. I
STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. i AND 2
P JvC.' 3,t,~1 ~
\ / 'iS 4
,34 u).< - '. :
T~CT No. 'H885 ~,
(~-~'~y ~,
~5 ,-~ . -- ~' 6 .' .
~ 6 -'
37
7
?7-,e£gT LIGHTS EA.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NORTII
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
STATE OF CALIFORNIA 772.
Exhibit B
To
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 2003/2004
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (GENERAL CITY)
Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (LMD #1) represents 23.63 acres of landscape area, 41.88
acres of parks and 16.66 acres of community trails that 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 41.88 acres of parks consist of Bear
Gulch Park, East and West Beryl Park, Old Town Park, Church Street Park, Golden Oaks Park
and the Rancho Cucamonga Senior Center.
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS):
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.
The 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.
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 (LOCAL STREETS):
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.
B-I
Exhibit "B" continued
Proposed additions to Work Program (Fiscal Year 200312004)
For Project: Tract 16431
Number of Lamps
Street Lights 5800L 9500L 16,000L 22,000L 27,500L
SLD# 1 ---
SLD # 2 -6 ....
Community Trail Turf Non-Turf Trees
Landscaping DGSF SF SF EA
LMD #1 ---
...... :32
*Existing items installed with original project
Assessment Units by Distfidt
Parcel DU S1 S2 L1
15 15 15
Exhibit C
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2003/2004
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (GENERAL CITY)
The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $92.21 for the fiscal year 2003/04. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Landscape Maintenance District No. i (General City):
# of Physical # of Rate Per
Units Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Type Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Single
Family Parcel 7699 1.0 7951 $92.21 $733,161.71
Multi-
Family Units 7091 0.5 3570 $92.21 $329,189.70
CommPlnd. Acre 2 1.0 2 $92.21 $184.42
TOTAL $1,062,535.83
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (TRACT 16431) is:
15 Units x 1 A.U. Factor x $92.21 Rate Per A.U. -- $1,383.15 Annual Assessment
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS):
The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $17.77 for the fiscal year 2003/04. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (Arterial Streets):
# of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Unit Type Unit,s U'nits Factor Unit,$ I/nit Revenue
Single
Family Pamel 19,803 1.00 19,803 $17.77 $351,899.31
Multi-
Family Unit 7,402 1.00 7,402 $17.77 $131,533.54
Commercial Acre 2,288.82 2.00 4,577.64 $17.77 $81,344.66
TOTAL $564,777.51
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (TRACT 16431) is:
15 Units x 1 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $266.55 Annual Assessment
Exhibit "C" continued
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 (LOCAL STREETS)
The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $39.97 for the fiscal year 2003/04. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 2 (Local Streets):
# of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use [)'nit Tyne Unit5 Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Single
Family Parcel 6050 1.00 6050 $39.97 $241,818.50
Multi
Family Unit 24 1.00 919 $39.97 $36,732.43
Commercial Acre 19.05 2.00 19.05 $39.97 $1,522.86
Total $280,073.79
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (TRACT 16431) is:
15 Units x 1 A.U. Factor x $39.97 Rate Per A.U. = $599.55 Annual Assessment
TH E C I T Y OF
]~AN CH 0 C U CAH 0 N C,A
Staff Report
TO: Mayor, Members of the City Council and
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: Pete Ortiz, Chief of Police
Rancho Cucamonga Police Department
BY: Valerie Tanquay, Lieutenant
DATE: November 19, 2003
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF A CONTRACT FOR THE SPLIT SINGLE SOURCF
PURCHASE OF TIRE MOUNTING AND GENERAL VEHICLE MAINTENANCF
AND REPAIRS TO POLICE DEPARTMENT VEHICLES FROM A&R TIRF
SERVICE~ OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ AND R&R AUTOMOTIVE~ OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA~ FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003/04~ WITH AN OPTION TO RENEW THF
AGREEMENT FOR ADDITIONAL ONE (1) YEAR PERIODS~ UPON MUTUAl
CONSENT~ UP TO A TOTAL OF THREE (3) YEARS~ IN AN ANNUAL AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $70~000.00 FOR A&R TIRE SERVICE, AND $70~000.00 FOR
R&R AUTOMOTIVE~ FUNDED FROM FUND 1001-701-5250
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve the award of a contract for the split single
source purchase of tire mounting and general vehicle maintenance and repairs to Police
Department vehicles from A&R Tire Service, of Rancho Cucamonga, and R&R Automotive, of
Rancho Cucamonga, for fiscal year 2003/04, with an option to renew the agreement for
additional one (1) year periods, upon mutual consent, up to a total of three (3) years, in an
annual amount not to exceed $70,000.00 for A&R Tire Service and $70,000.00 for R&R
Automotive, both funded from fund 1001-701-5250.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The Rancho Cucamonga Police Department is requesting to use A&R Tire Service and R&R
Automotive as split single-source vendors for lube/oil/filter changes, air conditioning, brakes,
front-end alignments, tire mounting/balancing, smog inspections, and general repairs to
Police Department fleet vehicles. Attached are pricing lists from both vendors for the most
common services that they provide.
It is important for public safety to have the Police Department vehicles operational and have
as little downtime as possible. To achieve this, having two reliable, consistent, local vendors
available for routine services are necessary. The Police Department has extremely limited in-
house vehicle maintenance capabilities and must outsource the majority of this work.
A&R Tire Service also carries spare wheels for drive-up tire replacement on the patrol units.
The tires are purchased from Dapper Tire on the County of San Bernardino contract and A&R --
Tire Service stores them at their location. This increases unit availability and decreases field
personnel downtime. They service and repair all makes of vehicles from standard
automobiles to class "A" trucks and trailers.
The department uses R&R Automotive for lube/oil/filter changes, brakes, front-end, engine,
drive-train, electrical, and quick-service repairs. They service and repair all makes of
vehicles, from automobiles to light trucks, including recreational vehicles. R&R Automotive is
currently an approved county contract vehicle vendor for Sheriff's Department units, including
transportation vans. All Sheriff's vehicles take precedence over general public vehicles when
they go into R&R Automotive.
Both vendors are familiar with the specialty equipment that is built into the Police Department
fleet vehicles. Due to the complexity of this equipment, it is important to have vendors that
are capable of determining if the problems are original-equipment-manufacturer (OEM)
problems or associated with the emergency vehicle equipment. The vehicles are also held in
secure storage at both locations while they are in for repairs.
A&R Tire Service is licensed by the State Bureau of Automotive Repair for general vehicle
repairs and smog tests and repairs. They are also licensed by the South Coast Air Quality
Management District for R-12/R-134 air conditioner service and repairs. All service
technicians are Automotive Service Excellent (ASE) certified or in the ASE training program.
R&R Automotive is licensed by the State Bureau of Automotive Repair for general vehicle
repairs, brake/lamp inspections, and smog/emission diagnosis and repairs. All service
technicians at R&R Automotive are also ASE certified.
Fleet Maintenance also uses A&R Tire Service and R&R Automotive for service and repairs
on City vehicles because of the consistency, reliability, and quality of their work. Both
vendors have provided excellent service to our depadment for over sixteen (16) years.
Respectfully submitted,
Pete Ortiz, Chief of
Rancho Cucamonga Police Department
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
SINGLE/SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION
FOR PURCHASES $1,501 AND ABOVE
The below information is provided in support of my Department requesting approval for
a single/sole source. Outside of a duly declared emergency, the time to develop a
statement of work or specifications is not in itself justification for single or sole source.
Vendor: A & R Tire Service Date: 07/14/03
C, ommodity/Service: Tire & General Vehicle Repairs
I=stimated expenditure: 35,000 Your Name: K. Larson
Extent of market search conducted: None
Price Reasonableness: Yes
Does moving forward on this product/service further obligate the City to future similar
contract actual arrangements?
'4o
DEFINITIONS:
SINGLE SOURCE - a transaction with a business entity that is chosen, without competition, from
among two or more business entities capable of supplying or providing the goods or services that
meet the specified need.
· ~iOLE SOURCE - A transaction with the only business entity capable of supplying or providing the
goods or services that meet the specified need.
Initial all entries below that apply to the proposed purchase (more than one entry will apply to most
single/sole source products/services requested). If needed, attach a memorandum containing
complete justification and support documentation as directed in initial entry.
'I'HIS IS A SINGLE SOURCE r-~ THIS IS A SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE F'--] (check one).
1. ] I SINGLE/SOLE SOURCE REQUEST IS FOR THE ORIGINAL MANUFACTURER,
THERE ARE NO REGIONAL DISTRIBUTORS. (Item no. 3 also must also be completed).
2. I I THE PARTS/EQUIPMENT ARE NOT INTERCHANGEABLE WITH SIMILAR PARTS
OF ANOTHER MANUFACTURER. (Explain in separate memorandum).
Single/Sole Source Justification Form
Page 2
3. [ I THIS IS THE ONLY KNOWN ITEM OR SERVICE THAT WILL MEET THE
SPECIALIZED NEEDS OF THIS DEPARTMENT OR PERFORM THE INTENDED
FUNCTION. (Attach memorandum with details of specialized function or application).
4. I I UNIQUE FEATURES OF THE SUPPLY/SERVICE BEING REQUESTED. THERE IS
NO ALTERNATIVE SUPPLIER. (Attach memorandum with reasons why these unique
features are and what benefit the City will accrue.)
5. I I THE PARTS/EQUIPMENT ARE REQUIRED FROM THIS SOURCE TO PERMIT
STANDARDIZATION (Attach memorandum describing basis for standardization request).
6. I ~/ I NONE OF THE ABOVE APPLY. A DETAILED EXPLANATION AND JUSTIFICATION
FOR THIS SINGLE/SOLE SOURCE REQUEST IS CONTAINED IN ATTACHED
MEMORANDUM.
The undersigned requests that competitive procurement be waived and that the vendor identified as
the supplier of the service or material described in this single/sole source justification be authorized
as a single/sole sou~lce~ the~se/~c/~ or material.
Department Head: ~//~/~j~/, ..~ ,.(' ~-~ Department: ~
,,,;,,,,,,,
~ APPROVED
APPROVED WITH CONDITION/S
DISAPPROVE
APPROVED BY PURCHASING MANAGER: Date:
~ -
$20,000 AND ABOVE
See comments above by Purchasing Division
Attach to Council Request
CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Date:
h A N C H O C U C A M O N G A
POI~ICE DEPAOTMENT
Memorandum
DATE: July 14, 2003
TO: Dawn Haddon, Purchasing Mgr.-Purchasing Dept.
FROM: Valeria Tanguay, Lt.-Police
SUBJECT: Open Purchase Order for A & R Tire Service
Attached, is the Single/Sole Soume Justification form for an open purchase order for A
& R Tire Service in Rancho Cucamonga.
We use A & R Tire Service for lube/oil/filter changes, air conditioning, brakes, front-end
alignments, tire mounting/balancing, smog inspections and other general repairs. Also,
they carry our spare wheels for drive up tire replacement for our patrol units in the field
that need tire replacement. This increases unit availability and decreases field
personnel downtime. They service and repair all makes vehicles from automobiles to
class "A" trucks & trailers.
A & R Tire Service is licensed by the state Bureau of Automotive Repair for general
vehicle repairs and smog test & repairs. Also, licensed by the South Coast Air Quality
Management District for R-12/R-134 air conditioner service and repairs. All service
technicians are ASE certified (Automotive Service Excellent) or in the ASE training
program.
Fleet Maintenance also uses them for service and repairs on city vehicles. A & R Tire
Service has provided excellent service to our department for over 16 years.
VT:kl
07140:3
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
SINGLE/SOLE SOURCE JUSTIFICATION
FOR PURCHASES $1,501 AND ABOVE
The below information is provided in support of my Department requesting approval for
a single/sole source. Outside of a duly declared emergency, the time to develop a
statement of work or specifications is not in itself justification for single or sole source.
Vendor: R & R Automotive Date: 07/14/03
Commodity/Service: General Vehicle Repairs
Fstimated expenditure: 35,000 Your Name: K. Larson
Fxtent of market search conducted: None
Price Reasonableness: Yes
Does moving forward on this product/service further obligate the City to future similar
contract actual arrangements?
~1o
DEFINITIONS:
I}INGLE SOURCE - a transaction with a business entity that is chosen, without competition, from
among two or more business entities capable of supplying or providing the goods or services that
meet the specified need.
SOLE SOURCE - A transaction with the only business entity capable of supplying or providing the
goods or services that meet the specified need.
Initial all entries below that apply to the proposed purchase (more than one entry will apply to most
eingle/sole source products/services requested). If needed, attach a memorandum containing
complete justification and support documentation as directed in initial entry.
THIS IS A SINGLE SOURCE ~ THIS IS A SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE [~] (check one).
1. I I SINGLE/SOLE SOURCE REQUEST IS FOR.THE ORIGINAL MANUFACTURER,
THERE ARE NO REGIONAL DISTRIBUTORS. (Item no. 3 also must also be completed).
2. I I THE'PARTS/EQUIPMENT ARE NOT INTERCHANGEABLE WITH SIMILAR PARTS
OF ANOTHER MANUFACTURER. (Explain in separate memorandum).
Single/Sole Source Justification Form
Page 2
3. [ ] THIS IS THE ONLY KNOWN ITEM OR SERVICE THAT WILL MEET THE
SPECIALIZED NEEDS OF THIS DEPARTMENT OR PERFORM THE INTENDED
FUNCTION. (Attach memorandum with details of specialized function or application).
.4. [ ] UNIQUE FEATURES OF THE SUPPLY/SERVICE BEING REQUESTED. THERE IS
NO ALTERNATIVE SUPPLIER. (Attach memorandum with reasons why these unique
features are and what benefit the City will accrue.)
5. [ 1 THE PARTS/EQUIPMENT ARE REQUIRED FROM THIS SOURCE TO PERMIT
STANDARDIZATION (Attach memorandum describing basis for standardization request).
'-~. I~' NONE OF THE ABOVE APPLY. A DETAILED EXPLANATION AND JUSTIFICATION
FOR THIS SINGLE/SOLE SOURCE REQUEST IS CONTAINED IN ATTACHED
MEMORANDUM.
The undersigned requests that competitive procurement be waived and that the vendor identified as
the supplier of the service or material described in this single/sole source justification be authorized
,,sa s,ng,e/so,e sour;e the se /mater, al.
VED WITH CONDITION/S
DISAPPROVE
Cornments:
$1,501 - $19,999
APPROVED BY PURCHASING MANAGER: ,~~,:~¢---~ Date:
$20,000 AND ABOVE
See comments above by Purchasing Division
.Attach to Council Request
CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Date:
R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A
P Ol~l CI; DI~PAI~T~I~NT
M norandum
DATE: July 7, 2003
TO: Dawn Haddon, Purchasing Mgr.-Purchasing Dept.
FROM: Valeria Tanguay, Lt.-Police
SUBJECT: Open Purchase Order for R & R Automotive
Attached, is the Single/Sole Source Justification form for an open purchase order R & R
Automotive.
We use R & R Automotive in Rancho Cucamonga for lube/oil/filter changes, brakes,
front end, engine, drivetrain, electrical, and quick service repairs. They service and
repair all makes vehicles from automobiles to light trucks, including recreation vehicles.
R & R Automotive is licensed by the state Bureau of Automotive Repair for general
vehicle repairs, brake/lamp inspections, and smog/emission diagnosis & repairs. Also,
all service technicians are ASE (Automotive Service EXCellent) certified.
Fleet Maintenance also uses them for service and repairs on city vehicles. Also, they
are the approved vehicle vendor for sheriff's department units including transportation
vans. R & R Automotive has provided excellent service to our department for 16 years.
VT:kl
071403
Below is th~ pd~ listing that you reques~ I included fl~e most common services
that we perform on the Sheriff's vehicles. I also included what I feel are other key factors
thai should bc not~ on you~ proposal.
lfl can be of any other assistance please feel free to call at any time.
JuNe
Labor ra~e for all cfly, county ~md state vel~cles is $$5_00 per hour_ Our I~or rate for the
~eral public is $6500 per hour.
Lube, oil ami filter, salty insp~ion m~d im~ot brakes (6~s of oil) $39.33
Lube, oil and filt~r, safc~ inspection and brake inspection (Sq~s of oil)$38.95
Tram service wi~ symh~c uuns fired & dra~in~ of ~otque conveaer $120.68
(On Crown Victoria's, performed in ~n~rvais of 30,000 miles)
Relining front brakes on pstrol u~ts. Includes macl~ning ~ont rotors and Ford factory
All other ~ehicle~ not including ~WD'$ l~or is $~2.50 · brake pads.
Rclinin§ rear Brakes on palr~l un, ts. Includes machining rotors a~l Ford factory pads
· $198.46.
T~re dismoun~ng, moonting~ balancing, nc-w valve stem ~mt dispmal f~e $15.00 I~ tire
Front wheel ali~nmem ~10.00 Four wheel ali~m~ut $?0~00 (pssseu~r c~rs)
Front whe~l al~nment of I~t frocks $~0.00
Ccolin~ sys~m ~rv~ce $47.24 includes 2 ~llov, s of cool,mt
Ot~er key service
All sher~ffvel~cles take ~ over ge~ral public.
All vehicles are secured in house.
We curv:mtly hold the county P~VP pe~d~n§ new one.
We hold a i million dollar garage liabiliOj and Workn~m's Comp policies
We work o~ ~ w~de v~fiety o£vebicles ~clud~n§ trailers and ~ue~ators.
We prov~0e numerous of services that are not listed above.
We can deciphe~ be~vecm OEM problems or emc~m~cy vehicle equ~t~nem
Problems and any OEM warranties, which save the city time and money
FRO~ :~RT[RE-~ F~X NO, :90998004~$ Nou, 12 2003 ~0:03~ P2
A&R Tire
Service Prices
· Front End Alignment ................ $59.95
Four Wheel Alignment ........ .... $99.95
Smog Test + cart ($8.25) ............ $39.99
Labor Rate: $76.30
Front Brake Service.. ...... . ...... ..$139.99
(New pads and resurface rotors)
Rear Brake Service .................. $139,99
(New pads and resurface drums/rotors)
Oil Service ......... .. ................ $28.28
Tire Installation. ..................... $10.68
9820 Foothill Blvd. · Rancho Cucamonga · CA91730-3616 · Phone: 909-987-TIRE (8473) · Fax: g09-98043425
R A N C H O C U C a M O N G A
11I
ENGINEERING DE PART'lENT
SlaffReport
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Robert Lemon, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: Approval to accept the bids received and award and authorize the execution
of a contract in the amount of $1,691,656.82 to the apparent Iow bidder, Pouk
& Steinle, for the Electrical Distribution System Cabling, Connections, and
Equipment Project
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Council accept the bids received and award and authorize the
execution of a contract in the amount of $1,691,656.82 to the apparent Iow bidder, Pouk &
Steinle, and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $169,165.68
for the Electrical Distribution System Cabling, Connections, and Equipment Project, to be
funded from Capital Reserve funds, Acct. No. 10250015650/1382025-0 and appropriate
$1,860,822.50 (contract award of $1,691,656.82 plus 10% contingency in the amount of
$169,165.68) to Acct. No. 10250015650/1382025-0 from Capital Reserve fund balance.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
On August 31, 2001, the Rancho Cucamonga City Council authorized the creation and
operation of a municipally owned utility for the purpose of providing vadous utility services.
Subsequently, on August 21, 2002, the Redevelopment Agency authorized the filing of a
Wholesale Distribution Access Tariff 0NDAT) Application with Southern California Edisor~
Company for the potential provision of electric service to the Victoria Arbors development.
area by the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility.
A critical element of the City's plans to serve this area is the construction of an electrical~
distribution system to relay energy from the City's proposed substation and interconnectior~
with Southern California Edison's transmission system, to be located at the southeast
corner of Rochester Avenue and Stadium Parkway, to the Victoria Arbors Master Plan
area. Council initiated the preliminary design and final design of the offsite electrical
distribution system via the approval of professional services agreements with Butsko Utility'
Design on December 18, 2002 and April 16, 2003, respectively. The project was separated
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
AWARD OF CONTRACT TO POUK & STEINLE FOR ELECTRICAL DISTRIBUTION CABLING,
CONNECTIONS, AND EQUIPMENT PROJECT
NOVEMBER 19, 2003
PAGE 2
into two major sections: 1) Cabling, Connections, and Equipment Section; 2) Conduit and
Substructure Section. The Conduit and Substructure Section was in turn segregated into
three subsections: 1) Rochester Avenue and Foothill Boulevard; 2) Day Creek Boulevard;
3) Cultural Center Drive. These subsections were handled as separate bids from the
Cabling, Connections, and Equipment Section and are currently under construction.
Additionally, the conduit and substructure elements of two other vital components of the
distribution system (Victoria Gardens Lane and the complete Victoria Gardens Mall onsite
system) will be constructed by the developer of the mall per the provisions of the
Distribution and Service Extension Agreement previously executed by Victoria Gardens
Mall, LLC and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The combination of the City's three offsite
Conduit and Substructure Sections and the developer's onsite Conduit and Substructure
Sections will result in a complete system of electrical conduits and substructures.
The final design of the necessary cabling and other electrical components that will occupy
the conduits and substructures within all five of these conduit and substructure sections
was completed and, on September 17, 2003, City Council approved a resolution
authorizing the advertising of the "Notice Inviting Bids" and approving plans and
specifications for the 12 Ky Electrical Distribution System Cabling, Connections, and
Equipment Project. At the time of the bid opening for this project, on November 12, 2003,
the City was in receipt of one bid from Pouk & Steinle, inc. in an amount of $1,691,656.82
Staff has reviewed the bid submitted by Pouk & Steinle, Inc. and determined that it meets
the needs of the City. The cost for this project was included in the original financial model
presented to City Council at the special meeting of April 16, 2003, at which time City
Council approved the full implementation of the municipal utility. Pouk and Steinle's bid
amount is approximately $200,000 less than the engineer's estimate for this project and is
approximately $400,000 less than the more general and conservative budget line item
included in the most recently updated financial model. To date, although the exact
amounts for individual elements of the municipal utility's planned infrastructure have
changed, total actual expenditures have maintained consistency with the total projected
capital expenditures included in the original financial model of April 16, 2003.
It is recommended that Council approve the recommended action.
Respectfully Submitted,
William J. O'Neil
City Engineer
RAN C H O C U C A M O N G A
I~N GINI~I~I~INC D/~PAI~THI~N T
Staff Report
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Jon Gillespie, Traffic Engineer
SUBJECT': ACCEPT BIDS RECEIVED AND AWARD AND AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION
OF THE CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $437,437.00 TO THE APPARENT
LOW BIDDER, ALL AMERICAN ASPHALT, AND AUTHORIZE THE
EXPENDITURE OF A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $43,743.00
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF BASE LINE ROAD TRAFFIC AND STREET
IMPROVEMENTS TO BE FUNDED FROM ACCOUNT NO. 1124-303-
5650/1283124-0 (TRANSPORTATION FEE PROGRAM FUNDS)
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council accept the bids received and award and authorize the
execution of the contract in the amount of $437,437 to the apparent Iow bidder, All American
Asphalt, and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $43,743 for the
construction of Base Line Road Traffic and Street Improvements, to be funded from Account No.
1124-303-5650/1283124-0 (Transportation Fee Program Funds.)
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
Per previous Council action, bids were solicited, received and opened on November 4, 2003 for
the subject project. The Engineer's Estimate was $552,170. Staff has reviewed all bids received
and found to be complete and in accordance with the bid requirements. The City received bids
from 10 contractors. The average amount bid by the 10 contractors was $539,184. . .
The scope of work to be performed in general consists of installing a traffic signal on Base Line
Road at the southbound 1-15 Freeway on/off ramps, widening Base Line Road in order to provide
two (2) westbound left turn lanes, widening the southbound 1-15 Freeway on and off ramps to
provide two (2) lanes, overlaying the pavement on Base Line Road from East Avenue to a point
1040 ft west of East Avenue, and installing new traffic signs, striping and pavement markers.
This project is to be funded from Transportation Fee Program funds, Account #1124-303-
5650/1283124-0. City staff has obtained an encroachment permit from Caltrans for this work.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Base Line Road Traffic and Street Improvements
November 19, 2003
Page 2
Staff has reviewed all bids received and found them to be complete and in accordance with the
bid requirements. Any irregularities were determined to be inconsequential. Staff has completed
the required background investigation, and finds all bidders to meet the requirements of the bid
documents.
Re, c.~.ectfully submitted, ' ~
Wi~ia¢ J. O'Neil
Cit~/-Engineer
Attachments: Vicinity Map and Bid Summary
Vi'cinity Map'
BID'SuMMARy FOR BID OPENING NOVEMBER 4, 2003 APPARENTLO~BIDDER
Base Line Road Traffic and Street Improvements ENGINEERS COST
......... Ail American Asnhalt R..I. Nohle Cnmpnny
UNIT UNIT UNIT BID CORRECTEI
NO QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT AMOUNT
1. I LS Construction Survey Staking $14,000.00 $14,000.00 $8,154.86 $8,1 ~4.86 $28,000.00 $28,000.00 $28,000.00
2. I LS Mobilization $26,000.00 $26,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $19,250.00 $19,250.00 $19,250.00
3. I LS Cleadng and Grubbing $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00
4. 40 M Remove Metal Beam Guard Rail $40.00 $1,600.00 $27.00 $1,080.00 $68.00 $2,720.00 $2,720.00
5. 1300 SM RemoveBaseandSurfacing $20.00 $26,000.0(~ $8.50 $11,050.00 $12.70 $16,510.00 $16,510.0C
6. 180 M Remove Asphalt Concrete Dike $4.00 $720.0(~ $6.50 $1,170.00 $4.28 $770.40 $770.41~
7. 5 EA ~djust Manhole Frame and Coverto Grade $650.0(1 $3,250.00 $350.00 $1,750.0£ $480.00 $2,400.00 $2,400.00
8 5 EA [djusl Water Valve Cover to Grade $650.00 $3,250.00 $350.00 $1,750.0(2 $90.00 $450.00 $450.00
9. 810 CM Jndassified Excavation (F) $35.00 $28,350.00 $22.00 $17,820.00 $28.00 $22,680.00 $22,680.00
10. 480 CM UndassifiedFill(F) $30.00 $14,400.00 $22.00 $10,560.00 $20.00 $9,600.00 $9,600.00
11. 450 SM Aggregate Base (Class ll} $10.00 $4,500.00 $24.00 $10,800.00 $8.75 $3,937.50 $3,937.50
12. 1800 SM Road Mixed Cement Treated Base (Class A) $15.00 $27,000.00 $17.85 $32,130.00 $15.67 $28,206.00 $28,206.00
13. 8000 SM Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix (AHRM) Oveday $9.00 $72,000.00 $7.77 $62,160.00 $7.05 $56,400.00 $56,400.00
14. 800 SM Cold Mill Asphalt Concrete Pavement $6.00 $4,800.00 $5.00 $4,000.00 $7.15 $5,720.00 $5,720.00
15. 2200 SM ~.sphaltConomteCrypeA) $22.00 $48,400.00 $13.00 $28,600.00 $18.10 $39,820.00 $39,820.00
16. 18C M ~sphalt Concm/s Oike (Type 0) $8.00 $1,440.0C $30.00 $5,400.00 $24.35 $4,383.00 $4,383.00
17. 11 (2 M ~§0 mm Full Depth Asphalt Concrete $26.00 $2,860.0C $20.00 $2,200.00 $18.70 $2,057.00 $2,057.00
18. 8 SM ~,sphalt Concrete Overside Drain $40.00 $320.0(2 $58.0~0 $464.00 $163.00 $1,304.00 $1,304.00
19. 110 M 2oncrete Curb (A1-150) $8.00 $880.00 $51.00 $5,610.00 $80.20 $8,822.00 $8,822.00
20. 4 EA Concrete Curb Ramp $850.00 $3,400.00 $900.00 $3,600.0(2 $1,220.00 $4,880.00 $4,880.0(2
21. 40 M Metal Beam GuardRail $100.00 $4,000.00 $85.00 $3,400.0(2 $134.00 $5,360.00 $5,360.0(~
22. I LS ErosionContml(lypeD) $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $1,250.00 $1,250.00 $12,500.00 $12,500.00 $12,500.0(2
23. 1 LS Signing and Stdpiog $6,000.00 $6,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $12,300.00 $12,300.00 $12,300.00
24. I LS Signal and Lighting (SB MS Ramp/Baseline Rd.) $110,000.00 $110,000.00 $108,000.00 $108,000.00 $113,000.00 $113,000.00 $113,000.00
25. 1 LS Ramp Metering 8, Lighting $22,000.00 $22,000.00 $7,700.00 $7,700.00 $7,700.00 $7,700.00 $7,700.00
26. 1 LS Modify Signal and Lighting (East Ave./Baseline Rd.) $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $18,300.0(~ $18,300.00 $18,300.00
2?. LS Traffic Control $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $48,041.14 $48,041.14 $26,500.00 $26,500.00 $26,500.00
28. LS =repute Water Pollution Control Program $5,000.0(~ $5,000.00 $2,626.00 $2,626.00 $2,675.00 $2,675.00 $2,675.00
29. LS Nater Pollution Control $30,000.00 $30,000.0(2 $2,121.00 $2,121.00 $5,800.00 $5,800.00[ $5,800.00
BID 'SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING NOVEMBER 4, 2003
Base Line Road Traffic and Street Improvements Sequel Contractors, Inc. Alliance Streetworks, Inc. Hillcrest Contracting, Palp, Inc. DBA Excel
inc. Paving Company
UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT
NO QT¥ UNIT DESCRIPTION COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT
1, LS :Construc~ionSurveySlakit~g $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $18,162.00 $18,162.00
2. I LS Mobilization $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.0(} $30,000.00 $30,000.00 $11,000.00 $11,000.00
3. ] LS Clearing and Grubbing $25,000.00 $25,000.00 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.0£
4. 40 M Remove Melal Beam Guard Rail $30.00 $1,200.00 $70.00 $2,800.00 $63.00 $2,520.00 $30.00 $1,200.0(}
5. 1300 SM RemoveBaseandSutfadng $16.00 $20,800.00 $17.00 $22,100.00 $15.50 $20,150.00 $20.00 $26,000.00
6. 180 M Remove Asphalt Concrete Dike $6.00 $1,080.0C $10.00 $1,800.00 $7.20 $1,296.0(} $5.00 $900.00
7 5 EA ~,djust Manhole Frame and Cover to Grade $300.00 $1,500.0(} $300.00 $1,500.00 $480.00 $2,400.00 $530.00 $2,650.00
8. 5 EA ~,djust Water Valva Cover to Grade $300.00 $1,500.00 $300.00 $1,500.00 $150.00 $750.00 $255.00 $ ],275.00
9. 810 CM JnclassifiedExcavat~n(F) $20.00 $16,200.00 $35.00 $28,350.00 $24.50 $19,845.00 $19.00 $15,390.00
10. 480 CM UnclassifiedFill(F) $25.00 $12,000.00 $60.00 $28,800.00 $37.00 $17,760.00 $15.00 $7,200.00
1]. 450 SM AggregateBase(Classll) $9.00 $4,050.00 $20.00 $9,000.0(3 $17.00 $7,650.00 $16.5(} $7,425.00
12. 180( SM Road Mixed Cement Treated Base (Class A) $16.00 $28,800.00 $22.00 $39,600.00 $19.70 $35,460.00 $11.00 $19,800.00
13. 8000 SM AsphaltRubberHolMix(AHRM)Overlay $6.35 $50,800.00 $8.00 $64,000.00 $8.20 $65,600.00 $9.00 $?2,000.00
14. 800 SM Cold Mill Asphall Concrete Pavement $6.75 $5,400.00 $7.00 $5,600.00 $11.00 $8,800.00 $8.00 $6,400.00
15. 2200 SM ~,sphaltConcrete(TypeA) $12.10 $26,620.00 $25.00 $55,000.00 $16.70 $36,740.00 $22.00 $48,400.00:
16 18(3 M ~sphalt Coo,a u[u Dike 0'ype D) $23.00 $4,140.0C $40.00 $7,200.00 $30.00' $5,400.0(} $32.50 $5,850.0(}
17. 11(} M 190 mm Full Depth Asphalt Concrete $15.00 $1,650.0(} $80.00 $8,800.00 $39.00 $4,290.0(} $43.00 $4,730.0(}
18. 8 SM ~,sphalt Concrete Overside Drain $112.00 $896.00 $200.00 $1,600.00 $130.00 $1,040.0(} $290.00 $2,320.00
19. 110 M ;oncrete Curb (A1-150) $40.00 $4,400.00 $50.00 $5,500.00 $55.00 $6,050.0(} $94.00 $10,340.00
20. 4 EA ~oncmte Curb Ramp $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $1,000.00 $4,000.00 $1,000.00 $4,000.0(} $1,700.00 $6,800.00
21. 40 M Metal Beam GuardRail $80.00 $3,200.00 $135.00 $5,400.00 $83.00 $3,320.00 $90.00 $3,600.00
22. I LS Erosion Control (Type D) $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $1,300.00 $1,300.00 $1,260.00 $1,260.00
23. 1 LS Signing and Stdping $11,500.00 $11,500.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.0(} $12,000.00 $12,000.00 $13,300.00 $13,300.00
24. 1 LS SignalandUghtieg(SBl-15Ramp/BaselineRd.) $91,000.00 $91,000.00 $115,000.00 $115,000.0(} $113,000.00 $113,000.00 $118,000.00 $118,000.00
25. I LS RampMetedng&Ughting $17,000.00 $17,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.0(} $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,250.00 $8,250.00
26. LS Modify Signal and Ughting (East Ave./Baselioe Rd.) $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $18,000.00 $18,000.00 $19,500.00 $19,500.00
27. LS Traffic Control $60,000.00 $60,000.00 $16,000.00 $16,000.00 $39,000.00 $39,000.00 $73,000.0(~ $73,000.00
28. LS =repare Water Pollution Control Program $5,000.0(} $5,000.0C $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $2,900.00 $2,900.00
29_. I LS Water Pollution Control $5,000.00 $5,000.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $4,000.00 $4,000.00
~ Page 2 TOTAL $475.736.00 $497.550.00 ~'~0~ ~?t nn ,~q~a r, q9 nnl
BID' SUMMARy FOR BID OPENING NOVEMBER 4, 2003
Base Line Road Traffic and Street Improvements Sully-Miller Contracting Company. Laird Construction Co., [
-- !nc. Gentry Brothers, Inc.
UNIT BID CORRECTEE UNIT UNIT
NO QTY ! UNIT DESCRIPTION COST AMOUNT AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT
1. 1 LS Construction Survey Staking $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,500.00 $8,500.00
2. 1 L8 Mobilization $19,215.00 $19,215.00 $19,215.00 $79,657.00 $79,657.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00
3. 1 LS Clearing and Grubbing $2,800.00 $2,800.00 $2,800.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $78,000.00 $78,000.00
4. 40 M Remove Metal Beam Guard Rail $32.00 $1,280.00 $1,280.00 $50.00 $2,000.00 $44.00 $1,760.00
5. 1300 SM RemoveBaseandSurfacing $15.0(~ $19,500.00 $19,500.0C $5.00 $6,500.00 $15.00 $19,500.0(]
6. 180 M Remove Asphalt Coecrele Dike $3.00 $540.00 $540.0(] $25.00 $4,500.00 $3.50 $630.0(]
7. 5 EA ~,djust Manhole Frame aid Cover to Grade $500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $500.0(] $2,500.00 $300.00 $1,500.00
8. 5 EA ~,djust Water Valve Cover to Grade $250.00 $1,250.00 $1,250.00 $50.00 $250.0C $100.00 $500.00
9. 810 CM Unclas,~ifiedExcavafion(F) $34.00 $27,540.00 $27,540.00 $20.00 $16,200.0(] $30.00 $24,300.00
10. 480 CM Unclassified Fill (F) $32.00 $15,360.00 $15,360.00 $20.00 $9,600.0(] $50.00 $24,000.00
'11. 450 SM Aggregate Base (Class Jl) $22.00 $9,900.00 $9,900.00 $50.00 $22,500.00 $]0.00 $4,500.00
12. 1800 SM Road Mixed Cement Treated Base (Class A) $11.00 $19,800.00 $19,800.00 $5.00 $9,000.00 $23.00 $41,400.00
13. 8000 SM Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix (AHRM) Oveflay $10.00 $80,000.00 $80,000.00 $10.00 $80,000.00 $10.0~ .$80,000.00
14. 800 SM Cold Mill Asphalt Concrete Pavement $9.00 $7,200.00 $7,200.00 $7.50 $6,000.00 $10.00 $8,000.00
]5. 220C SM SsphaltConcrete(Typ~A) $21.0(~ $46,200.00 $46,200.00 $16.50 $36,300.00 $20.00 $44,000.00
16. 18(] M ~.sphall Concrete Dike ('rype D) $20.00 $2,400.0(] $3,600.0(] $25.00 $4,500.00 $28.00 $5,040.00
17. 110 M 190 mm Full Depth Asphalt Concrete $42.00 $4,620.00 $4,620.0(] $100.00 $11,000.00 $15.00 $1,650.0C
18. 8 SM Asphal Concrete Overside Drain . $106.00 $848.00 $848.0~ $500.00 $4,000.00 $220.00 $1,760.0(]
19. 110 M Concrete Curb(Al-150) $67.00 $7,370.00 $7,370.0~ $100.00 $11,000.00 $55.00 $6,050.0(]
20. 4 EA Concmte Curb Ramp $2,100.00 $8,400.00 $8,400.00 $5,000.0(] $20,000.0C $1,100.00 $4,400.0(1
21. 40 M Metal Beam GuardRail $95.00 $3,800.00 $3,800.00 $100.0(1 $4,000.0(] $90.00 $3,600.0(1
22. I LS Erosion Control (Type D) $2,800.00 $2,800.00 $2,800.00 $5,000.00 $5,000.0(1 $3,000.00 $3,000.00
23. 1 LS Signing and Stfiping $14,000.00 $14,000.00 $14,000.00 $1~,000.00 $15,000.0(1 $12,000.00 $12,000.00
24. I LS Signal and Lighting (SB l-15 Ramp/Baseline Rd.) $131,654.77 $131,654.77 $131,654.77 $118,500.00 ~$118,500.00 $115,000.00 $115,000.00
25 LS Ramp Metering & Lighting $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $9,000.00 $101000.00 $10,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00
26. LS ~odi~SignalandLighting(EastAve./BaselineRd.) $21,000.00 $21,000.00 $21,000.00 $19,250.00 $19,250.00 $19,000.00 $19,000.00
2.7. 1 LS rr~c Control $69,000.00 $69,000.00 $69,000.00 $50,000.00 $50,000.00 $60,000.00 $60,000.00
28. 1 LS Prepare Water Pollution Control Program $2,200.00 $2,200.0(1 $2,200.0(] $500.00 $500.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00
29. I LS Water Pollution Contml $7,600.00 $7,600.00 $7,600.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $2,000.0(1 $2,000.00
~ Page 3 TOTAl $547,777.77 $548,977.77 ;577.757.00 $639.090.00
BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING NOVEMBER 4, 2003
Base Line Road Traffic and Street Improvements Silvia Construction, Inc.
I LrN'IT
NO QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION' COST AMOUNT
1. 1 LS Construction Survey Staking $10,700.00 $10,700.00
2. I LS Mobilization $78,704.00 $78,704.00
3. ] LS Clea~ing and Grubbing $60,51 ].00 $60,511.00
4. 40 M Remove Metal Beam Guard Rail $122.00 $4,880.00
5. 1300 SM Remove Base and Surfacing $ l 0.85 $14,105.0(1
6. 180 M Remove Asphalt Concrete Dike $22.3(1 $4,014.0(1
7 5 EA a. djust Manhole Frame ahd Cover to Grade $600.0(1 $3,000.00
8. 5 EA ~,djust Water Valve Cover to Grade $82.00 $410.00
9. 810 CM Jnclassified Excavation (F) $62.90 $50,949.00
10. 480 CM JnclassifiedFill(F) $86.00 $41,280.00
11. 450 SM Aggregate Base (Class II) $24.50 $11,025.00
12. 1800 SM RoadMxedCementTreatedBase(ClassA) $18.40 $33,120.00
13. 8000 SM Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix (AHRM) Overlay $9.00 $72,000.00
]4. 800 SM Cold Mill Asphalt Concrete Pavement $ IO.80 $8,640.00
15. 2200 SM AsphaR Concrete (Type A) $15,30 $33,660.00
16. 180 M Asphalt Concrete Dike (Type D) $17.50 $3,150.00
17. 1]0 M 190 mm Full Depth Asphalt Concrete $175.00 $19,250.0C
18. 8 SM Asphalt Concrete Overside Drain $733.00 $5,864,0(2
]9' 1 lC M Concrete Curb (A1-150) $75.00 $8,250.01~
20. 4 EA Concrete Curb Ramp $3,440.00 $13,760.00
21. 4{1 M ~letal Beam GuardRail $160.5(1 $6,420.00
22. I LS Erosion Control (Type D) $18,500.00 $18,500.00
23. 1 LS ~igning and Striping $10,579.00 $10,579.00
24. I LS Signal and Lighting (SB 1-15 Ramp/Baseline Rd.) $112,621.00 $112,621.00
25. I LS Ramp Metering & Ughting $7,704.00 $7,704.00
26. 1 LS ModifySignalandUghting(EastAve./SaselineRd.) $18,190.00 $18,190.00
22. 1 LS Traffic Control $53,571.00 $53,571.00
228. 1 LS Prepare Water Pollution Control Program $2,675.00 $2,675.00
29~.I 1i LS Water Pollution Control $9,200.00 $9,200.00
I
~ Page 4 TOTAL $716.732.001
R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A
E~GIN E ERIN G DE PART'lENT
StaffRq ort
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Joe Stofa Jr., Associate Engineer
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF A MASTER PLAN TRANSPORTATION FACILITY
REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TRAFFIC
SIGNAL AT THE INTERSECTION OF BASE LINE ROAD AND ELENA
WEST IN CONNECTION WITH DEVELOPMENT OF TRACT 16239,
SUBMITTED BY DPDG FUND III, LLC., TO BE FUNDED FROM
TRANSPORTATION REIMBURSEMENT ACCOUNT NO.
11243035650/1026124-0
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving the
Transportation Facility Reimbursement Agreement for construction of Base Line Road
and Elena West traffic signal and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said
agreement and to cause same to record.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
As a Condition of Approval of Tract 16239, DPDG Fund III, LLC, the developer, was
required to construct a traffic signal at the intersection of Base Line Road and Elena
West.
The above required signal improvements has been completed by the developer and
accepted by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
The developer has submitted an itemized statement to the City for reimbursement. The
total cost of the signal was $177,000 with Transportation Fee Credit against their
building permits in the amount of $120,000. The remaining amount of $57,000.00 has
been budgeted in the 2003-04 Transportation Reimbursement Account for said signal
improvements.
75
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
November 19, 2003
Page 2
Staff has reviewed the statement for construction costs submitted and have confirmed
the amount of $57,000.00 reimbursement to the developer for the installation of a traffic
signal at the intersection of Base Line Road and Elena West.
Copies of the agreement signed by the Developer are available in the City Clerk's office.
Respectfully submitted,
City Engineer
WJO:dlw
Attachment
VICINITY MAP
CITY HALL
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
??
RE$OLU'I~ONNO. O 3"~)~)~)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING A MASTER FLAN
TRANSPORTATION FACILITY REIMBURSEMENT
AGREEMENT FOR TI-IE INSTAII.ATION OF A TRAFFIC
SIGNAL AT THE INTERSECTION OF BASELINE ROAD AND
ELENA WEST
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has for its consideration a
Master Plan Transportation Facility Reimbursement Agreement submitted by DPDG Fund III, LLC,
the developer of Tract 16239, for the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Base Line
Road and Elena West; and
WHEREAS, the developer, at the developer's expense, has completed said traffic signal
improvements; and
WHEREAS, the developer request reimbursement for the portion of the traffic signal
improvements as entitled to per the conditions of his development by means of said Reimbursement
Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE that said reimbursement agreement be and same is
hereby approved, and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said reimbursement agreement on
behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest hereto and cause said
agreement to record.
~ A N C H O C U C A M O N G A
ENGINEERING D EPART~iENT
Staff Report
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO:. Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Walter Stickney, Associate Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: APPROVAL FOR AWARD AND AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT
IN THE AMOUNT OF $195,000 TO DAN GUERRA AND ASSOCIATES, AND
AUTHORIT~F~ THE EXPENDITURE OF A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF
$19,500, FOR CONSTRUCTION SURVEY AND ADMINISTRATION SERVICES FOR
PHASE 3A OF CFD 2003-01, TO BE FUNDED FROM FUND 614 - CFD 2003-01,
ACCOUNT NO. 16143035300/1442614-0.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council approve the Professional Services Agreement with Dan Guerra and
Associates to provide professional services for Phase 3A of Community Facilities District 2003-01, including
survey and construction administration services and authorize the Mayor to sign said agreement and the City
Clerk to attest thereto.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
Community Facilities District (CFD) 2003-01 funds the design and construction of necessary public facilities
integral with the proposed mall near Foothill Boulevard and the 1-15 Freeway, as well as future residential
development north of the proposed mall site. This infrastructure has been designed and will be constructed in
multiple phases. Phase 3A is designed with a construction contract set to award in December. This contract
will provide for survey services and contract administration necessary for the first phase of CFD 2003-01.
The City requested and received a proposal to provide construction survey services from Dan Guerra and
Associates. Their proposal met all of the City's requirements in an amount of $195,000.00 to be funded from
Account No. 1614-3035300/1442614-0. Dan Guerra and Associates has provided services to the City for
Phases lA and lB (phases of the tn:st of two CFD's funding all infrastructure.improvements). The firm is
uniquely aware of the problems inherent to the site and has a gmat deal of information already generated in
their records that will be used for this project. Staff has verified the cost for services as comparable with
engineering firms working on other projects for the City.
R~'g~ect'~t~y submitted, . ,~ ~
Wil ia~i~. O'Neil
City Engineer
WJO: WCS: ls
~ ^ N C H O C U C A M O N G A
111111'11111
]~NGISI~IN G DI~PAI~T~II~N T
Staff Report
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Lucinda Hackett, Associate EngineerO~
Richard Oaxaca, Engineering Techniciar~
SUBJECT: ACCEPT THE BIDS RECEIVED AND AWARD AND AUTHORIZE THE EXECUTION
Of THE CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT Of $75,865.00 TO THE APPARENT LOW
BIDDER, SILVIA CONSTRUCTION, INC., AND AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE
OF A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $7,586.50 FOR THE HAVEN
AVENUE PAVEMENT REHABILITATION FROM ALTA LOMA DRIVE TO LEMON
AVENUE, TO BE FUNDED FROM MEASURE I FUNDS, ACCOUNT NO.
11763035650/1376176-0
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council accept the bids received and award and authorize the
execution of the contract in the amount of $75,865.00 to the apparent Iow bidder, Silvia
Construction, Inc, and authorize the expenditure of a 10% contingency in the amount of $7,586.50,
for the Haven Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation from Alta Loma Drive to Lemon Avenue, to be
funded from Measure I funds, Account No. 11763035650/1376176-0.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
Per previous Council action, bids were solicited, received and opened on October 21, 2003, for the
subject project. The Engineer's estimate was $82,540.00. Staff has reviewed all bids received and
found them to be complete and in accordance with the bid requirements with any irregularities to be
inconsequential. Staff has completed the required background investigation and finds all bidders to
meet the requirements of the bid documents.
Respectfully submitted,
~lJa/m J. O'Ueil
City Engineer
WJO:LH]RO:[s
Attachment
BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING OCTOBER 21, 2003 I APPARENTLOWBIDDER
Haven Avert.,, ~, ........ o.,. .................. ENGINEERS COST
.......................... un .. om ~sta s~oma Drive io Lemon Avenue ~,~, 1 I~ViA]E Silvia Construction, Inc. Elite Bobcat Service, Inc.
UNIT ! UNIT UNIT I
NO QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION COST , AMOUNT COST AMOUNT
COST AMOUNT
1. 1 LS Clear & Grub, incl. removals of AC paving, & mobiliz., etc. $5,000.001 $5,000.00 $10,807.00 $10,807.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00
2. 4180 SY ColdPlane 0.10'Deep, see Plan $3.00' $12,540.00 $1.30 $5,434.00 $1.75 $7,315.00
3. 430 TONS Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix, incl. crack sealing & preparation $70.00 $30,100.00 $70.501 $30,315.00 $64.00 $27,520.00
4. 210 TONS Asphalt Concrete (R & R), incl. Pavcmentpreparation $50.001 $10,500.00 $48.40 $10,164.00 $56.00 $11,760.00
5. 330 TONS Crushed Aggregate Base $30.00 $9,900.00 $18.00 $5,940.00 $17.001 $5,610.00
6. 1 EA Adjust to Grade (Manholes) $500.00 $500.00 $2,200.00 $2,200.00 $475.00' $475.00
7. 3 EA Adjust to Grade (Water Valves; Gas Valve) $200.00 $600.00 $70.00 $210.00 $400.00 $1,200.00
8. 16 EA Rclpacelnductive Loop Detectors $400.00 $6,400.00 $200.00 $3,200.00 $225.00 $3,600.00
9. I LS Striping, Pavement Markings $4,000.00 $4,000.00 $3,110.00 $3,110.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00
10. 1 LS Traffic Control $3,000.00~ $3,000.00 $4,485.00 $4,485.00 $3,000.00t $3,000.00
TOTAL $82~540.00 $75~865.00 $78,480.00
BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING OCTOBER 21, 2003
Haven Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation from Alta Loma Drive to Lemon Avenue All American Asphalt ILJ. Noble Company Laird Construction Co., Inc.
UNIT UNIT UNIT
NO (~TY UNIT DESCRIPTION COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT
1. 1 LS Clear & Grub, incl. removals of AC paving, & mobiliz., etc. $4,550.00 $4,550.00 $9,200.00 $9,200.00 $16,274.00 $16,274.00
2. 418( SY Cold Plane 0.10' Deep, seePlan $1.951 $8,151.00 $2.051 $8,569.00 $2.00 $8,360.00
3. 430 TONS Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix, incl. crack sealing & preparation $70.50! $30,315.00 $75.00 $32,250.00 $70.00i $30,100.00
4. 210 TONS Asphalt Concrete (R & R), incl. Pavement preparation $97.00 $20,370.00 $48.00 $10,080.00 $45.001 $9,450.00
5. 330 TONS Crushed Aggregate Base $10.00 $3,300.00 $27.00 $8,910.00 $15.00 $4,950.00
6. 1 EA Adjust to Grade (Manholes) $555.00 $555.00 $325.00 $325.00 $1,250.00 $1,250.00
7. 3 EA Adjust to Grade (Water Valves; Gas Valve) $555.00 $1,665.00 $210.00 $630.00 $215.00', $645.00
8. 16 EA Relpace Inductive Loop Detectors $185.00 $2,960.00 $200.00 $3,200.00 $225.00 $3,600.00
9. LS Strlping, Pavement Markings $2,900.00 $2,900.00 $3,500.00 $3,500.00 $3,850.00 $3,850.00
10. LS l~raffic Control $3,950.00 $3,950.00 $2,700.00 $2,700.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00
· ~ · TOTAL i $78~716.00 $79~364.00 I $79~979.00
BlD SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING OCTOBER 21, 2003
Holland-Lowe Construction
Haven Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation from Alta Loma Drive to Lemon Avenue Hardy & Harper, Inc. Inc. Gentry Brothers, Inc.
UNIT I UNIT UNIT
NO QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT
1. 1 LS Clear & Gmb, incl. removals of AC paving, & mobiliz., crc. $9,500.00 $9,500.00 $12,996.00 $12,996.00 $21,000.00 $21,000.00
2. 4180 SY Cold Plane 0.10' Deep, seePlan $195'. , $8,151.00 $2.20 $9,196.00 $1.75~ $7,315.00
3. 430 TONS Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix, incl. crack sealing & preparation $76.00 $~2,680.00 $76.55. $32,916.50 $80.00 $34,400.00
4. 210 TONS Asphalt Concrete (R & R), incl. Pavement preparation $52.40' $11,004.00 $43.35 $9,103.50 $40.00 $8,400.00
5.1 330 TONS Crushed Aggregate Base $20.00 $6,600.00 $17.80 $5,874.00 $15.00 $4,950.00
6.i 1 EA Adjust to Grade (Manholes) $450.00i $450.00 $880.00' $880.00 $500.001 $500.00
$300.00
7.~ 3 EA Adjust to Grade (Water Valves; Gas Valve) $900.00 $93.00 $279.00 $20.00 $60.00
8.I 16 EA Relpace Inductive Loop Detectors $225.001 $3,600.00 $226.00 $3,616.00 $250.00 $4,000.00
9. 1 LS Striping, Pavement Markings $3,700.00 $3,700.00 $3,966.00 $3,966.00 $4,000.00, $4,000.013
10. 1 LS Traffic Control $4,500.00 $4,500.00 $2,452.00! $2,452.00 $3,000.00! $3,000.013
TOTAL ~ $81~085.00 $81~279.00 $87~625.00
BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING OCTOBER 21, 2003
Haven Avenue Pavement Rehabilitation from Alta Loma Drive to Lemon Avenue Vance Corporation E.G.N. Construction, Inc.
UNIT UNIT
NO QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT
1. 1 LS Clear & Grub, incl. removals of AC paving, & mobiliz., etc. $20,000.00 $20,000.00 $9,100.00 $9,100.00
2. 4180 SY Cold Plane 0.10' Deep, seePlan $1.00 $4,180.00 $2.55, $10,659.00
3. 430 TONS Asphalt Rubber Hot Mix, incl. crack sealing & preparation $67.00 $28,810.00 $119.00 $51,170.00
4. 210 TONS Asphalt Concrete (R & R), incl. Pavement preparation $61.00 $12,810.00 $56.00 $11,760.00
5. 330 TONS Crushed Aggregate Base $35.00 $11,550.00 $15.801 $5,214.00
6. 1 EA Adjust to Grade (Manholes) $1,250.00 $1,250.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00
7. 3 EA Adjust to Grade (Water Valves; Gas Valve) $75.00 $225.00 $25.00 $75.00
8. 16 EA Relpace Inductive Loop Detectors $200.00 $3,200.00 $250.00 $4,000.00
9. 1 LS Striping, Pavement Markings $3,300.00. $3,300.00 $3,800.00 $3,800.013
10. 1 LS Traffic Control $7,450.001 $7,450.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.013
TOTAL I $92,775.00 $99,778.00
Pn~e 2
HAVEN AVENUE PAVEMENT REHABILITATION
(FROM ALTA LOMA DRIVE TO I,EMON AVENUE)
.4
r ' $~
I' I I
~ 24TH
FOQ~'HILL BLV~
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
VICINITY MAP
I~ A N C H O C U C A M O N G A
I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
StaffR port
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Robert Lemon, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: Authorize the execution of a Right of Entry Agreement with Southern
California Edison Company by the City Manager or his duly appointed
representative for the construction of the electrical substation within the
Epicenter expanded parking lot, located at the southeast corner of Rochester
Avenue and Stadium Parkway
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended the City Council authorize the execution of a Right of Entry Agreement
with Southern California Edison Company by the City Manager or his duly appointed
representative for the construction of the electrical substation within the Epicenter
expanded parking lot, located at the southeast corner of Rochester Avenue and Stadium
Parkway.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
In response to the unstable energy situation in the State of Califomia, the City of Rancho
Cucamonga on August 31, 2001, authorized the creation and operation of a municipally
owned utility for the purpose of providing various utility services. The purpose of this
formation was to enable the City to explore options in dealing with energy issues at the
local level. Subsequently, on August 21, 2002, the Redevelopment Agency authorized the
filing of a Wholesale Distribution Access Tariff (WDAT) Application with Southern California
Edison Company (Edison) for the provision of electric service to the Victoria Arbors
development area by the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Utility. Since this time, the City
Council has approved various actions relating to the full implementation of the Municipal
Utility, including authorizing the construction of a jointly owned electrical substation and
interconnection facility within the Epicenter's expanded parking lot facility, located at the
southeast corner of Rochester Avenue and Stadium Parkway.
CItY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
RIGHT Of ENTRY AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON
NOVEMBER 19, 2003
PAGE 2
In accordance with Edison's construction policies, the City-owned portion of the substation
was to be built by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and the Edison-owned portion of this
facility is to be built by a contradtor working directly for SCE. On September 17, 2003, the
City Council authorized the award of a public works contract to Union Engineering, Inc. for
the construction of the City-owned portion of the substation and this portion of the facility is
currently under construction. Edison recently advised City staff that SCE's contractor would
be starting work on the Edison-owned portion of the substation in December 2003. In
connection with this planned construction activity, Edison requested that a right-of-entry
agreement be executed by the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Southem California Edison
granting SCE permission to enter and work upon the substation site, as such site is the
property of the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
The City Attorney was advised of this request and drafted a Right-of-Entry Agreement for
this purpose. This agreement is now presented to the City Council for its consideration. It
is recommended the City Council authorize the execution of a Right of Entry Agreement
with Southern California Edison Company by the City Manager or his duly appointed
representative for the construction of the electrical substation within the Epicenter
expanded parking lot, located at the southeast comer of Rochester Avenue and Stadium
Parkway.
Respectfully Submitted,
City Engineer
Date Issued: November 19, 2003 Date of Termination: April 1, 2004
RIGHT OF ENTRY AND IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
This Right of Entry and Improvement Agreement ("Right of Entry") is granted
by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a California municipal corporation, ("City" sometimes
hereinafter) to: Southem California Edison ("Licensee" sometimes hereinafter), with respect
to that certain parcel(s) of real property owned by City commonly referred to by the street
address(es) of: 8273 and 8313 Rochester Avenue ("the Premises" sometimes hereinafter).
I. Licensee desires to enter upon the Premises in order to investigate the suitability of
the Premises for installation of an electric utility substation and related conduit, wiring and
appurtenances and, if suitable, the installation of the same, ("the Project" sometimes
hereinafter) the type of which and the nature of the installation being set forth on Attachment
1 hereto (collectively "Improvements.")
2. City is willing to permit Licensee to enter upon the Premises in order that Licensee
may carry out the Project on the terms and conditions set forth herein.
3. Licensee agrees that it will carry out the Project with due care and in accordance
with acceptable methods commonly utilized in conducting the investigation and installation
of the Project.
4. Licensee agrees that, upon the completion of its investigation and/or after the
installation of the Improvements it shall repair all damage to the Premises and return the
Premises including but not limited to, the soil conditions and compaction, to the condition(s)
which existed thereon at the commencement of the Project. Licensee further agrees that, at
all times during the Project, the Premises shall be secured and entry thereon controlled by
Licensee, subject to subsequent demand or direction by the City, to preclude injury or damage
to any person or property resulting or in connection with the Project and/or any tests, taking
of samples, installation or other operations conducted by Licensee in or upon the Premises.
Further, Licensee shall, at all times, comply with all governmental regulations, laws,
ordinances or otherwise applicable or relevant to the Project and all portions thereof.
5. Licensee warrants that all persons participating in, supervising or overseeing the
Project, and all parties having responsibility to accomplish the Project, in whole or part, shall
be fully licensed or accredited to perform such investigations or construction, or portions
thereof.
752631 I 1/12/2003 1
6. Licensee agrees to bear all costs and expenses pertaining to the Project, or any
portion thereof, including design, materials, safety and security requirements. Licensee shall
submit to City's City Engineer all information pertaining to the conduct of the Project, and all
portions thereof, as said City Engineer deems necessary or advisable by him to ensure all
safety and security requirements are properly met.
7. Licensee shall, upon completion of the Project, provide to City three (3) copies of
all results on any investigation, planning, design and construction including reports, data,
information, maps, plans, photographs, film, videotape or otherwise which shall, upon receipt
by City, become and remain City's property.
8. Licensee shall not commence work under this Right of Entry until it has obtained
all insurance required hereunder in a company or companies acceptable to City. Licensee
shall take out and maintain at all times during the term of this Right of Entry the following
policies of insurance:
(a) Workers' Compensation Insurance: Before beginning work, Licensee shall
furnish to City a certificate of insurance as proof that it has taken out full workers'
compensation insurance for all persons whom it may employ directly or through
subcontractors in carrying out the work specified herein, in accordance with the laws of the
State of California.
In accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code Section 3700,
every employer shall secure the payment of compensation to his employees. Licensee prior
to commencing work, shall sign and file with City a certification as follows:
"I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of Labor Code which requires every
employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self
insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and I will comply with such
provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this Agreement."
(b) Public Liability and Property Damage: Throughout the term of this Right of
Entry at Licensee's sole cost and expense, Licensee shall keep, or cause to be kept, in full
force and effect, for the mutual benefit of City and Licensee, comprehensive, broad form,
general public liability and automobile insurance against claims and liabilities for personal
injury, death, or property damage arising from Licensee's activities, providing protection of at
least One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for bodily injury or death to any one person or for
622846 11/12/2003 2
any one accident or occurrence and at least One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) for property
damage.
(c) General Insurance Requirements: All insurance required by express provision
of this Right of Entry shall be carded only in responsible insurance companies licensed to do
business in the State of California and policies required under paragraphs 8. (a) and (b) shall
name as additional insureds City, its elected and appointed officials, officers, employees,
agents and representatives. All policies shall contain language, to the effect that: (1) the
insurer waives the right of subrogation against City and City's elected officials, officers,
employees, agents and representatives; and (2) the policies are primary and noncontributing
with any insurance that may be carried by City. Licensee shall furnish City with copies of all
such policies promptly upon receipt of them, or endorsement evidencing the insurance.
9. Indemnification: Licensee shall defend, indemnify and save harmless City, its
elected and appointed officials, officers, agents, consultants and employees, from all liability
from loss, damage or injury to persons or property, including the payment by Licensee of any
and all legal costs and attorneys' fees, in any manner arising out of the acts and/or omissions
of Licensee pursuant to this Right of Entry, including, but not limited to, all consequential
damages, to the maximum extent permitted by law.
10. Licensee shall, unless waived by the City Engineer, post with City a cash bond,
certificate of deposit or other similar instrument in a sum specified by the City Engineer to
secure Licensee's obligations hereunder.
11. City may terminate this Right of Entry prior to the termination date specified
above upon verbal or written notice to Licensee or its representative(s). In the event this
Right of Entry is so terminated, Licensee shall immediately restore the Premises as required
by paragraph 4 hereof.
12. No Warranty of Entitlement/Girl to City. Licensee expressly agrees and
acknowledges that the conduit and associated materials as described on Attachment 1 and
which comprise the Improvements are being installed at Licensee's own risk. Licensee
agrees that other than this Right of Entry it has no interest, legal or equitable, in the Premises.
Licensee acknowledges that it will seek, in the future, authorization to utilize the Premises for
commercial purposes pursuant to a lease or other similar instrument. Licensee agrees and
acknowledges the City is in no manner obligated to offer, accept or enter into the referenced
lease or other relationship pertaining to the use of the Premises as a result of Licensee's
present installation of the Improvements. Licensee expressly agrees that the Improvements,
752631 11/12/2003 3
once installed, shall become an unremovable fixture of the Premises and shall be a part of the
realty for all purposes. The Improvements are intended by Licensee to be a gift to the City
and an improvement to the Premises voluntarily made without further expectation by
Licensee of compensation, reimbursement, credit, offset, rent prepayment or any other
consideration or value being offered or recognized by City.
Licensee shall, upon completion of the Improvements, deliver and assign to City all
warranties, guarantees, and the like provided to Licensee by either Licensee's contractor or
the materials manufacturer.
13. No ConstmctionBeforeNotice-NoticeofNon-Responsibility. No work ofany
kind shall be commenced on and no construction or other materials shall be delivered for or
in furtherance of the Improvements, nor shall any development work be commenced or
materials be delivered on the Premises until at least ten (10) days after written notice has
been given by Licensee to the City of the commencement of such work or the delivery of
such materials. The City shall, at any and all times during the term of this Right of Entry,
have the right to post and maintain on the Premises and to record as required by law any
notice or notices of nonresponsibility provided for by the mechanics' lien laws of the State of
California. The work prohibited by this section until ten (10) days written notice thereof has
been given to the City includes, as well as actual on-site construction work, any site
preparation work, installation of utilities, street construction or improvement work, or any
grading, trenching or filling on the Premises.
14. Compliance With Law and Quality. The Improvements shall be constructed, and
all work performed on said Premises and all Improvements completed on said Premises shall
be in accordance with all valid laws, ordinances, regulations and orders of all federal, state,
county, or local governmental agencies or entities having jurisdiction over said Premises. All
work performed on said Premises pursuant to this Right of Entry, or authorized by this Right
of Entry, shall be done in good workmanlike manner and only with new materials of good
quality and high standard.
15. Time for Completion. This Right of Entry shall terminate, and the Improvements
shall be completed on or before April 1, 2004.
16. Mechanics' Liens. Nothing in this Right of Entry shall be construed as
constituting the consent of the City express or implied, to the performance of any labor or the
furnishing of any materials or any specific improvements, alternations of or repairs to the
Premises or any part thereof by any contractor, subcontractor laborer or materialman, nor as
622846 11/12/2003 4
giving Licensee or any other person any right, power or authority to act as agent of or to
contract for, or permit the rendering of any services, or the furnishing of any materials in such
manner as would give rise to the filing of mechanics' liens or other claims against the fee of
the Premises or the improvements thereon. The City shall have the right at all reasonable
times to post, and keep posted on the Premises, any notices which the City may deem
necessary for the protection of the City and of the Premises and the improvements thereon
from mechanics' liens or other claims. In addition, Licensee shall make, or cause to be made,
prompt payment of all monies due and legally owing to all persons doing any work for
fumishing any materials or supplies to Licensee or the Premises and the Improvements
thereon.
Subject to Licensee's right to contest the same prior to payment, Licensee shall keep
the Premises and such improvements free and clear of all mechanics' liens on account of
work done for Licensee of persons claiming under it. Licensee agrees to and shall indemnify
and hold City harmless against liability, loss, damages, costs, attorneys' fees and all other
expenses on account of claims of liens of laborers or materialmen or others for work
performed or materials of supplies associated with works authorized by Licensee.
In the event any lien is recorded, Licensee shall, upon demand, furnish the bond
described in California Civil Code Section 3143, or its successor statute, which results in the
removal of such lien from the Premises, or other evidence satisfactory to the City that such
lien will be paid, removed, discharged as a claim against the Premises.
Should any claims of lien be filed against the Premises or the improvements thereon,
or any action affecting the title to such Premises or the improvements thereon be commenced,
the party receiving notice of such lien or action shall forthwith give the other party written
notice thereof.
17. This Right of Entry is the sole representation of the agreement between the
parties, and that there are no oral agreements or representations between the parties hereto
affecting this Right of Entry and this Right of Entry supercedes and cancels any and all
previous negotiations, arrangements, brochures, agreements, representations and
understandings, if any, between the parties hereto and none thereof shall be used to interpret
or construe this Right of Entry. There are no other representations or warranties between the
parties and all reliance with respect to representations is solely upon the representations and
agreements contained in this Right of Entry.
18. Assignment. No assignment of this Agreement or of any part or
752631 11/12/2003 5
110
obligation of performance hereunder shall be made, either in whole or in part, by
CONTRACTOR without the prior written consent of CITY.
19. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of California.
20. Attorney's Fees. In the event any legal proceeding is instituted to enforce any
term or provision of the Agreement, the prevailing party in said legal proceeding shall be
entitled to recover attorneys' fees and costs fi.om the opposing party in an amount determined
by the court to be reasonable.
21. Entire Agreement. This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements,
either oral or in writing, between the parties with respect to the subject matter herein. Each
party to this Agreement acknowledges that no representation by any party which is not
embodied herein nor any other agreement, statement, or promise not contained in this
Agreement shall be valid and binding. Any modification of this Agreement shall be effective
only if it is in writing signed by all parties.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
COMPANY A Municipal Corporation
By: By:
Title: Title:
622846 11/I 2/2003 6
tli
R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Staff Report
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: James T. Harris, Associate Engine~='~'~'
Richard Oaxaca, Engineering Tech~lei~n.~
SUBJECT: ACCEPT THE BIDS RECEIVED AND AWARD AND AUTHORIZE THE
EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $153,900.00 TO
THE APPARENT LOW BIDDER, STEINY AND COMPANY, INC., AND
AUTHORIZE THE EXPENDITURE OF A 10% CONTINGENCY IN THE
AMOUNT OF $15,390.00, FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF TRAFFIC
SIGNALS AND SAFETY LIGHTING AT THE INTERSECTION OF
VICTORIA STREET AND ETIWANDA AVENUE, TO BE FUNDED FROM
TRANSPORTATION FUNDS, ACCOUNT NO. 11243035650/1285124-0
AND APPROPRIATE AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $44,290.00 TO
ACCOUNT NO. 11243035650/1285124-0 FROM TRANSPORTATION
FUND BALANCE
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the City Council accept the bids received and award and
authorize the execution of the contract in the amount of $153,900.00 to the apparent
Iow bidder, Steiny and Company, Inc., and authorize the expenditure of a 10%
contingency in the amount of $15,390.00, for the construction of Traffic Signals and
Safety Lighting at the Intersection of Victoria Street and Etiwanda Avenue, to be funded
from Transportation Funds, Account No. 11243035650/1285124-0 and appropriate an
additional amount of $44,290.00 to Account No. 11243035650/1285124-0 from
Transportation fund balance.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS;
Per previous Council action, bids were solicited, received and opened on November 4,
2003, for the subject project. The Engineer's estimate was $130,000.00. Staff has
CiTY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Re: Award Traffic Signals and Safety Lighting at Victoria Street and Etiwanda Avenue
November 19, 2003
Page 2
reviewed all bids received and found them to be complete and in accordance with the
bid requirements with any irregularities to be inconsequential; however, the apparent
Iow bid was higher than the budgeted $125,000 by $28,900. The Engineer's estimate
was appropriate at the time it was made but due to increased costs for materials, labor
and the preponderance of like work, prices have gone up. A review of current traffic
signal construction pricing and the closeness of all bids received indicates the apparent
Iow bid adequately reflects the proposed work and an appropriation of additional funds
of $44,290 cover the $28,900 overage plus a $15,390 (10%) contingency is justified.
Staff has completed the required background investigation and finds all bidders to meet
the requirements of the bid documents.
Res~;;h,,~ully submitted, .~
wilr¢_rnJ.
O'Nei--
City'Erfgineer
WJO:dTH/RO:Is
Attachment
//3
BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING NOVEMBER 4, 2003 Apparent Low Bidder
Traffic Signals and Safety Lighting at the Intersection of ENGINEERS COST
Victoria Street and Etiwanda Avenue ESTIMATE Steiny and Com~nany, Inc. Sierra Pacific Electrical Contracting
UNIT BID UNIT UNIT BID CORRECTED
NO QTY UNIT DESCRIPTION COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT AMOUNT
l.I LS Daffic Signal & Safety Lighting at Victoria Street
and EtiwandaAve. $130,000.00 $130,000.00 $153,900.00 $153,900.00 $154,500.00 $154,000.00 $154,500.00
TOTAL $130,000.00 $153,900.0C $154,000.00 $154,500.00
BID SUMMARY FOR BID OPENING NOVEMBER 4, 2003
Traffic Signals and Safety Lighting at the Intersection of Moore Electrical
Victoria Street and Etiwanda Avenue Contracting, Inc. New West Signal Pouk & Steinle, lnc.
UNIT UNIT UNIT
COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT COST AMOUNT
1. 1 LS Traffic Signal & Safety Lighting at Victoria Street
and Etiwanda Ave. $159,653.0(3 $159,653.00 $160,341.0(] $160,341.00 $165,475.00 $160,341.0C
TOTAL $159,653.00 $160,341.00 $160,341
Page 1
_., ,., :~. r-rojec[
._ -- '~k-~/,i~ ~-: ~/~2-,"
, Location
-' ~/-,.¢ti ,,,,
..... :,.. _. _L.. .... :Cz ...... ~. _ _.,R~W_ ............ 'r ....
"-':T' ,'~ ~_._~1 at the Zn~rmction of Victoria Street and Etiwanda Avenue
:' '.~ ,,~ -~------- ,
~ f~ ~!i-~ .,i i
/.' t,%1,~'
R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A
~/111'11 I'1 I'?!' IIIIIII I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Staff Report
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO:. Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Kenneth Fung, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECr: ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND,
ACCEPT A MAINTENANCE BOND AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR
IMPROVEMENTS FOR DRC2001-00423, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF
SANTA ANITA AVENUE, NORTH OF 4TH STREET, SUBMITI'ED BY MASTER
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
RECOMMENDATION:
The required improvements for DRC2001~00423 have been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is
recommended that the City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a
Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond and accept a
Maintenance Bond.
BA CKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
As a condition of approval of completion of DRC2001-00423, located on the west side of Santa Anita
Avenue, North of 4th Street, the applicant was required to complete street improvements. The
improvements have been completed and it is recommended that the City Council release the existing
Faithful Performance Bond and accept the Maintenance Bond.
Developer: MASTER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Release: Faithful Performance Bond No. B34227442 $9,100.00
Accept: Maintenance Bond No. B34227442-M $ 910.00
Respectfully submitted,
William J. O'Neil
City Engineer
WJO:KF:dlw
Attachment
VICINITY MAP
mOUR 1
~ TO POMONA ~ TO SAN
VICINITY MAP ~
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
//7
RESOLUTION NO. O3--~1 ~)/
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUOAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR DRC2001-00423 AND
AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION
FOR THE WORK
WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for DRC2001-00423 have
been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work is
complete.
NOW, THEREFORE, 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.
f~ A N H O C U C A M O N G A
"1~ IIII I I
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
S tffReport
DA'rE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY' Kenneth Fung, Assistant Engineer
SUBJEC'r: APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT
SECURITY AND ORDERING THE ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND STREET LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 FOR DRC2002-00601,
LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF VINEYARD AVENUE,
APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET SOUTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD,
SUBMITTED BY SOMMERVILLE-CONZELMAN COMPANY, A LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolutions accepting the
subject agreement and security, ordering the annexation to Landscape Maintenance
District No. 1 and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 2 and authorizing the
Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreement.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
DRC2002-00601, located on the west side of Vineyard Avenue, approximately 600 feet
south of Foothill Boulevard, in a Medium Residential District, was approved by the
Planning Commission on January 8, 2003. This project involves the construction of a
168 unit apartment complex on 12.53 acres of land.
The Developer, Sommerville-Conzelman Company, a Limited Partnership, is submitting
an agreement and security to guarantee the construction of public improvements in the
following amounts:
Faithful Performance Irrevocable Offer to Pay: $67,600.00
Labor and Material Irrevocable Offer to Pay: $33,800.00
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DRC2002-00601
November 19, 2003
Page 2
Copies of the agreement and security are available in the City Clerk's Office.
The Consent and Waiver to Annexation forms signed by the Developer are on file in the
City Clerk's office.
Respectfully submitted,
~am J. 0 Nell
City Engineer
WJO:KF:hh
Attachments
12 b
RL"DHILL COUNTRY CLUI~
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA VICINITY MAP
DRC2002-00601
8250 VINEYARD AVENUE 12.[
RESOLUTION NO. ~",.~ ~,
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT
SECURITY FOR DRC2002-00601
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its
consideration an Improvement Agreement executed on September 30, 2003, by Sommerville-
Conzelman Company, a Limited Partnership, as developer, for the improvement of public right-of-
way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located on the west
side of Vineyard Avenue, approximately 600 feet south of Foothill Boulevard; 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 DRC2002-00601; and
WHEREAS, 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.
/12-
RESOLUTION NO. t~),-~3 03
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE
ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND STREET LIGHTING
MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 FOR DRC2002-00601
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. 1, Street
Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 (referred to
collectively as the "Maintenance Districts"); 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 Districts; and
WHEREAS, such provisions also provide that the requirement for the preparation
resolutions, an assessment engineer's report, notices of public hearing and the right of majority
protest may be waived in writing with the written consent of all of the owners of property within the
territory to be annexed; and
WHEREAS, notwithstanding that such provisions of the 1972 Act related to the annexation
of territory to the Maintenance District, Article XIIID of the Constitution of the State of California
("Article XII1D") establishes certain procedural requirements for the authorization to levy
assessments which apply to the levy of annual assessments for the Maintenance Districts on the
territory proposed to be annexed to such districts; and
WHEREAS, the owners of certain property described in Exhibit A attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference have requested that such property (collectively, the 'Territory")
be annexed to the Maintenance Districts in order to provide for the levy of annual assessments to
finance the maintenance of certain improvements described in Exhibit B hereto (the
"Improvements"); and
WHEREAS, all of the owners of the Territory have filed with the City Clerk duly executed
forms entitled "Consent And Waiver To Annexation Of Certain Real Property To A Maintenance
District And Approval Of The Levy Of Assessments On Such Real Property" (the "Consent and
Waiver"); and
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have expressly
waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act to the annexation of
the Territory to the Maintenance Districts and have expressly consented to the annexation of the
Territory to the Maintenance Districts; and
/2,3
RESOLUTION NO.
DRC2002-00601
October 15, 2003
Page 2
WHEREAS, by such Consent and Waiver, all of the owners of the Territory have also
expressly waived any and all of the procedural requirements as prescribed in the 1972 Act and/or
Article XrllD applicable to the authorization to the levy the proposed annual assessment against the
Territory set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and have
declared support for, consent to and approval of the authorization of levy such proposed annual
assessment set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, at this time the City Council desires to order the annexation of the Territory to
the Maintenance Districts and to authorize the levy of annual assessments against the Territory in
amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit C hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: That the above recitals are all tree and correct.
SECTION 2: The City Council hereby finds and determines that:
a. The annual assessments proposed to be levied on each parcel in the Territory do not
exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on each such
parcel from the Improvements.
b. The proportional special benefit derived by each parcel in the Territory from the
Improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the cost of the
maintenance of the Improvement.
c. Only special benefits will be assessed on the Territory by the levy of the proposed
annual assessments.
SECTION 3: This legislative body hereby orders the annexation of the Territory to the
Maintenance Districts, approves the financing of the maintenance of the Improvements from the
proceeds of annual assessments to be levied against the Territory and approves and orders the levy of
annual assessments against the Territory in amounts not to exceed the amounts set forth in Exhibit B.
SECTION 4: AIl future proceedings of the Maintenance Districts, including the levy of all
assessments, shall be applicable to the Territory.
Exhibit A
Identification of the Owner and Description of the Property
To Be Annexed
The Owner of the Property is:
SOMMERVILLE-CONZELMAN COMPANY, L.P., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
The legal description of the Property is:
PARCEL 1: (207-211-06)
THAT PORTION OF LOT 18, SUBDIVISION OF LOT 10, CUCAiMONGA VINEYARD TRACT, IN THE
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 20
OF MAPS, PAGE(S) 44, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, LYING EASTERLY OF THE PARCEL OF
LAND CONVEYED TO SAN BERNARDINO FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT BY DEED RECORDED
DECEMBER 21, 1951, IN BOOK 2874, PAGE 447, OFFICIAL RECORDS.
PARCEL 2: (207-211-36)
A PORTION OF THOSE PARTS OF LOT 18 OF SUBDIVISION OF LOT 10, CUCAMONGA VINEYARD
TRACT, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP
RECORDED IN BOOK 20 OF MAPS, PAGE(S) 44, RECORDS OF SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY,
DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENTS RECORDED IN BOOK 1682, PAGE(S) 269 AND IN BOOK 2874,
PAGE(S) 447, BOTH OlqqCIAL RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, SAID PORTIONS BEING ALL OF
SAID PARTS LYING EASTERLY FROM THE EASTERLY LINE OF A 60.00 FOOT WIDE STRIP OF
LAND, TIIE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID STRIP DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE CENTERLINE OF ARROW ROUTE HIGHWAY (60.00 FEET WIDE)
DISTANT, ALONG SAID CENTERL1NE, NORTH 89 DEG. 54' 36" WEST, 652.19 FEET FROM A ONE-
INCH IRON PIPE MARKING THE INTERSECTION THEREOF WITH THE CENI'ERLINE OF
VINEYARD AVENUE (60.00 FEET WIDE) AS SAID INTERSECTION IS SHOWN ON RECORD OF
SURVEY MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 35, PAGE(S) 90, RECORDS OF SURVEY OF SAID COUNTY;
THENCE NORTH 12 DEG. 58'07" WEST, 607.24 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY 1210.23 FEET ALONG
A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE EASTERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 4019.16 FEET AND A
CENTRAL ANGEL OF 17 DEG. 15' 10"; THENCE NORTH 4 DEG. 17' 03" EAST, 856.51 FEET TO THE
POINT OF TERMINATION IN THE CENTERL1NE OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD (100.00 Icme, ET WIDE)
AS SAID INTERSECTION IS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF RECORD OF SURVEY RECORDED IN
BOOK 35, PAGE(S) 90, OF RECORDS OF SURVEY.
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NOS. 0207-211-06-0-000; AND 0207-211-36-0-0000
The above-described parcels are shown on sheet A-2 attached herewith and by this reference
made a part hereof.
A-1
/25
Exhibit A-2
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
VICINITY MAP
DRC2002-00601 12 {~11
Annexation to LMD 1, SLMD1 and, SLMD ,2 ' II
Exhibit B
To
Description of the District Improvements
Fiscal Year 2003/2004
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (GENERAL CITY):
Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (LMD #1) represents 23.63 acres of landscape area, 41.88
acres of parks and 16.66 acres of community trails that 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 41.88 acres of parks consist of Bear Gulch Park,
East and West Beryl Park, Old Town Park, Church Street Park, Golden Oaks Park and the Rancho
Cucamonga Senior Center.
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS):
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.
The 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.
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 (LOCAL STREETS):
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.
/2.7
Exhibit "B" continued
Proposed additions to Work Program (Fiscal Year 2003/2004)
For Project: DRC2002-00601
Number of Lamps
Street Lights 5800L 9500L 16,000L 22,000L 27,500L
SLD # 1 --- 4 .........
SLD#2 ...............
Community Trail Tuff Non-Tuff Trees
Landscaping DGSF SF SF EA
LIVID# 1 ............
*Existing items installed with original project
Assessment Units by District
Parcel DU S I S 2 L 1
168 168 168 84
B-2
Proposed Annual Assessment
Fiscal Year 2003/2004
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (GENERAL CITY):
The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $92.21 for the fiscal year 2003/04. The following table
summarizes thc assessment rate for Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General City):
# of Physical # of Rate Per
Units Assessment Assessment Assessment
Land Use Type Units Factor Units Unit Revenue
Single
Family Parcel 7699 1.0 7951 $92.21 $733,161.71
Multi-
Units 709 ! 0.5 3570 $92.21 $329,189.70
Family
CommIInd. Acre 2 1.0 2 $92.21 $184.42
TOTAL $1,062,535.83
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (DRC2002-00601) is:
168 Units x 0.5 A.U. Factor x $92.21 Rate Per A.U. = $7,745.64 Annual Assessment
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL STREETS):
The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $17.77 for the fiscal year 2003/04. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 1 (Arterial Streets):
# of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
l,ancl lT~ lTnit Tyne ITnil~ Ilnit~ P'act~r llllJts lTnit Reve. m~e
Single
Family Parcel 21,151 t.00 21,151 $17.77 $375,853.27
Multi-
Family Unit 8,540 1.00 8,540 $17.77 $151,755.80
Commercial Acre 2,380.36 2.00 4,760.72 $17.77 $84,597.99
TOTAL $612,207.06
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (DRC2002-00601) is:
168 Units x 1 A.U. Factor x $17.77 Rate Per A.U. = $2,985.36 Annual Assessment
Exhibit "C" continued
STREET LIGHT MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 (LOCAL STREETS):
The rate per assessment unit (A.U.) is $39.97 for the fiscal year 2003/04. The following table
summarizes the assessment rate for Street Light Maintenance District No. 2 (Local Streets):
# of # of Rate Per
Physical Physical Assessment Assessment Assessment
[ .and l )'~e ! Init Tyne l }'nits 1 lnit~ l~'actnr 1 lnit~ Ilnit Revem~
Single
Family Parcel 6050 1.00 6050 $39.97 $241,818.50
Multi Family Unit 24 1.00 919 $39.97 $36,732.43
Commercial Acre 19.05 2.00 19.05 $39.97 $1,522.86
Total $280,073.79
The Proposed Annual Assessment against the Property (DRC2002-00601) is:
168 Units x 1 A.U. Factor x $39.97 Rate Per A.U. = $6,714.96 Annual Assessment
c-2
I~ ^ N C h 0 C U C A M 0 N GA
N EERIN G L~E PART~EN T
Slaf:f Report
DALE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Willie Valbuena, Jr. Engineer
SUBJECT: ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND,
ACCEPT A MAINTENANCE BOND AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR
IMPROVEMENTS FOR DR 00-24, SUBMITTED BY DARRELL D. CLENDENEN,
LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF ELM AVENUE AND WHITE BIRCH
DRIVE
RECOMMENDATION:
The required improvements for DR 00-24 have been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is
recommended that the City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a
Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond and
accept a Maintenance Bond.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
As a condition of approval of completion of DR 00-24, located at the northeast corner of Elm Avenue
and White Birch Drive, the applicant was required to complete street improvements. The
improvements have been completed and it is recommended that the City Council release the existing
Faithful Performance Bondand accept the Maintenance Bond.
Developer: Darrell D. Clendenen
1215 Pomona Road Suite D
Corona, CA 92882
Release: Faithful Performance Bond Bond $13,700.00
Accept: Maintenance Bond Cash $1,370.00
Res_p_~ctf ully submitted,
City Engineer
WJO:WV:dlw
Attachment
I$I
CITY OF rrF~~
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
~G~G D~ON
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS FOR DR 00-24 AND AUTHORIZING THE
FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF WORK
WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for DR 00-24, 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 THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the work is hereby accepted and the City
Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorded of
San Bernardino County.
R A N H O C U C A M O N G A
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Staff Report
DATE: November 19,2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Vicki Chilicki, Engineering Technician
SUBJECt: ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND,
ACCEPT A MAINTENANCE BOND AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR
IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 14162, LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 19TM
STREET, AT THE WESTERN CITY LIMITS, SUBMITTED BY WALTON
DEVELOPMENT, LLC
RECOMMENDATION:
The required improvements for Tract 14162 have been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is
recommended that the City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a
Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond and accept a
Maintenance Bond.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
As a condition of approval of completion of Tract 14162, located on the south side of 19m Street, at the
western City limits, the applicant was required to complete street improvements. The improvements have
been completed and it is recommended that the City Council release the existing Faithful Performance
Bond and accept the Maintenance Bond.
Developer: Walton Development, LLC Bond No.
Release: Faithful Performance Bond 1845472 $293,100.00
Accept: Maintenance Bond 1845472 $ 29,310.00
Re s~f~ully submitted, /~-
Willia~ J. 0 Neil
City Engineer
WJO:VC:dlw
Attachment
/3¥
' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
I~IGINEERING DIVI~0N
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT NO. 14162 AND
AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION
FOR THE WORK
WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Tract No.14162 have
been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work is
complete.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucarnonga 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.
/3(,
R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A
1~ N ~ I N E E 1~ I N G D I~ PAD Y~ E N T
Staff Relmrt
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO:. Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William I. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Kenneth Fung, Assistant Engineer
SUBJECT: ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND,
ACCEPT A MAINTENANCE BOND AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR
IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT NO. 15174, LOCATED ON THE SOUTI-IV~EST
CORNER OF CHLrRCH STREET AND ROCHESTER AVENUE, SUBMITTED BY
KB HOME GREATER LOS ANGELES, INC.
RECOMMENDATION:
The required improvements for Tract No. 15174 have been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is
recommended that the City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a
Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond and accept a
Maintenance Bond.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
As a condition of approval of completion of Tract No. 15174, located on the southwest corner of Church
Street and Rochester Avenue, the applicant was required to complete street improvements. The
improvements have been completed and it is recommended that the City Council release the existing
Faithful Performance Bond and accept the Maintenance Bond.
Developer: KB HOME Greater Los Angeles, Inc.
Release: Faithful Performance Bond No. 11127489364 $1,907,300.00
Accept: Maintenance Bond No. 11127489364 $190,730.00
Respectfully submitted '
~ J. O Neil
City Engineer
WJO:KF:dlw
Attachments
VICINITY MAP
I~O~'CT.~ Z ~
CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT NO. 15174 AND
AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION
FOR THE WORK
WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Tract No. 15174 have
been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work is
complete.
NOW, THEREFORE, 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.
R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: William J. O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Kenneth Fung, Assistant Engineer
~: ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS, RELEASE THE FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE BOND,
ACCEPT A MAINTENANCE BOND AND FILE A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR
IMPROVEIvIENTS FOR TRACT NO. 15492, LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF MILLIKEN AVENUE AND TERRA VISTA PARKWAY, SUBMITTED
BY KB HOME GREATER LOS ANGELES, INC.
RECOMMENDATION:
The required improvements for Tract No. 15492 have been completed in an acceptable manner, and it is
recommended that the City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a
Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond and accept a
Maintenance Bond.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
As a condition of approval of completion of Tract No. 15492, located on the southeast comer of Milliken
Avenue and Terra Vista Parkway, the applicant was required to complete street improvements. The
improvements have been completed and it is recommended that the City Council release the existing
Faithful Performance Bond and accept the Maintenance Bond.
Developer: KB HOME GREATER LOS ANGELES, INC.
Release: Faithful Performance Bond No. 26 68 11 $1,715,423.00
Accept: Maintenance Bond No. 26 68 11 $171,542.30
Respectfully submitted,
Willia J~3. 'Nell
City Engineer
WJO:KF:dlw
Attachments
· VIOINITY MAP
TRA~T 15492
...~.:.:!.. CITY OF RAHCHO CUCAMOHGA
r". cOUNTY OF SAN BEi:{NAFKDIHO
STATE OF CALIFOP, HIA ////
RESOLUTION NO. (~),.~---~7
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT NO. 15492 AND
AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION
FOR THE WORK
WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Tract No.15492 have
been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work is
complete.
NOW, THEREFORE, 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 Bemardino County.
ORDINANCE NO. 719
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT DRC2003-00709,
AMENDING PORTIONS OF SECTION 17.08 RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICTS OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA DEVELOPMENT
CODE, ALLOWING PUBLIC STORAGE FACILITIES WITHIN
RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DISTRICTS UNDER SPECIFIC
CIRCUMSTANCES WITH THE APPROVAL OF A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN
SUPPORT THEREOF.
A. RECITALS.
1. On September 24, 2003, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing with respect to the
above referenced Development Code Amendment and, following the
conclusion thereof, adopted its Resolution No. 03-138, recommending that
the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopt said amendment.
2. On November 5, 2003, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the amendment to the
Development Code.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
B. ORDINANCE.
The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: This City Council hereby specifically finds that all the facts set
forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct.
SECTION 2: This City Council hereby finds and determines that the subject
amendment identified in 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 Title 14 of the
California Code of Regulations.
Ordinance No. 719
SECTION 3: Section 17.08.030 - Use Regulations for Residential Districts,
Section 17.08.030.E.5- Special Use Regulations/Recreational
Vehicle Storage or Mini-Storage Facilities, Section
17.08.050.F. 1 .d - Absolute P olicies/Land U se Conflict Mitigation
Measures/Orientation, and Section 17.08.050.F.l.e- Absolute
Policies/Land Use Conflict Mitigation Measures/Barriers and
Alleviation of the Development Code hereby are amended to read,
in words and figures, as shown in Exhibit "A."
SECTION 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, orword of
this Ordinance is, for any reason, deemed or held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent
jurisdiction, or preempted by legislative enactment, such decision
or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions
of this Ordinance. The City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga hereby declares that it would have adopted this
Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause,
phrase, or words thereof, regardless of the fact that any one or
more sections, subsections, clauses, phrases, or words might
subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional or preempted
by subsequent legislation.
SECTION 5: The City Clerk shall certify to 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 cimulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California.
Please see the following page
for formal adopt[on, certification and signatures
Ordinance No. 719
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 19th day of November 2003.
AYES: Alexander, Gutierrez, Howdyshell, Kurth, Williams
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
William J. Alexander, Mayor
ATTEST:
Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk
I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga,
California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a Regular Meeting
of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the 5th day of November 2003, and
was passed at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on
the 19th day November of 2003.
Executed this 20th day of November 2003, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
Debra J. Adams, CMC, City Clerk
Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17. 08.030
USE VL L LM M MH H
17. Utility or Service Facility C C C C C C
18. Recreational Vehicle Storage C C C C C
or Mini-Storage for public use
C. Accessory Uses
1. Accessory Structure P P P P P P
2. Antenna P P P P P P
3. Caretaker's Residence C C C C C C
4. Guest House P P P
5. Home Occupation P P P P P P
6. Lodging Unit P P P
7. Other Accessory Uses P P P P P P
8. Private Garage P P P P P P
9. Private Swimming Pool P P P P P P
10. Second Dwelling Unit (including p p p
elder cottage)
12. Feed & Tack Store (if accessory to
C
commercial stable)
13. Dormitory (if accessory to college or C C C C C C
school)
14. Uses in Historic Structures C C C C C C
D. Temporary Uses
1. Temporary Uses as prescribed in
Section 17.04.070 and subject to P P P P P P
those provisions.
2. Temporary trailers for use in
conjunction with religious and
C C C C C C
agricultural uses for a specified
interim period.
P = Permitted Use
C = Conditional Use Permit required
E. Special Use Requlations
1. Aqricultural Uses. Prior to development, the following agricultural uses are either
permitted or conditionally permitted on lots of 2.5 acres or more:
EXHIBIT"A" 17.08-4 07/03 //_..//~:~
Rancho Cucamonga Developtnent Code Section 17.08. 030
Minimum Site Maximum
Allowable
Area Per Number Of
Type of Animal Animal(s) Animals On Residential
Required An~/Site® District
7. Household pets other than a cat or dog None No Maximum All
8. Exotic or Wild Animals ia) ~a) All
Notes:
(A) Y~ung anima/s b~m t~ a permitted anima~ kept ~n the site may be kept unti~ such anima~s are weaned~
(cats and dogs - 4 months; large animals * 6 months; horses - 12 months)
(B) As established by Conditional Use Permit review.
(C) A minimum of 20,000 square feet of lot is required to maintain these animals.
(D) More than 5 birds or rodents per each 5,000 square feet of site area may be permitted subject to approval of
a Conditional Use Permit.
(E) A pony, which is defined as any horse measuring 14 hands and 2 inches or less in height at the withers,
may be kept in addition to the keeping of two horses or in lieu of two horses, three ponies may be kept on a
20,000 square foot lot.
3. Home Occupations. The use of a residence for business purposes shall be permitted
subject to issuance of a Home Occupation Permit (See Section 17.04.060).
4. Mobile Homes. One mobile home is permitted on a lot in a residential District, except
Very Low, subject to the following requirements:
a. The mobile home is p~aced on a permanent foundation system in compliance
with all applicable building regulations.
b. The mobile home construction is certified under the National Mobile Home
Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 and which was constructed after
October of 1976. Documentation indicating certification and construction date
must be submitted to the Building and Safety Division in order to secure valid
building permit(s).
c. The Design Review Committee shall determine if the placement of the mobile
home is compatible to the immediate area in which it is being placed in
accordance with Section 17.06.010 and the following criteria:
(1) The design of the mobile home unit shall be similar in character and
appearance to other dwellings in the area for such things as unit size, roof
overhangs, roof materials and exterior materials.
(2) All building setbacks, parking, coverage, height, width and sign
requirements of the base District shall apply.
5. Recreational Vehicle Storaqe Y~rd or Mini-Storaqe Facilities. The parking and
storage of recreational vehicles and mini-storage facilities in proximity to
residential users shall be permitted only on lots of 2 acres or more unless part of a
master planned development, subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
17.08-7 3/01
//-/7
Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17. 08. 030
a. All storage activities shall be screened from public view by a combination of block
or masonry wall, berming, dense landscaping, or building mass. The
development of mini-storage facilities may be considered in
residential land use districts as a means of mitigating land use
conflicts outlined in Section 17.08.050.F. There are certain locations
within the City where residentially designated properties are located
adjacent to undeveloped parcels of land where this transition
between the existing residential neighborhood and non-residential
influences (i.e. high traffic corridors, commercial or industrial land
uses, etc.) is a primary design issue that prevents desirable
development, resulting in such parcels remaining undeveloped or
under-developed. The mini-storage use would be considered in
situations where the facility would act as mitigational buffers for
residential developments impacted by unchangeable environmental
issues, such as traffic and noise, as determined by the Planning
Commission.
b. Retail or wholesale activity, Commercial dismantling, repair or storage wrecking
activities or the storage of junk or salvage materials or dismantled pads are
prohibited.
c. The development of the mini-storage facility is subject to all Site
Development Criteria as detailed in Section 17.10.040; and the
Performance Standards as outlined in Section 17.10.050.
6. Second Dwellinq Units. Permitted subject to the following criteria:
a. The unit may be constructed as an accessory building or attached to the primary
residence on a parcel in a single-family residential district.
b. The unit is not for sale, but for rental purposes only, or use by a member of the
immediate family.
c. The lot contains an existing single-family detached residence, and does not
contain a guest house.
d. The unit shall not exceed 640 square feet if the parcel is less than 20,000 square
feet; if greater than 20,000 square feet, the second unit can exceed 640 square
feet but may not be greater than 950 square feet or 30 percent of the main
dwelling unit, if attached. (Unit size is exclusive of enclosed parking space
requirement.)
Lot Size: A second dwelling unit may be established on a lot or parcel of land
having a minimum of 10,000 square feet.
Height: A detached second dwelling unit shall be limited to one story, shall not
exceed 16 feet in height, and shall not exceed the height of the main dwelling
unit.
e. The unit shall have a separate entrance from the main residence.
f. The unit shall provide parking and access per Chapter 17.12 and provide one
enclosed parking space per bedroom, not to exceed two enclosed spaces per
unit. The enclosed parking space shall not be located in the required front or
17.08-8 3/01
/
Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17. 08.050
7. The Project promotes energy efficiency through the use of energy efficient building
design (e.g., south facing windows, energy conserving building materials and
appliances, etc.) and site planning (e.g., east-west aligned units, landscaping for solar
access, etc.).
8. The Project contains trees protected by the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code that
are worthy of preservation; an application for a tree removal permit and report have
been submitted and healthy trees are preserved through proper site planning and
grading techniques.
F. Land Use Conflicts. The matrix in Table 17.08.050-F indicates the conflicts that are
presumed to exist between land uses. The types of mitigation measures listed in the
following sections are the design tools that should be employed either separately or in
combination to mitigate existing or potential land use conflicts. The Absolute Policies require
that such conflicts be effectively mitigated in the project design.
1. Land Use Conflict Mitigation Measures.
a. Open Space Setbacks. By providing an open space buffer between conflicting
land uses, conflicts can often be avoided. The width of the buffer required will
depend on the severity of conflict and the extent of landscaping. To work
effectively, the ownership, use, and maintenance of the open space buffer must
be cleady defined.
b. Landscaping and Topographic Chan.qes. As pad of an open space buffer or as a
treatment of land immediately adjacent to buildings, landscaping can be used to
reduce conflicts.
c. Dense Plantinqs of Ever,qreens Can Provide a Visual Buffer.
(1) Sensitive landscaping can soften the sharp visual contrast between two
abutting land uses by subduing the differences in architecture and bulk and
by providing a gradual transition rather than a harsh edge between uses.
(2) Dense growth of plants can be visually appealing but also can be used to
discourage unwanted and unsafe pedestrian or bicycle access between
land uses.
(3) Landscaping can be used in combination with other mitigation measures,
such as reducing the width of open space buffer required and soften the
visual conflict created by safety and secudty fences.
(4) Re-contouring of the land can alter views, subdue sounds, reduce glare,
change the sense of proximity, and channel pedestrian travel.
d. Orientation. The strict spatial proximity between land uses and the apparent or
functional proximity can be very different depending on the orientation of
buildings and activities in the two land uses.
(1) The buildings themselves can cause a buffer to be created by effectively
turning their backs on each other or by bufferin~! residential land
uses from offensive noise and traffic generating activities --
orienting views, access, and principal activities away from the other land
use. Care must be taken, however, that a hazardous and unaesthetic
"no-mans" land is not created in the process.
Rancho Cucamonga Development Code Section 17. 08. 050
(2) Alternately, the intervening space can be eliminated altogether if the two
buildings share a common back wall.
(3) An entire site plan shall be oriented so that the activities and functions are
aligned hierarchically -- placing those least compatible furthest from the
common boundary between land uses and those most compatible near
that boundary (i.e., single story adjacent to single story).
e. Barriers and Alleviation. It may be appropriate and necessary to use physical
barriers to prevent the undesirable attributes of one land use from affecting the
people and activities in the adjacent land use.
(1) Fences, walls, and berms can prevent the passage of people into areas
that would be unsafe or insecure.
(2) Light and noise can also be mitigated through physical barriers such as
fences, walls, berms, screens, landscaping, or compatible non-
residential buildings or structures.
f. Amhitectural Compatibility. In addition to the architectural considerations
involved in mitigation through orientation, the architectural design of buildings
can reduce conflict and promote compatibility,
(1) Materials, colors, scale, and prominence of buildings in adjacent land uses
can be coordinated so there is a gradual transition from one land use to
another rather than a sharp and displeasing contrast. Purely aesthetic
details that are "tacked" onto a building to cover up land use conflicts,
however, will cause more harm than good.
(2) The architectural compatibility should rise from a total consideration of the
function of each land use and the function of the space between them.
g. Circulation. Streets and parking areas can often serve to reduce certain types of
land use conflicts. Separation of conflicting uses with a street or parking area
can provide a buffer.
17.08-31
'~ H E CITY OF
~A~CHO CUCA~ONGA
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16038 - CARNEY - A request to subdivide
.817 acre~ of land into 4 parcels in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units
per acre), located on the west side of Klusman Avenue, north of Diamond
Avenue - APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files: Development Review
DRC2003-00015, Variance DRC2003-00017, Tree Removal Permit
DRC2003-00419, and Minor Exception DRC2003-00016. (Continued from
October 1,2003).
CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00015 - CARNEY - A request to develop
four single-family homes on .817 acres of land in the Low Residential District
(2-4 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Klusman Avenue, north
of Diamond Avenue - APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files: Tentative Parcel Map
SUBTPM16038, Variance DRC2003-00017, Tree Removal Permit
DRC2003-00419, and Minor Exception DRC2003-00016. (Continued from
October 1, 2003).
CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF VARIANCE DRC2003-00017 - CARNEY - A
request for a variance to reduce the required lot depth and reduce' the required
front setback, for 4 proposed single-family residences in the Low. Residential
District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Klusman
Avenue, north of Diamond Avenue - APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files:
Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16038, Development Review DRC2003-00015,
Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00419, and Minor Exception DRC2003-00016.
(Continued from October 1,2003).
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and approve
the Tentative Parcel Map, Development Review, and Variance, subject to the alternative design.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DRC2003-00017, SUBTPM16-38, DRC2003-00015 - CARNEY
November 19, 2003
Page 2
BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission reviewed the request at their regularly scheduled
meeting on August 27, 2003. At that time, the Commission received a staff report and took
public testimony from residents in the surrounding neighborhood. Several residents testified
against the Variance because of concerns with neighborhood compatibility. The public hearing
was closed and the Commission discussed the project. The Variance was approved by a vote
of 3-0 with one abstention (McPhail) and one absentee (Stewart). Judith Biewener, a resident
who lives across the street from the proposed development, appealed this decision to the City
Council in a timely manner.
The Planning Commission reconsidered the Variance on October 8, 2003, because the original
advertisement and Resolution of Approval did not adequately describe the proposed Variance
for the reduced lot depth and reduced front yard setback on Lot 3.
ANALYSIS:
A. General: The applicant originally requested flexibility from the following City standards:
· Lot depth - Reduce lot depth from 100 feet to 80 feet on Lots I and 2
· Lot depth - Reduce lot depth from 100 feet to 72 feet on Lot 3
· Front Setback - Reduce from 32 feet to 25 feet 8 inches on Lot 3
The .817 acre property is long and narrow and is proposed to be subdivided into four parcels
ranging in size from 7,246 square feet to 12,358 square feet. The minimum net average lot size
in the Low Residential District is 8,000 square feet and the four proposed parcels comply with
this standard. The site is surrounded on all sides by single-family homes with an average lot
size of 8,900 square feet. Each parcel will contain a two-story single-family home with a
three-car garage that will face to Klusman Avenue. Klusman Avenue, north of Diamond
Avenue, is currently about half the width (40 feet) of a local street. The applicant will dedicate
20 feet of his property in order to make Klusman Avenue comply with the required width of a
local residential street.
The subject property is an existing parcel of record and is essentially a remnant parcel from
pre-incorporation. County approved subdivisions exist to the east and west. The property is
unique because of its small size, long linear shape, and shallow depth. This narrow
configuration is a design challenge. The project applicant applied for a Variance to reduce the
lot depth from 100 feet to 80 feet to accommodate the proposed "wide-shallow" configuration.
The small lot depth also resulted in the need for a Minor Exception to reduce the rear yard
setback from 20 feet to 18 feet. The shallow depth is further exacerbated on Lot 3 because the
curve of the cul-de-sac bulb reduces the depth of this lot from 80 feet to 72 feet and reduces the
front yard setback from 32 feet to 25 feet 8 inches.
ALTERNATIVE DESIGN: The applicant and staff met with surrounding residents on
September 24, 2003. Four residents attended to represent their neighborhood. Staff presented
an alternative (see Exhibit "C") based upon the City's standard for a reduced 25-foot radius
turnaround, instead of a 38-foot radius cul-de-sac bulb. This alternative offers several
advantages: 1 ) eliminates a need for front setback variance on Lot 3; 2) reduces the amount of
/5'2
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DRC2003-00017, SUBTPM16-38, DRC2003-00015 - CARNEY
November 19, 2003
Page 3
variance for lot depth on Lot 3 (lot depth would be 80 feet, the same as Lots 1 and 2); and 3)
works within a standard 60-foot right-of-way (no additional dedication needed from existing
homeowners). Additionally, the applicant offered to redesign the homes to reduce the footprint
to eliminate a need for a minor exception for a rear setback and delete second floor windows or
use frosted "non-vision" glass along the west elevations to maintain privacy of the existing
neighborhood. On October 8, 2003, the Planning Commission approved the lot depth variance
based upon this alternative design.
APPEAL: Based upon testimony and discussions with the neighborhood residents, the
following reasons form the basis of their objection to the proposed development (including the
alternative design):
1. Lot Size - Residents believe that the proposed lot size is too small in comparison to their
neighborhood. The proposed lots range in size from 7,247 square feet to 12,000 square
feet, and the average lot size is 8,912 square feet. The proposed development exceeds
the City's standard for the Low Residential zone of 7,200 square feet minimum and
8,000 square feet average lot size. The proposed lots are smaller than the existing lots
to the west, which are 11,100 square feet minimum and the existing lots to the east
along Klusman Avenue, which are 12,202 square feet minimum. The residents
questioned whether the lots could accommodate swimming pools. The alternative
design provides a 20-foot rear yard setback that is wide enough for a standard size pool.
In addition, the lots all have substantial side yard setbacks that would allow sufficient
room for pools.
2. Density - Residents questioned the appropriateness of the proposed density. The
Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.02.140 defines density as "the total
number of dwelling units in a project site, divided by the gross area of the project site."
The gross area is defined as "the entire area within the boundaries of a project site,
building, or lot, measured to the centerline of adjoining street rights of way" (Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code 17.02.140). The gross area of the project site as measured
to the centerline of Klusman Avenue and Diamond Avenue, is 1.108 acres; therefore, up
to 4 homes are allowed in the Low Residential zone (2-4 dwelling units per acre).
Project density is 3.81 dwelling units per acre.
3. House Size - Residents believe that the proposed homes are too large for their
neighborhood. The proposed Floor Plans are 2,482 square feet and 2,855 square feet,
whereas, the typical home in the neighborhood is 1,600 square feet according to
residents. Larger homes typically translate into higher sales prices, which will raise
property values in the neighborhood.
4. On-Street Parking - Residents believe that not enough parking will be available on
Klusman Avenue. Currently, Klusman Avenue has only been improved on the east
(residents) side. This development would complete the missing street improvements on
the west side, thus doubling the on-street parking capacity. Also, all of the proposed
homes have 3-car garages, which exceeds the City's standard of 2-car garage off-street
parking, and reduces the demand for on-street parking.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DRC2003-00017, SUBTPM16-38, DRC2003-00015 - CARNEY
November 19, 2003
Page 4
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 ail property owners
within a 300-foot radius of the project site. A meeting was held with the adjoining residents on
September 24, 2003.
Respectfully submitted,
City Planner
BB:DC:Is
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - City Council Staff Report dated November 5, 2003
Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16038
Draft Resolution of Approval for Development Review DRC2003-00015
Draft Resolution of Approval for Variance DRC2003-00017
THE CITY OF
I~ A lq C 1t 0 CIICAHONGA
DATE: November 5, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16038 - CARNEY - A request to subdivide
.817 acres of land into 4 parcels in the Low Residential District (2-4 dwelling units
per acre), located on the west side of Klusman Avenue, north of Diamond
Avenue - APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files: Development Review
DRC2003-00015, Variance DRC2003-00017, Tree Removal Permit
DRC2003-00419, and Minor Exception DRC2003-00016. (Continued from
October 1,2003).
CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00015 * CARNEY - A request to develop
four single-family homes on .817 acres of land in the Low Residential District
(2-4 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Klusman Avenue, north
of Diamond Avenue - APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files: Tentative Parcel Map
SUBTPM16038, Variance DRC2003-00017, Tree Removal Permit
DRC2003-00419, and Minor Exception DRC2003-00016. (Continued from
October 1,2003).
CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL OF VARIANCE DRC2003-00017 - CARNEY - A
request for a variance to reduce the required lot depth and reduce the required
front setback, for 4 proposed single-family residences in the Low Residential
District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Klusman
Avenue, north of Diamond Avenue - APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files:
Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16038, Development Review DRC2003-00015,
Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00419, and Minor Exception DRC2003-00016.
(Continued from October 1,2003).
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council deny the appeal and approve
the Tentative Parcel Map, Development Review, and Variance, subject to the alternative design.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DRC2003-00017, SUBTPM16-38, DRC2003-00015 - CARNEY
November 5, 2003
Page 2
BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission reviewed the request at their regularly scheduled
meeting on August 27, 2003. At that time, the Commission received a staff report and took
public testimony from residents in the surrounding neighborhood. Several residents testified
against the Variance because of concerns with neighborhood compatibility. The public hearing
was closed and the Commission discussed the project. The Variance was approved by a vote
of 3-0 with one abstention (McPhail) and one absentee (Stewart). Judith Biewener, a resident
who lives across the street from the proposed development, appealed this decision to the City
Council in a timely manner.
The Planning Commission reconsidered the Variance on October 8, 2003, because the original
advertisement and Resolution of Approval did not adequately describe the proposed Variance
for the reduced lot depth and reduced front yard setback on Lot 3.
ANALYSIS:
A. General: The applicant originally requested flexibility from the following City standards:
· Lot depth - Reduce lot depth from 100 feet to 80 feet on Lots 1 and 2
· Lot depth - Reduce lot depth from 100 feet to 72 feet on Lot 3
· Front Setback - Reduce from 32 feet to 25 feet 8 inches on Lot 3
The .817 acre property is long and narrow and is proposed to be subdivided into four parcels
ranging in size from 7,246 square feet to 12,358 square feet. The minimum net average lot size
in the Low Residential District is 8,000 square feet and the four proposed parcels comply with
this standard. The site is surrounded on all sides by single-family homes with an average lot
size of 8,900 square feet. Each parcel will contain a two-story single-family home with a
three-car garage that will face to Klusman Avenue. Klusman Avenue, north of Diamond
Avenue, is currently about half the width (40 feet) of a local street. The applicant will dedicate
20 feet of his property in order to make Klusman Avenue comply with the required width of a
local residential street.
The subject property is an existing parcel of record and is essentially a remnant parcel from
pre-incorporation. County approved subdivisions exist to the east and west. The properly is
unique because of its small size, long linear shape, and shallow depth. This narrow
configuration is a design challenge. The project applicant applied for a Variance to reduce the
lot depth from 100 feet to 80 feet to accommodate the proposed "wide-shallow" configuration.
The small lot depth also resulted in the need for a Minor Exception to reduce the rear yard
setback from 20 feet to 18 feet. The shallow depth is further exacerbated on Lot 3 because the
curve of the cul-de-sac bulb reduces the depth of this lot from 80 feet to 72 feet and reduces the
front yard setback from 32 feet to 25 feet 8 inches.
ALTERNATIVE DESIGN: 'The applicant and staff met with surrounding residents on
September 24, 2003. Four residents attended to represent their neighborhood. Staff presented
an alternative (see Exhibit "C") based upon the City's standard for a reduced 25-foot radius
turnaround, instead of a 38-foot radius cul-de-sac bulb. This alternative offers several
advantages: 1) eliminates a need for front setback variance on Lot 3; 2) reduces the amount of
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DRC2003-00017, SUBTPM16-38, DRC2003-00015 - CARNEY
November 5, 2003
Page 3
variance for lot depth on Lot 3 (lot depth would be 80 feet, the same as Lots I and 2); and 3)
works within a standard 60-foot right-of-way (no additional dedication needed from existing
homeowners). Additionally, the applicant offered to redesign the homes to reduce the footprint
to eliminate a need for a minor exception for a rear setback and delete second floor windows or
use frosted "non-vision" glass along the west elevations to maintain privacy of the existing
neighborhood. On October 8, 2003, the Planning Commission approved the lot depth variance
based upon this alternative design.
APPEAL: Based upon testimony and discussions with the neighborhood residents, the
following reasons form the basis of their objection to the proposed development (including the
alternative design):
1. Lot Size - Residents believe that the proposed lot size is too small in comparison to their '
neighborhood. The proposed lots range in size from 7,247 square feet to 12,000 square
feet, and the average lot size is 8,912 square feet. The proposed development exceeds
the City's standard for the Low Residential zone of 7,200 square feet minimum and
8,000 square feet average lot size. The proposed lots are smaller than the existing lots
to the west, which are 11,100 square feet minimum and the existing lots to the east
along Klusman Avenue, which are 12,202 square feet minimum. The residents
questioned whether the lots could accommodate swimming pools. The alternative
design provides a 20-foot rear yard setback that is wide enough for a standard size pool.
In addition, the lots all have substantial side yard setbacks that would allow sufficient
room for pools.
2. Density - Residents questioned the appropriateness of the proposed density. The
Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 17.02.140 defines density as "the total
number of dwelling units in a project site, divided by the gross area of the project site."
The gross area is defined as "the entire area within the boundaries of a project site,
building, or lot, measured to the centerline of adjoining street rights of way" (Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code 17.02.140). The gross area of the project site as measured
to the centerline of Klusman Avenue and Diamond Avenue, is 1.108 acres; therefore, up
to 4 homes are allowed in the Low Residential zone (2-4 dwelling units per acre).
Project density is 3.61 dwelling units per acre.
3. House Size - Residents believe that the proposed homes are too large for their
neighborhood. The proposed Floor Plans are 2,482 square feet and 2,855 square feet,
whereas, the typical home in the neighborhood is 1,600 square feet according to
residents. Larger homes typically translate into higher sales prices, which will raise
property values in the neighborhood.
4. On-Street Parking - Residents believe that not enough parking will be available on
Klusman Avenue. Currently, Klusman Avenue has only been improved on the east
(residents) side. This development would complete the missing street improvements on
the west side, thus doubling the on-street parking capacity. Also, all of the proposed
homes have 3-car garages, which exceeds the City's standard of 2-car garage off-street
parking, and reduces the demand for on-street parking.
157
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DRC2003-00017, SUBTPM16-38, DRC2003-00015 - CARNEY
November 5, 2003
Page 4
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. A meeting was held with the adjoining residents on
September 24, 2003.
Respectfully submitted,
City Planner
BB:DC:mlg
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Site Utilization Plan
Exhibit "B" - Site Plan/Alternative Site Plan
Exhibit "C" - Conceptual Grading Plan
Exhibit "D" - Tentative Parcel Map
Exhibit "E" - Tree Removal Permit
Exhibit "F" - Building Elevations and Floor Plans (Original Design)
Exhibit"G"- Design Review Cornmittee Action Agenda dated June 17, 2003
Exhibit "H" - Initial Study Parts I and II
Exhibit "1" Variance/Minor Exception Justification Letter from Applicant
Exhibit "J" - Planning Commission Minutes dated August 27 and October 8,
2003
Draft Resolution of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM16038
Draft Resolution of Approval for Development Review DRC2003-00015
Draft Resolution of Approval for Variance DRC2003-00017
/ ~' .-'~ \
/ r-~ rj Ln , ~ ~ ~ ___~ ~
I~ I I I I I
R, I I I I I I L I ' I
*~. I I I L ..... J I .....
~.v',. L ..... J .... ~--J r-J , . - ...... J ~
q., I .... , ~' 'F=---n
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP )No %60~8 L ...... J
CONCEPTUAL gRADINg PLAN
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP No. 16038
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP No. 16038
!
/
Tree Removal Permit
A
Ordinance No. 276, perta n ng to the preservation of trees on private property, requires that no pemon remove or relocate any
woody plants in excess of fifteen (15) feet in height and having a single trunk circumference of fifteen (15) inches or more and
multi-trunks having a circumference of thirty (30) inches or mom (measured twenty-four (24) inches from ground level), without
first obtaining a Tree Removal Permit from the City.
Application i~ to remove (choose one): ~ 5 trees or less [] 50 feet of windrows or less
[] 6 trees or more* [] 51 feet of windrows or more*
Related Development Application:* ~)~'~
*Note: When associated with a development application or involves removing 6 trees or more/51 feet of windrows or more
requires a 10-calendar day notification period of all adjacent properly owners.
Name, Address, Telephone of Applicant:
Name, Address, Telephone of Property Owner (it other than applicant):
:~ ~Reasons for Removal (attach additional sheet(s)if necessary): ~ ¢Z~-'/z~' ,4' xf/~-z~' /,y'¢)~'/'/~
i=ropertyOwner,sSignature: Date: ~'~/~" ""~( ~
'This application shall include a Site Plan indicating location of all trees to be removed and retained. The Site Plan shall
*the location of the hoUse/garage and other improvements. The species, number, and size of the trees to be removed shall
.so designated. If a tree is diseased, then a written statement from a licensed arborist stating the nature of the disease shall
,equired. Application fee as established by City Council Resolution.
APPROVED
/
1/
Condition of the trees?
2 Any safety hazards to Demons, adjacent property or utility installations? /~ (-~
3. Any conflict with proposed improvements?
4. Proximity of other trees in the area?
5. Effect of tree removal on the aesthetics of the area and the public health, safety and welfare.. JtJ O~J ~
6. Am any of the trees required to be preserved by any specific plan, condition of approval, or historic landmark Designation?
7. Is an arborist required? ~j~
DESIGN REVIE~V COMMENTS
8:30 p.m. Rick Fisher June 17, 2003
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003 00015-CARNEY-
A request to develop four single-family homes on a .817 acres of land in the Low Rasident~al District
(2-4 dwelling units per acre, located on the west side of Klusman Avenue, north of Diamond Avenue
- APN: 1062-401-05. Related files: DRC2003-00016, DRC2003-00017, and SUBTPM 16038.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16038 - CARNEY-
A request to subdivide a .817 acres of land into 4 parcels in the Low Residential Distdct (2-4
dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Klusman Avenue, north of diamond Avenue -
APN: 1061-401-05. Related files: DRC2003-00015, DRC2003-00016, and DRC2003-00017.
Desiqn Parameters: The one-acre preperty is long and narrow and will be subdivided into four
parcels ranging in size from 7,246 square feet to 12,358 square feet. The site is surrounded on all
sides by single-family homes on an average lot size of 11,000 square feet. Each parcel will contain
atwo-storysingle-familyhome with three-car garage that will front-on KlusmanAvenue. Therewill
be two floor plans of 2,424 square feet and 2,855 square feet and each will contain a kitchen, living
room, dining room, family room, three bedrooms and three bathrooms. A 6-foot block wall exists
along the west property line and new 6-foot high block walls will be constructed between the homes
and along the street side yard of future Lot 1.
The narrow configuration of the lot has made development of this property difficult. The applicant
has applied for a Vadance to reduce the lot depth from 100 feet to 80 feet, and to allow an average
front yard setback distance of 35 feet instead of the required 37 feet, to accommodate the proposed
'wide-shallow' lot configuration. The small lot depth has also resulted in the need for a Minor
Exception to reduce the rear yard setback from 20 feet to 18 feet.
The exterior of the I~omes will be comprised of a brick veneer at the base of the buildings, stucco
and painted Masonite wood on the sides, wood shutters around specific windows, composite roof
tiles designed to simulate wood shake shingles, dual glazed windows, and painted wood railings
surrounding covered front porch areas. The three-car garages will contain roll up doom with
windows.
Klusman Avenue, north of Diamond Avenue is currently about half the width (40 feet) of a local
street and terminates at a 4-foot high block wall located near the mid-point of future Lot 3. A portion
of the street will be extended northward to allow access to future Lot 4. However, the applicant will
not complete the remainder of the cul-de-sac bulb because the propertyto the east is under different
ownership. The owner of this property will be responsible for completing the cul-de-sac bulb when
he develops his properly. Access to future Lot 4 will be compromised by this situation as will turn
around ability of cars on Klusman Avenue. The applicant will dedicate 20 feet of his property in
order to make Klusman Avenue comply with the required width of a local street. Instead, a futura
street will eventually connect with the terminus of Klusman Avenue and will be constructed by the
developer of the property east of this site.
.Staff Comments: The following comments are intended to provide an outline for Committee
discussion.
DRC COMMENTS
DRC2003-00015 AND SUBTPM16038 - CARNEY
June 17, 2003
Page 2
Maior I~sues: The following broad design issues will be the focus of Committee discussion
regarding this project:
1. Variance: Applicant has filed a Variance to reduce the lot depth from 100 feet to 80 feet and
to allow an average 35-foot front yard setback rather than the'required 37-foot average front
yard setback. Staff believes that the property's narrowness is a unique situation that
warrants consideration of variance.
2. Minor Exception: Applicant has filed a Minor Exception to reduce the rear yard setback from
20 feet to 18 feet. Again, because of the lack of sufficient depth of the existing property,
staff believes warrants consideration of flexibility from the Code standard.
Secondary Issues.: Once all of the major issues have been addressed, and time permitting, the
Committee will discuss the following secondary design issues:
1. Provide better 360-degree architecture by carrying more elements from front elevations to
the sides and rear. For example, window shutters, and accent siding.
Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee recommend
approval, subject to working out the suggestions above with staff, prior to scheduling for the
Planning Commission.
De~iqn Review Committee Action:
Members Present: Para Stewart, Dan Coleman
Staff Planner:' Rick Fisher
The Committee recommended approval subject to revising the drawings as listed below prior to
scheduling the project for Planning Commission:
1. Plan 1: Break up the large living room roof mass on the front elevation with either two
dormers or one larger dormer. Increase the size of the support posts around the front porch
to give them a sturdier appearance. Building materials used on the front elevation should be
used on the sides and rear of the house. Provide more articulation to the building.
2. Plan 2: Enhance the front entrance and porch area so that it becomes the focal point of the
house. This can be achieved by increasing the size of the support columns, enhancing the
gable above the front door, and providing more detailing around the front door. Building
materials used on the front elevation should be used on the sides and rear of the house.
Additional articulation should be provided to the second floor rear elevation, such as a
pop-out.
ENVIRONMENTAL
INFORMATION FORM
(Part I - Initial Study)
City ~; ~ ~g~ (Pie ~e lype or pril~ cte~rly using Ink. Use the t~b key to mov~ fr~m or~ ~ lo If~ ~ I1~
INCOMPLETE. APPL ICA TION~ W~ NO[BE PROCESSED. Please ~ ~t ~ is ~e m~ of ~ e~nt ~ en~m t~t
~e appfl~ is ~mple~ at the ~ of submi~l: C~ ~ff ~11 not be eva~able
~/~ .~ ~, ~
Ne~ & Address off.on pm~Hng ~is ~ ~ d~mnt f~ ~):
/TD
Information irldic~ted by an asterisk (*) is not required of non-consfruction CUP's unless otherwise requested by staff.
'1) Provide e furl ~'cale (8-1~ x 11) ~opy of the' USGS Quadrant Sheet(s) which Includes the project Si~, and indicate
the site boundaries.
2) provfde e set of colo/ photographs that show representative views into the site from the north, south, easf end west;
views in~ end from the site from the primary acce$= poibts that serve the site; end mpresentetive views of
~ignl~cant features ~ the site. Include · map showing location of each photograph.
4) Assessor's Parcsl Numbers (attech edd'Yfional shest # naceaserY): ' /0~ ~, " ~0 / -- ~
dedications):
Describe any proposed general plan amendmenf er zone change which would effect the I~OJect site
(attach additional sheet ff necessary):
thdude a desc~pti~n ~f ~ permit$ wh~ch wi~ be necessary fr~m the ~ily ~ Ranc`h~ Cuc~m~nge and ~ther
govemrnentel agencies in o~ler to fully Impierr~nt the project:
oass~it~ the physical $~ffing of the site as it exists befom the pn~jecl Including informaflon on topography,
· . Descrfbe eny
~ablflty, plants end animals, mafure trees, lmll$ end roads, drainage courses, end scenic
exlsling slruclure$ on site (including age end condiliOo) and the uae of the structureS, A~tech photographs of
elgn~csnt ~sture8 described. In addition, cite all sources o! informalion (i.e., geological andlor hyOrologia
biotic an6 arohaologtcal surveys, traff~ studies):
I'll
10) De~be the known cultural end/or historicel espect= of the site, Cite ell sOurCes of Inforrna#on (books, published
reports end oral history):
f f) Describe any noise sources and their levels fhat q~v effect the site (aircraft. roadwey i~olae, et~) and how they ~ effect proposed useS:
Yh'~ ~/',~-~,~f ,~ /£ A~x/'r~'~ /~ ~/w.;f ~z /~,,~,,~,~,',,~
12) ~scSbe the p~ed pmje~ In de~ll. ~ sh~ p~vl~ a~ a8~ue~ descdp~ of ~e ~ ~ ~ of u~ime~
use t~t ~11 ~su~ ~m t~ p~ p~e~. Ind~ i~ them ~ p~ed pha~$ ~ deve~p~nf, ~ e~ent of
de~lop~ni ~ ~ur ~h each pha~, e~ ~ en~pe~ c~tl~ ~ ~ch In~ A~ch edd~l s~e~s)
En~mn.~ln~Fo~' '~ /~~
13) De$cdbe the Surrounding properties. Including informeflon on plants and snimels ,~,Id any cultural, historiCal, or
$cenlc especfs. ~ndicate the ~ype of ~and use (re$id~nfia~ c~mmer~ etc~)~ intensi~y ~f ~nd u$e (~ne-fem~y~
apartment houses, shops, deparJmenl stores, etC.) ertd scale of development (height, frontage, setback, mar yard,
afc.):
. ......
f 4) Wilt the proposed prejecf change the pattern, scale or characfer of the surroundirlg general area of the project?
f 5) Indicate the type of sho~14erm end Ion,-term noise to be gene~ted, including source and amount. How will these
noise level~ effect adjacent prope~e~ end ofl-stte usaa. Whet methods of ~undproofing ere
· t6) indicateproposeflremovalsend/orreplecement$ofmatumor$cenl~t~ee$:
17) Indicate ally bodies of water (includl~l~ domestic water suppfle$) i~to which the site ~lreills:
-- '" C~t~d on ,5~Z~2002 4:{39 PM
18) Indicate expected amount of w~ter usage, (See A#echment A for usage estimates). For further clerfflcatlon, please
contact the Cucamonga Counb/ Water District et 987-2591.
e. Residential (gel~day) 70~ Peak usa (gel/Day)
b. CommerciaL/Ind, (gal/day/ac) Peek use (gal/mia/ac)
19) Indicate proposed method of sewage disposal, [~ Septic Teak ~Sewer.
if septic tanks em proposed, a~ach percolation te~s. If discharge to a sanitary sewage system is proposed indicate
expected dall)~ sewage generation: (See Attachment A for usage estimates). For further claHflsa~lon, please contact
the Cucamenge County Water District at 987-259t.
e. Residential (gel/day)
fl. Commeroiel/lndusfl'iel (gel~day~aC)
RESIDENTIAL P..ROJECTS:
20) Number of residential unite:
Detached (indicate range of parcel sizes, minimum lot size and maximum lot size:
~teched (indicate whether units era rental ~ for sale units): ....
21) Antictpatedmnge of sale prices encYorrents;
Rent (per mOr~) $ to $.
22) Specify number of bedrooms by unit type:
Created ,oe 5~22~2002 4:09 PM
Er~ro~mentelln~Form I .doc
24) Indicate the expected number of school children who will be residing within the prcjecf: Contact the ePpmprfete
~chool Districts es shown in Atlachment B:
a. Elementery: ...
b. Junior High:
c. Senior High.
COMMERCIAL. INDL~$TRIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL pROJECTS.
Z5) Descdbe type of use(s) end major function(s) of commercial, Indu,~rlal ~r institutional uses:._ .....
26) Totalfloorameofcommemial, lndust~fal, orinstitufionelusesbytype:
27) Indicate houm~ of operetio~f:
ES) Numberofemi~loyess: Total: .
Maximum Shift:
Time of Maximum ~hlff: ......
29) Provide breakdown of anticipated job classificagons, including w~ge and salary ranges, as well as en indication of the
rate of him for each classification (atlach additional sheet if necessary):
30) E~timetlon ofthe number of wo~er~ te be hired fhet cun'ently reslcla in the
CW:
'31) For commercial end indu~t~al uses only, indicate the source, type and amount of air pollution emissions. (Dote should
be verffled through the South Coast Air Quality Management District, at (8f8) 572-62~3):
Erlvimnment~llnfoFo,'m 1,doc Created or, 5/2Z/ZOO2 4:09 PM
/75
ALL PROJECTS
32) ~ave the w~ter~ $ewer~ ~m~ and ~~~d c~ntr~~ ~gencies serv~ng the pr~jec~ been c~ntect~d to determ~ne the~r ~b~~ity to
provide adequate ~en4ce to the proposed pmjeut? If so, please indiceto their response.
J/~. Y'PT' Uf/~./T/~:,.~ /~,,~ ,~X/.~r/,x/~ ~IT 7Y/,~ ~'/f~,
33) In the known history of this property, has there been any use, ~torege, or discharge of'hazardous end/or toxic
mate~fats? Examples of hazardous end/or toxic materials include, but ere not limited to PCB's; red*~oacttve substances;
pesticJdes and herbicides; fuels, oils, ~otvents, end othe[ flammable liquids and Oases. AisC note underground s*torega
of'any of the above. Please li~ the materials end descrlbe their use, storage, end/or discharge on the prope,4,y, es well
as the dates of use, ff known.'
34) Will the proposed projec~ Involve the temporary or long-term use, storage or discharge of ha=ardous and/or toxic
materials, Including but not Ilretted to those examples listed above? ff yes, provide an inventory of all such materials to
be ueed and proposed rnethod of di=po~el. The locatlon of such usa$, along Wlth the .~torage and shipmerlt area$.
shell be shown and labeled on the appltcetlon plan&
I hereb caf'b'fy that the statements furnished above and ia the a~tached exhibits present the data end information rec~ulmd for
adequ:~ evaluation of this proj~:f to the best Ot my ability, that the facts, statement~, and Inform~tlon pre$ented am true and correct
tot he bes~ of my knowledge and betlef. I further understend thet addltlonal infon'nallen mey be roqulred to be aubmltled bafore an
adequate evaluation can be mede by the City of Rancho Cucemonge.
Date: /w//~/ ~,1 ~ Signature: ~/~~ ....
/
Created en 5/22/2002 4:09 PM
EnvfrenmentallnfoFOrm'l.doC
City of Rancho Cucamonga
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
INITIAL STUDY PART II
BACKGROUND
1. Project File: Parcel Map SUBTPM16038 and Development Review DRC2003-00015
2. Related Files: Variance DRC2003-00017, Minor Exception DRC2003-00016, and Tree Removal
Permit DRC2003-00419
3. Description of Project: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00015 - CARNEY - A request to
develop four single-famiJy homes on .817 acres of land in the Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units
per acre) District, located on the west side of Klusman Avenue, north of Diamond Avenue -
APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files: Variance DRC2003-00017, Minor Exception DRC2003-00016
and SUBTT16038.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16038 - CARNEY -
A request to subdivide .817 acres of land into 4 parcels in the Low Residential District
(2-4 dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Klusman Avenue, north of Diamond
Avenue - APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files: Development Review DRC2003-00015, Minor
Exception DRC2003-00016, Variance DRC2003-00017.
4. ProJect Sponsor's Name and Address:
Cecil Carney
12841 Newport Avenue
Tustin, CA 92780
5. General Plan Designation: Low Residential (2..4 dwelling units per acre)
6. Zoning: Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre)
7. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting (Briefly describe the project's surroundings):
Single-family residences on minimum 10,000 square foot lots to the north, west, and east. Also to
the east are a few vacant parcels. To the south is a Metropolitan Water District right-of-way
containing a mainline water pipe.
8. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Division
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
9. Contact Person and Phone Number:
Rick Fisher, Contract Planner
(909) 477-2750
10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement): Cucamonga County Water District sewer and water connections
/77
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 2
GLOSSARY - The following abbreviations are used in this report:
EIR - Environmental Impact Report
FEIR - Final Environmental Impact Report
NOx - Nitrogen Oxides
ROG - Reactive Organic Gases
PM~0 - Fine Particulate Matter
RWQCB - Regional Water Quality Control Board
SCAQMD - South Coast Air Quality Management District
URBEMIS7G - Urban Emissions Model
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 3
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact," "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation
Incorporated," or "Less Than Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
'( ) Aesthet cs ( ) Agricultural Resources (v') Air Quality
(v') Biological Resoumes (¢') Cultural Resoumes (v') Geology/Soils
( ) Hazards & Hazardous (,/) Hydrology/Water Quality ( ) Land Use/Planning
Materials ( ) Energy and Mineral Resources ( ) Population/Housing
( ) Mineral Resources (,/) Noise ( ) Transpodation/'rraffic
( ) Public Services ( ) Recreation
( ) Utilities/Service Systems (v') Mandatory Findings of
Significance
DETERMINATION
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
( ) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment. A
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
(v') I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the
project have been made by, or agreed to, by the project proponent. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
() I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
() I find that the proposed project MAY have a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially
Significant Unless Mitigated' impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standard and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets.
An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that
remain to be addressed.
() I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects 1) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Prepared By: _/~, ~ Date:
Reviewed By: q ~/. ~'~,~,,~_x~_ ~.._~,Date:
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page
4
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PqtentiaJlyWith Than
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial affect a scenic vista? ( ) ( ) ( )
b) Substantially damage scenic resoumes, including, but ( ) ( ) ( ) (./')
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a State Scenic Highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or ( ) ( ) ( ) (./')
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new soume of substantial light or glare which ( ) ( ) (v') ( )
would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
Comments:
a) There are no significant vistas within or adjacent to the project site. The site is not within
a view corridor according to General Plan Exhibit 111-15.
b) The project site contains no scenic resoumes and no historic buildings within a State
Scenic Highway. There are no State Scenic Highways within the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
c) The site is located Jn a residential neighborhood and is characterized by 1- and 2-story
singte-family detached residences to the north/south/east/west. In addition, there are
vacant pamels of land to the east and vacant pamel to the south that contains a
Metropolitan Water District pipe. The visual quality of the area will not degrade as a result
of this project. Design review is required prior to approval. City standards require the
developer to underground existing and new utility lines and facilities to minimize unsightly
appearance of overhead utility lines and utility enclosures in accordance with Planning
Commission Resolution No. 87-96, unless exempted by said Resolution.
d) The project will create new light and glare because the site is currently vacant. The
design and placement of light fixtures will be shown on plans which require review for
consistency with City standards that requires shielding, diffusing, or indirect lighting to
avoid glare. Lighting will be typical of that found in residential neighborhoods. The impact
is not considered significant.
2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or ( ) ( ) (-/') ( )
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resoumes Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ( ) ( ) ( ) (-/')
Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment ( ) ( ) ( ) (-/')
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 5
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially W'~h l~an
Comments:
a) The site is located in a residential neighborhood and is characterized by 1- and 2-story.
single-family detached residences to the north/south/east/west. In addition, there are
vacant parcels of land to the east and vacant parcel to the south that contains a
Metropolitan Water District pipe. There are approximately 1,300 acres of Prime
Farmlands, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance within the City of
Rancho Cucamonga, of which about one-third is either developed or committed to
development according to General Plan Table IV-2. The major concentrations of
designated farmlands are located in the southern and eastern portions of our City that is
characterized by existing and planned development. Further, two-thirds of the designated
farmlands parcels are small, ranging from 3 acres to 30 acres, and their economic viability
is doubtful; therefore, they are not intended to be retained as farmland in the General Plan
Land Use Plan. The General Plan FEIR identified the conversion of farmlands to urban
uses as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a statement of overriding
conditions was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent
with the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated.
b) There is no agriculturally zoned land within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. There are no
Williamson Act contracts within the City.
c) ~'he site is located in a residential neighborhood and is characterized by 1- and 2-story
single-family detached residences to the north/south/east/west. In addition, there are
vacant pamels of land to the east and vacant pamel to the south that contains a
Metropolitan Water District pipe. The nearest agricultural use, a citrus omhard is .2 miles
east from the project site. Therefore, no adverse impacts are anticipated.
3. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢')
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute ( ) (,/') ( ) ( )
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/)
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non-attainment under an applicable Federal or State
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ( ) (,,' ) ( ) ( )
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
number of people?
Comments:
a) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.6), continued development will contribute to
the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and
State standards. The General Plan FEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as
a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a statement of overriding conditions
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 6
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PotentiallyWith l~an
was ultimately adopted by the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the
General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated.
b) During the construction phases of development, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty
construction vehicles, construction worker vehicles, and energy use will generate
emissions. In addition, fugitive dust would also be generated during grading and
construction activities. While most of the dust would settle on or near the project site,
smaller particles would remain in the atmosphere, increasing particle levels within the
surrounding area. Construction is an on-going industry in the Rancho Cucamonga area.
Construction workers and equipment work and operate at one development site until their
tasks am complete. They then transfer to a different site where the process begins again.
Therefore, the emissions associated with construction activities are not new to the Rancho
Cucamonga area and they would not violate an air quality standard or worsen the existing
air quality in the region. Nevertheless, fugitive dust and equipment emissions are required
to be assessed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) on a
project-specific basis. Therefore, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented
to reduce impacts to less-than-significant levels:
1. All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition
so as to reduce operational emissions. Contractor shall ensure that all
construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as per
manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available at the
construction site for City verification.
2. Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, developer shall submit
construction plans to City denoting the proposed schedule and projected
'equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that Iow
emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their use was
investigated and found to be infeasible for the project. Contractors shall also
conform to any construction measures imposed by the SCAQMD as well ss
City Planning staff.
3. All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in
SCAQMD Rule 1113, Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or
high volume, Iow-pressure spray.
4.All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in SCAQMD
Rule 1108.
5. All construction equipment shall comply with SCAQMD Rules 402 and 403.
Additionally, contractors shall include the following provisions:
· Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding and
watering.
· Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads.
· Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over
extended periods of time.
· Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated soil
during and after the end of work periods.
· Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local
ordinances and use sound engineering practices.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 7
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
· Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt is
carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result of
hauling, Timing may vary depending upon time of year of construction,
· Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds
exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements.
· Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or cover
payloads using tarps or other suitable means.
6. The site shall be treated with water or other soil stabilizing agent (approved by
SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM~0 emissions, in accordance with
SCAQMD Rule 403.
7. Chemical soil stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be applied
to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or more to
reduce PMlo emissions.
8. The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative fuel
powered equipment where feasible.
9. The construction contractor shall ensure that construction-grading plans
include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in use.
After implementation of the preceding mitigation measures, short-term construction air
quality emissions would remain significant as noted in the General Plan FEIR
(Section 5.6). Based upon on the URBEMIS7G model estimates in Table 5.6-4 of the
General Plan FEiR, Nox, ROG, and PM~o would exceed SCAQMD thresholds for
significance; therefore, would all be cumulatively significant if they cannot be mitigated on
a project basis to a level less than significant. The General Plan FEIR identified the
citywide increase in emissions as a significant unavoidable adverse impact for which a
Statement of Overriding Considerations was ultimately adopted by the City Council.
In the long-term, development consistent with the General Plan would result in significant
operational vehicle emissions based upon on the URBEMIS7G model estimates in
Table 5.6-4 of the General Plan FEIR; therefore, would all be cumulatively significant if
they cannot be mitigated on a project basis to a level less than significant. The following
mitigation measures shall be implemented:
10. All residential and commercial structures shall be required to Incorporate high
efficiency/Iow polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances, and water
heaters.
11. All residential and commercial structures shall be required to Incorporate
thermal pane windows and weather-stripping.
After implementation of the preceding mitigation measures, the General Plan FEIR
identified the citywide increase in operational emissions as a significant unavoidable
adverse impact for which a statement of overriding conditions was ultimately adopted by
the City Council.
c) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.6) continued development would contribute
to the pollutant levels in the Rancho Cucamonga area, which already exceed Federal and
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 8
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: P,~,,.~y w-.h ~..
State standards. The General Plan FEIR identified the citywide increase in emissions as
a significant and adverse impact for which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was
ultimately adopted by the City Council. The project proposed is consistent with the
General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated.
d) Sensitive receptors are defined as populations that are more susceptible to the effects of
pollution than the population at large. The SCAQMD identifies the following as sensitive
receptors: long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers,
retirement homes, residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, and athletic
facilities. According to the SCAQMD, projects have the potential to create significant
impacts if they are located within 1/4 mile of sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air
contaminants identified in SCAQMD Rule 1401. According to the SCAQMD, projects
have the potential to create significant impacts if they are located within 1/4 mile of
sensitive receptors and would emit toxic air contaminants identified in SCAQMD Rule
1401. The project site is located within 1/4 mile of a sensitive receptor. Potential impacts
to air quality are consistent with the Public Health and Safety Super-Element within the
Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. During construction, there is the possibility of fugitive
dust to be generated from grading the site. The mitigation measures listed under b)
above will reduce impact to less-than-significant levels.
e) Typically, the uses proposed do not create objectionable odors. No adyerse impacts are
anticipated.
4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse offect, either directly or ( ) ( ) ( ) (,")
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on riparian habitat ( ) ( ) '( ) (v')
or other sensitive natural community identified in local
or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish
and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally ( ) ( ) ( ) (./')
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d). Interfere substantially with the movement of any native ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances ( ) ( ) ( )
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 9
Less Than
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PotentiallyWith
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ( ) ( ) I ( ) I (v') .
Conservation Plan, Natural Community conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or State
habitat conservation plan?
Comments:
a) The project site is located in an area developed with single-family residential uses. The
site has been previously disrupted during construction of infrastructure and surrounding
developments/annual disking for weed abatement. According to the General Plan
Exhibit IV-3, and Section 5.3 of the General Plan FEIR, the project site is not within an
area of sensitive biological resoumes; therefore, development will not adversely affect rare
or endangered species of plants or animals due to the fact that the project is surrounded
by urbanized land uses and is consistent with the General Plan Land Use Plan.
b) The project site is located in an urban area with no natural communities. No riparian
habitat exists on-site, meaning the project will not have any impacts.
c) No wetland habitat is present on-site. As a result, project implementation would have no
impact on these resources.
d) The majority of the surrounding area has been or ~s being developed, thereby disrupting
any wildlife corridors that may have existed. No adverse impa~ts are anticipated.
e) There are a five heritage trees on the project site. The applicant has applied for Tree
Removal Permit DRC2003-00419 to remove all five trees. As mitigation for removal the
City's Tree Preservation Ordinance requires replacement. The following mitigation
measure shall be implemented:
1. Tree removal shall require replacement planting on a one-for-one basis with
the largest nursery grown specimens available as determined by the City
Planner.
f) The project site is not located within a conservation area according to the General Plan,
Open Space and Conservation Plan, Exhibit IV-4. No conflicts with habitat conservation
plans will occur.
5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ( ) ( ) ( )
significance of a historical resource as defined in
§ 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ( ) (-/) ( ) ( )
significance of an archeological resource pursuant to
§ 15064.57
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ( ) (v') ( ) ( )
resoume or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/')
outside of formal cemeteries?
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 10
Significant Less
Issues and Suppoding Information Sources: PotentJatiy With Tllan
Significant Mitigation Significant NO
Comments:
a) The project site has not been identified as a "Historic Resource" per the standards of
Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code Section 2.24 (Historic Preservation). There will be
no impact.
b) There are no known archeological sites or resoumes recorded on the project site;
however, the Rancho Cucamonga area is known to have been inhabited by Native
Americans according to the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.11). Construction activity,
particularly grading, soil excavation and compaction, could adversely affect or eliminate
existing and potential archaeological resources. The following mitigation measures shall
be implemented:
1. If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or during
grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor
construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or preserve
them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the City of Rancho
Cucamonga will:
· Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from demolition or
significant modification without an opportunity for the City to establish
its archaeological value.
· Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of
archaeological sites within new developments, using their special
qualities as a theme or focal point.
· Pursue educating the public about the area's archaeological heritage.
· Propose mitigation measures and recommend conditions of approval to
eliminate adverse project effects on significant, important, and unique
prehistoric resources, following appropriate CEQA guidelines.
· Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting the
inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources within the
project area. Submit one copy of the completed report with original
illustrations, to the San Bernardino County Archaeological Information
Center for permanent archtving.
c) The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.11) indicates that the Rancho Cucamonga area is on
an alluvial fan. According to the San Bernardino County database, no paleontological
sites or resoumes have been recorded within the City of Rancho Cucamonga or the
sphere-of-influence, including the project site; however, the area has a high sensitivity
rating for paleontological resources. The older alluvium, which would have been
deposited during the wetter climate that prevailed 10,000-100,000 years ago during the
Late Pleistocene epoch of the Quaternary period, when the last "Ice Age" and the
appearance of modern man occurred, may contain significant vertebrate fossils. The
project site is underlain by Quaternary alluvium per General Plan Exhibit V-2; therefore,
the following mitigation measures shall be implemented:
2. A qualified paleontologist shall conduct a preconstruction field survey of the
project site. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will also
provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation measures
(i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate. Where mitigation
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 11
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PotenlJallyWith Than
monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but not be limited to,
the following measures:
· Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the rapid
removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site full-time
during the interval of earth-disturbing activities.
· Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded, divert
earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has completed
salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery, the grading
contractor should immediately divert construction and notify the monitor
of the find.
· Submit summary report to City of Rancho Cucamonga. Transfer collected
specimens with a copy of the report to San Bernardino County Museum.
d) The proposed project is in an area that has already been disturbed by development. The
project site has already been disrupted by construction of infrastructure and surrounding
developments/annual disking for weed abatement. No known religious or sacred sites
exist within the project area. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project.
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as ( ) .( ) ( ) (v')
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,')
iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides? ( ) ( ) ( )
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ( ) (,/) ( ) ( )
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction
or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/)
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 12
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PotentiallyW~lh Than
.Comments:
a) No known faults pass through the site and it is not in an Earthquake Fault Zone, nor is it in
the Rancho Cucamonga City Special Study Zone along the Red Hill Fault, according to the
General Plan Exhibit V-l, and Section 5.1 of the General Plan FEIR. The Red Hill Fault,
passes within 1.6 miles south of the site, and the Cucamonga Fault Zone lies approximately
1.6 miles north. These faults are both capable of producing Mw 6.0-7.0 earthquakes. Also,
the San Jacinto fault, capable of producing up to Mw 7.5 eadhquakes is 7 miles northeasterly
of the site and the San Andreas, capable of up to M~, 8.2 earthquakes, is 12 miles
northeasterly of the site. Each of these faults can produce strong ground shaking. Adhering
to the Uniform Building Code will ensure that geologic impacts are less than significant.
b) The Rancho Cucamonga area is subject to strong Santa Ana wind conditions during
September te April, which generates blowing sand and dust, and creates erosion
problems. Construction activities may temporarily exacerbate the impacts of windblown
sand, resulting Jn temporary problems of dust control; however, development of this
project under the General Plan would help to reduce windblown sand impacts in the area
as pavement, roads, buildings, and landscaping are established. Therefore, the following
fugitive dust mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to
less-than-significant levels:
1. The site shall be treated with water or other soil stabilizing agent (approved
by SCAQMD and RWQCB) daily to reduce PM~o emissions, in accordance
with SCAQMD Rule 403.
2. Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule established
by the City to reduce PM10 emissions associated with vehicle tracking of soil
off-site. Timing may vary depending upon time of year of construction.
3. Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 mph to
minimize PM~o emissions from the site during such episodes.
4. Chemical soil stabilizers (approved by SCAQMD and RWQCB) shall be
applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours or
more to reduce PM~o emissions.
c) The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.1) indicates that subsidence is generally associated
with rarge decreases or withdrawals of water from the aquifer. The project ~Nould not
withdraw water from the existing aquifer. The site is not within a geotechnical hazardous
area or other unstable geologic unit er soil type according to General Plan FEIR Figure
5.1-2. Soil types onsite consist of Hanford Sandy Loam Soil association according to
General Plan FEIR Exhibit 5.1-3. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
d) The majority of Rancho Cucamonga, including the project site, is located on alluvial soil
deposits. These types of soils are not considered to be expansive. Soil types on-site
consist of Hartford Sandy Loam Soil association according to General Plan Exhibit V-3
and General Plan FEIR Exhibit 5.1-3. These soils are typically well drained, nearly level
to sloping soils that formed in recent alluvium fans. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
e) The project will connect to, and be served by, the existing I~cal sewer system for
wastewater disposal. No septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal is proposed.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 13
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PotentiallyWith Than
7. HAZARDS AND WASTE MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,')
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or ( ) ( ) ( ) (/)
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within 1/4 mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢')
where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ( ) ( ) ( )
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing er working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ( ) ( ) ( ) (~')
adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or
where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
Comments:
a) The project will not involve the transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials. The City
participates in a countywide interagency coalition that is considered a full service
Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive that any other in the state. The
City has adopted a Standardized Emergency Management System Multi-Hazard
Functional Plan to respond to chemical emergencies. Compliance with Federal, State,
and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials and/or
waste will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less than significant. No
adverse impacts are expected.
b) The proposed project does not include the use of hazardous materials or volatile fuels.
The City participates in a countywide interagency coalition that is considered a full service
Hazardous Materials Division that is more comprehensive than any other in the state. The
City has adopted a Standardized Emergency Management System Multi-Hazard
Functional Plan to respond to chemical emergencies. Compliance with Federal, State,
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 14
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
and local regulations concerning the storage and handling of hazardous materials or
volatile fuels will reduce the potential for significant impacts to a level less than significant.
No adverse impacts are anticipated.
c) There are no schools located within 1/4 mile of the project site. The project site is located
within .6 miles of the nearest existing or proposed school: Vineyard Junior High School.
Typically, the uses proposed do not create objectionable odors. No adverse impacts are
anticipated.
d) The proposed project is not listed as a hazardous waste or substance materials site.
Recent site inspection did not reveal the presence of discarded drums or illegal dumping
of hazardous materials. No impact is anticipated.
e) The site is not located within an airport land use plan and is not within 2 miles of a public
airport. Project site is located approximately 5.5 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and
is offset north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated.
f) The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 21/2 miles to the west
of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated.
g) The City's Multi-Hazard Disaster Plan, which is updated every two years, includes policies
and procedures to be administered by the Rancho Cucamonga Fire District in the event of
a disaster. Because the project includes at least two points of public street access and is
required to comply with all applicable City codes, including local fire ordinances, no
adverse impacts are anticipated.
h) Rancho Cucamonga faces the greatest ongoing threat from a wind-driven fire in the Urban
Wildland Interlace area found in the northern part of the City according to the Fire District
Strategic Plan 2000-2005; however, the proposed project site is not located within a high
fire hazard area according to General Plan Exhibit V-7.
8. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/')
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or intedere ( ) (v') ( ) ( )
substantially with groundwater recharge such that
there wou~d be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a
lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the
production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would
drop to a level which would not support existing land
uses or planned uses for which permits have been
granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantia~ erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 15
Issues and Suppoding Information Sources: PotentiNly with Tr~an
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (./')
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner,
which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
soumes of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?. ( ) ( ) ( ) (~')
g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation
map?
h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures, ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/)
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ( ) ( ) ( ) (~')
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
Comments:
a) Water and sewer service is provided by the Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD)
and will not affect water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Project is
designed to connect to existing water and sewer systems.
b) According to CCWD, 43 percent of the City's water is currently provided from ground
water in the Cucamonga and Chino Basins. CCWD has adopted a master plan that
estimates demand needs until the year 2030. The proposed project will not deplete
groundwater supplies, nor will it interfere with recharge because it is not within an area
designated as a recharge basin or spreading ground according to General Plan
Exhibit IV-2. The development of the site will require the grading of the site and
excavation; however, would not affect the existing aquifer, estimated to be about 288 to
470 feet below the ground surface. As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.9),
continued development citywide will increase water needs and is a significant impact;
however, CCWD has plans to meet this increased need through the construction of future
water facilities. The following mitigation measure shall be implemented:
1. Structures to retain precipitation and runoff on-site shall be integrated Into
the design of the project where appropriate. Measures that may be used to
minimize runoff and to enhance infiltration include Dutch drains, precast
concrete lattice blocks and bricks, terraces, diversions, runoff spreaders,
seepage pits, and recharge basins.
c) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and
amount of surface water runoff due to the amount of new building and hardscape
proposed on a site; however, the project will not alter the course of any stream or river.
All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to
/ 72.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 16
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With l~an
handle the flows. The project design includes landscaping of all non-hardscape areas to
prevent erosion. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official
and City Engineer, prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, the project will not
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. The impact is not considered
significant.
d) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and
amount of surface water runoff due to the amount of new building and hardscape
proposed on a site; however, the project will not after the course of any stream or river.
All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to
handle the flows. A grading and drainage plan must be approved by the Building Official
and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore, increase in runoff from
the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are anticipated.
e) The project will cause changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and
amount of surface water runoff due to the amount of new building and hardscape
proposed on a site; however, all runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities,
which have been designed to handle the flows. The project will not result in substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by
the Building Official and City Engineer, prior to issuance of grading permits. Therefore,
increase in runoff from the site will not result in flooding on- or off-site. No impacts are
anticipated.
f) Grading activities associated with the construction period could result in a temporary
increase in the amount of suspended solids in surface flows during a concurrent storm
event, thus resulting in surface water quality impacts. The site is not more than 1 acre;
therefore, is not) required to comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) to minimize water pollution. No impacts are anticipated.
g) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General
Plan Exhibit V-5. No adverse impacts are expected.
h) The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to General
Plan Exhibit V-5. No adverse impacts are expected.
i) The Rancho Cucamonga area is flood protected by an extensive storm drain system
designed to convey a 100-year storm event. The system is substantially improved and
provides an integrated approach for regional and local drainage flows. This existing
system includes several debris dams and levees north of the City, spreading grounds,
concrete-lined channels, and underground storm drains as shown in General Plan Exhibit
V-6. The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area according to
General Plan Exhibit V-5. No adverse impacts are expected.
j) There are no oceans, lakes or reservoirs near the project site; therefore impacts from
seiche and tsunami are not anticipated. The Rancho Cucamonga area sits at the base of
the steep eastern San Gabriel Mountains whose deep canyons were cut by mountain
streams. Numerous man-made controls have been constructed to reduce the mudflow
impacts to the level of non-significance within the City. This existing system includes
several debris dams and levees north of the City, and spreading grounds both within and
north of the City.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 17
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially With T'nan
9. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to, a general plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
or natural community conservation plan?
Comments:
a) The site is located in a residential neighborhood and is characterized by 1- and 2-story
single-family detached residences to the north/south/east/west. In addition, there are
vacant parcels of land to the east and vacant pamel to the south that contains a
Metropolitan Water District pipe. This project will be of similar design and size to
surrounding residential development to the (north/south/east/west). The project will
become a part of the larger community. No adverse impacts are anticipated.
b) The project site land use designation is Low Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre). The
proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and does not interfere with any
policies for environmental protection. As such, no impacts are anticipated.
c) The project site is not located within any habitat conservation or natural community plan
area. According to the General Plan Exhibit IV-3, and Section 5.3 of the General Plan
FEIR, the project site is not within an area of sensitive biological resources therefore,
development will not adversely affect rare or endangered species of plants or animals due
to the fact that the project is surrounded by urbanized land uses and is consistent with the
General Plan Land Use Plan.
10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the State?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,')
mineral resoume recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
Comments:
a) The site is not designated as a State Aggregate Resources Area according to the City
General Plan, Figure IV-1 and Table IV-l; therefore, there is no impact.
b) The site is not designated by the General Plan, Figure IV-1 and Table IV-l, as a valuable
mineral resource recovery site; therefore, there is no impact.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 18
Issues and Supporting Information Sources:
11, NOISE, Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in ( ) (v') ( ) ( )
excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ( ) ( ) ( ) (¢')
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ( ) (v') ( ) ( )
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels
existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ( ) ( ) ( )
would the project expose people residing or working in
the project area to excessive noise levels?
Comments:
a) The proJect site is not within an area of noise levels exceeding City standards according to
General Plan Exhibit V-13 at build-out. The City's Development Code requires that all
industrial uses be conducted within an enclosed building; hence, no adverse operational
impact to nearby commemial uses is expected. The General Plan FEIR (Section 5.7)
indicates that during a construction phase, on-site stationary sources, heavy-duty
construction vehicles, and construction equipment, will generate noise exceeding City
standards. The following measures are provided to mitigate the short-term noise impacts:
1. Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m.
and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or
a national holiday.
2. Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards specified
in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the property line.
Developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly noise level monitoring as
specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times
may be required by the Planning Division. Said consultant shall report their
findings to the Planning Division within 24 houm; however, if noise levels
exceed the above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notif~ the
Planning Division. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then
construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance
with above noise standards or halted.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 19
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PotentiallyWith 3~an
The preceding mitigation measures will reduce the disturbance created by on-site
construction equipment; however, do not address the potential impacts due to the
transport of construction materials and debris. The following mitigation measures shall
then be required:
3, Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and
6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday or a
national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would exceed
100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site), then the
developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any construction
traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes
that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential dwellings.
b) The uses associated with this type of project normally do not induce groundborne
vibrations. As such, no impacts are anticipated.
c) The primary source of ambient noise levels in Rancho Cucamonga is traffic. The
proposed activities will not significantly increase traffic; hence, are not anticipated to
increase the ambient noise levels within the vicinity of the project.
d) See a) response above.
e) The site is not located within an airport land use plan and is not within 2 miles of a public
airport. Located approximately 5.5 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport and is offset
north of the flight path. No impact is anticipated.
f) The nearest private airstrip, Cable Airport, is located approximately 21/2 miles to the west
of the City's westerly limits. No impact is anticipated.
12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ( ) ( ) ( ) (~)
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ( ) ( ) ( ) (v*)
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating ( ) ( ) ( )
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
Comments:.
a) The project is located in a predominantly developed area and will not induce population
growth. Construction activities at the site will be short-term and will net attract new
employees to the area. No impacts are anticipated.
b) The project site contains no existing housing units. No adverse impact expected.
c) The project site is vacant land. No impacts are anticipated.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 20
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially W'dh Than
13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facifities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
a) Fire protection? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,')
b) Police protection? ( ) ( ) ( )
c) Schools? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
d) Parks? ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
e) Other public facilities? ( ) ( ) ( )
Comments:
a) The site, located near the intemection of Banyan Street and Amhibald Avenue, would be
served by a Fire Station No. 171 located approximately .5 miles frem the project site. The
project will not require the construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing
facilities or cause a decline in the levels of service, which could cause the need to
construct new facilities. Standard conditions of approval from the Uniform Building and
Fire Codes will be placed on the project so no impacts to fire services will occur. No
impacts are anticipated.
b) Additional police protection is not required as the addition of the project will not change
the pattern of uses within the surreunding area and will not have a substantial increase in
property to be patrolled as the project site is within an area that is regularly patrolled.
c) The Alta Loma School District and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District serve the
project area. Both school districts have been notified regarding the proposed
development. A standard condition of appreval will require the developer'to pay the
school impact fees. With this standard mitigation, impacts to the School Districts are not
considered significant.
d) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
There are three parks located 1 mile from the project site. The project will not require the
construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in
the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. A standard
condition of approval will require the developer to pay park development fees. No impacts
are anticipated.
e) The proposed project will utilize existing public facilities. The site is in a developed area,
currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The project will not require the
construction of any new facilities or alteration of any existing facilities or cause a decline in
the levels of service, which could cause the need to construct new facilities. Cumulative
development within Rancho Cucamonga will increase demand for library services.
According tO the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.9.9), the projected increase in library
space under the General Plan will not meet the projected demand. The General Plan
FEIR identified the cumulative impact on library services as a significant unavoidable
adverse impact for which a statement of overriding conditions was ultimately adopted by
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 21
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: I I I I
the City Council. The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan for which the
EIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. Since the adoption of the General Plan, the
City has planned a new libra~ within the Victoria Gardens regional shopping center of
approximately 22,000 square feet, which is in excess of the projected need of 15,500
square feet at build-out of the Ci~.
14. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,')
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
Comments:
a) The site is in a developed area, currently served by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
There are three parks located 1 mile from the project site. This project is not proposing
any new housing or large employment generator that would cause an increase in the use
of parks or other recreational facilities. A standard condition of approval will require the
developer to pay park development fees. No impacts are anticipated.
b) See a) response above.
15. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in ( ) ( ) ( ) (-/')
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or
highways?
'c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,')
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ( ) ( ) ( ) (-/)
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ( ) ( ) ( ) (,/')
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 22
Signiflcal3t Less
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: PotentiallywJi~l Than
g) C°nffict with ad°pted p°licies, plans, °r pr°grams I ()
supporting alternative transpodation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Comments:
a) As noted in the General Plan FEIR (Section 5.5), continued development will contribute to
the traffic Icad in the Rancho Cucamonga area. The proposed project is consistent with
the General Plan for which the FEIR was prepared and impacts evaluated. The project is
in an area that is mostly developed with street improvements existing or included in
project design. The project will not create a substantial increase in the number of vehicle
trips, traffic volume or congestion at intersections. The project site will be required to
provide street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the
site per City roadway standards. In addition, the City has established a Transportation
Development fee that must be paid by the applicant prior to issuance of building permits.
Fees are used to fund roadway improvements necessary to support adequate traffic
circulation. No impacts are anticipated.
b) The project will generate less than 250 two-way peak hour trips for non-retail; therefore, is
below the threshold of the San Bernardino Congestion Management Plan (CMP) criteria
for requiring a traffic impact analysis. The ITE associates a trip rate of 1 peak hour trip
per single-family dwelling unit. Based on this trip rate, the proposed project would
generate approximately 4 two-way peak hour trips. The project is in an area that is mostly
developed with all street improvements existing. The project will not negatively impact the
level of service standards on adjacent arterials. The project will be required to provide
street improvements (curb, gutter and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. No
impacts are anticipated.
c) Located approximately 5.5 miles northerly of the Ontario Airport, the site is offset north of
the flight path and will not change air traffic patterns. No impacts are anticipated.
d) The project is in an area that is mostly developed. The project will be required to provide
street improvements (curb, gutter, and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site. The
project design does not include any sharp curves or dangerous intersections or farming
uses. The project will, therefore, not create a substantial increase in hazards because of
a design feature. No impacts are anticipated.
e) The project will be designed to provide access for all emergency vehicles and will
therefore not create an inadequate emergency access. No impacts are anticipated.
f) The project design has adequate parking in compliance with standards of the Rancho
Cucamonga Development Code and will therefore not create an inadequate parking
capacity. No impacts are anticipated.
g) The project will not conflict with any adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting
alternative transportation. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has an adopted Circulation
Element and Bicycle Transportation Plan. There is an existing bike route along nearby
Archibald Avenue. No impacts are anticipated.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 23
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Signi~cant a[tiga~on Significant No
16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects.?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ( ) ( ) ( ) (,,~)
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
provider, which serves or may serve the project, that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted ( ) ( ) ( )
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with Federal, State, and local statutes and ( ) ( ) ( )
regulations related to solid waste?
Comments:
a) The proposed project is served by the Cucamonga County Water District sewer system,
which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant
located within Rancho Cucamonga. The project is required to meet the requirements of
the Santa Aha Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts
are anticipated.
b) The proposed project is served by the Cucamonga County Water District sewer system,
which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant
located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of
which are at capacity. The project is required to meet the requirements of the Santa Aha
Regional Water Quality Control Board regarding wastewater. No impacts are anticipated.
c) All runoff will be conveyed to existing storm drain facilities, which have been designed to
handle the flows. A Grading and Drainage Plan must be approved by the Building Official
and City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. The impact is not considered
significant.
d) The project is served by the Cucamonga County Water District water system. There is
currently a sufficient water supply available to the City of Rancho Cucamonga to serve
this project. No impacts are anticipated.
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 24
Issues and Supporting Information Sources: Potentially Wiffl Tr~a~l
e) The proposed project is served by the Cucamonga County Water District sewer system,
which has waste treated by the Inland Empire Utilities Agency at the RP-4 treatment plant
located within Rancho Cucamonga and RP-1 located within City of Ontario, neither of
which are at capacity. No impacts are anticipated.
f) Solid waste disposal will be provided by the current City contracted hauler who disposes
the refuse at a permitted landfill with sufficient capacity to handle the City's solid waste
disposal needs.
g) This project complies with Federal, State, and local statutes and regulations regarding
solid waste. The City of Rancho Cucamonga continues to implement waste reduction
procedures consistent with AB 939. Therefore, no impacts are anticipated.
17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future
projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will ( ) ( ) ( ) (v')
cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Comments:
a) The site is not located in an area of sensitive biological resources as identified on the City
of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan Exhibit IV-3. Additionally, the area surrounding the
site is developed. Based on previous development and street improvements, it is unlikely
that any endangered or rare species would inhabit the site.
b) If the proposed project were approved, then the applicant would be required to develop
the site in accordance with the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The 2001
General Plan was adopted along with the certification of a Program FEIR, Findings of
Fact, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for significant adverse environmental
effects of buildout in the City and Sphere of Influence. The City made findings that
adoption of the General Plan would result in significant adverse effects to aggregate
resources, prime farmland, air quality, the acoustical environment, library services, and
aesthetics and visual resources. Mitigation measures were adopted for each of these
resources; however, they would not reduce impacts to less than significant levels. As
Initial Study for City of Rancho Cucamonga
DRC2003-00015 Page 25
such, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations balancing the benefits of
development under the General Plan Update against the significant unavoidable adverse
impacts (CEQA Guidelines Section 15092 and 15096(h)). These benefits include less
overall traffic volumes by developing mixed-use projects that will be pedestrian friendly
and conservation of valuable natural open space. With these findings and the Statement
of Overriding Considerations, no further discussion or evaluation of cumulative impacts is
required.
c) Development of the site under the proposed land use change would not cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The Initial Study identifies
construction-related emissions of criteria pollutants as having a potentially significant
impact. Proposed mitigation measures would further reduce emission levels.
Additionally, impacts resulting from air quality would be short-term and would cease once
construction activities were completed, The Initial Study identified potentially significant
impacts associated with the exposure of people to increased noise levels. Mitigation
measures contained in this Initial Study will ensure impacts are at le~s than significant
levels.
EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one
or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier 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 FEIR
(SCH#2000061027, Certified October 17, 2001)
(,/) Master Environmental Assessment for the 1989 General Plan Update
(SCH #88020115, certified January 4, 1989)
0G/10/2003 11:58 714665~1 C R CARNEY ARCHITECT PAGE 02
Initial ~tudy fo~ City of P~n~ho Cucamong&
D1:~'2003-00016 Page
re~ ~is In~l Study and Se ~o~e mmgat~ measurea, e~]e~, I hl~ ~ ~ p~t pl~
p~ ~ hereby ~r~ to ~ pr~ m~at~n m~sur~ ~ a~id ~e e~s ~' m~tga~
VARIANCE
The existing one-acre paa'ccl (cm'rcr~ly zon~ L. 2-~ d~Ac) ~ 100 ~
;~em~n~ ~o ~6~ for ~ ~itio~ dedication of 20 f~t on t~
~¢ fo~ (4) p~ ~ts ~e o~y 80 ~et ~ 70 f~ res~i~ly, a~ less ~ ~e 100
fool ~m code r~u~¢~al, In a~Jo~ t~. ~o~ y~ ~b~k on ~ pro~ lot
~j~cnt ~ ~c ~e ~cs ~t ~ ~ ~m~ code r~mcnt of 32 ~t from
c~b. A sjd~ enh%' doubl~ c~ g~ ~ ~ pro~ on ~ lot to ~o~5~
p~k~. We ~llew ~ follo~ ~ ~ ~:
~;ion wo~ result M pr~i~ di~lty or ~ess~ physical
~dsMp ~;~ig~ ~ ~c obj~ivcs of~ ~.
b. T~ ~e ~e ~tio~ or ~rd~ ckc~s or ~itlom
applicable to ~c ~' ~lv~ ~ to the ~end~
tM~ ~ no~ a~ly ge~y to o;~r pm~es ~ ~e
C. ~ ~fict or ~ ht~e~n ~d ~or~ oft~ s~ified
~g~tioa wo~ ~ve the appB¢~ off. leges ~joy~
d. ~t ~he ~ of ~ M~i~ ~11 not ~ a
priv~ege ~ns~t ~ ~ l~al~o~ on ~ proxies
e. ~t ~ ~g of the Y~c ~ ~; ~ ~e~ lo the ~blic
h~th, ~, or ~1~ or ~t~ly ~j~o~ to pro~cs
~ovements ~ t~ ~c~ity.
EXCEPTION
; ,;,,o t,,,~_~ro ru~real tcn~rrentlv z~ned L.
The ~.~ ....... r .... , ....... , ..........
r~ukeme~ 1o p~v~e ~r ~ ~d~l d~ic~on of 20 feet once we~ side of
~ Averts, ~d ~tion ora C~' sl~d ~e~e, effe~ive na lot ~ for
tM fo~ (4) p~s~ ~s me o~y 80 ~ ~ 70 f~ restively, a~ l~s t~ ~e 100
foot ~ ~de r~o~em. ~ conj~ion mSth ~e r~M ~es ~r 1oi
dep~ ~d one (1) gem )~d ~b~k, a ~-~r e~ion is ~Ng requested on ~ fora (4)
~ont lot~ w ~d~e rea ~ ~ ~om the eo~ ~mm of 20 ~ to 18 ~. We
~lieve ~e fogo~g ~ ~ ~e;
a. TMt ~a m ~1
re~tion world re~t
h~s~p ~comi~em ~ ~ ob~fives of~e ~rnl PI~ ~d ~em of
~ ~elopmegt
b. ~t ~e ~e exc~o~
~p~ ~volv~ ~ to
g~ly to ~ ~op~ies ~e ~e di~t.
~c~on wo~d deprive ~ npplk~ of~i>51eges enjoyed by o~r
pro~ om~ ~ ~.~ di~i~.
d, ~1 ~ ~ oft~ Mhor E~tion ~1 mt comimte a ~ of
~c~l pfivtlege ~mi~
~lt~ ~f~', or were or ~t~ly ~j~iom to pm~s or
~ptovemems ~ ~h*
Plan in the Victoda Community Plan, located on the west side of Victoria Park Lane, north of the
Lane terminus - APN: 0227-171-26. This action is within the scope of the project
in a supplement to E~.vimnmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse No.
that was certified by the City Council on July 7, 1999, and no additional
~ actions mentioned in this notice is required pursuant
to Public F 21166.
C. {EVIEW DRC2003-00241 - STANDARD PACIFIC - A design review of
detailed site plan building elevations for 42 single-family lots (Tract Map SUBTI'16314) of
previously Map 15974 within the Victoria Arbors Master Plan in the Victoria
Community east of Day Creek and north of Chumh Street - APN: 0227-161-41
thru 47. This action the scope of the project reviewed in a supplement to
Environmental Im ghouse No. 98041137) that was certified by
the City Council on July 7, and no additional environmental review for the discretionary
actions mentioned in this r ic Resources Code Section 21166.
D. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - STANDARD PACIFIC - A design review of
detailed site plan and building r 38 single-family lots of previously approved Tract
Map SUBTT16369 within the Victoria Master Plan in the Victoria Community Plan,
located east of Day 0227-171-26 thru 28, 30 thru 33,
and 35 and 37 thru 39. project reviewed in a supplement
to Environmental In' that was certified by
the City Council on July 7, 1999, and no additional review for the discretionary
actions mentioned in this notice is 1166.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMI ~IEW DRC2003-00015- CARNEY
- A request to develop four single-family homes on .817 land in the Low Residential
District (2-4 dwelling units per acre), located on the west = Klusman Avenue, north of
Diamond Avenue - APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files: Tentative SUBTPM16038,
Variance DRC2003-00017, Minor Exception DRC2003-00016, Tree Removal Permit
DRC2003-00419.
Chairman Macias indicated that staff requested that Item E be pulled from the
be heard in conjunction with Public Hearing Items F and G.
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by McPhail, to adopt Items A, B, C, and D Consent
Calendar. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: FLETCHER, MAClAS, McNIEL, McPHAIL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: STEWART - carried
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Commissioner McPhail stated that she needed to recuse herself from Items E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, and
Q because her company receives remuneration from the applicants.
E. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW DRC2003-00015- CARNEY
F. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16038 - CARNEY
- A request to subdivide .817 acre of land into 4 parcels in the Low Residential District (2-4
dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Klusman Avenue, north of Diamond Avenue
-APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files: Development Review DRC2003-00015, Variance DRC2003-
00017, Minor Exception DRC2003-00016, and Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00419.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- August 27, 2003
G. VARIANCE DRC2003-00017 - CARNEY - A request to reduce the required lot depth from 100
feet to 80 feet for 4 proposed single family residences in the Low Residential Distdct (2-4
dwelling units per acre), located on the west side of Klusman Avenue, north of Diamond Avenue
- APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files: Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM 16038, Development
Review DRC2003-00015, Minor Exception DRC2003-00016, and Tree Removal Permit
DRC2003-00419.
Rick Fisher, Contract Planner, presented the staff report.
Chairman Macias opened the public headng.
Glen Cozart, 6201 Klusman Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that in 1983 he bought his house,
which is across the street from the proposed project. He thought the City should not allow houses to
be built on substandard lots. He asked the current depth of the lot. He said that once the street and
sidewalk are put in, the lots would be too small. He asked if Lots 3 and 4 would have a shared
driveway.
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, stated the lots are now 100 feet deep and will be 80 feet deep after
Klusman Avenue is finished.
KJm Felten, 6155 Diamond, Rancho Cucamonga, objected to having the new houses built 18 feet
from her back wall. She noted her house is on a % acre. She did not want a two-story house
overlooking her back yard and said a single-story house would be acceptable. She felt the new lots
should be % acre in order to be the same size as the surrounding lots.
Judy Biewener, 6211 Klusman Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, felt the proposed new lots are too
small. She was concerned about a loss of privacy. She stated they had been told the property was
not zoned for houses because of the size of the lots. She said her lot is between a % and % acre.
She opposed opening up the street.
Madan Kud, 6221 Klusman Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, expressed concern about the size of the
lots.
Scott Biewener, 6211 Klusman Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, asked if lots had ever been reduced to
an 80-foot depth in the past.
Floyd Hemdon, 9641 Banyan Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he owns the property. He said that
when the tract of homes that the other speakers live in was constructed, the developer was
permitted to put in Klusman Avenue at half of its desired width instead of making full street
improvements and it was known at that time that his lots were only 100 feet deep.
Cecil Carney, applicant, 12841 Newport Avenue, Tustin, stated he agreed with the staff report and
conditions.
Brad Bullet, City Planner, noted that several residents had expressed concems prior to Mr. Camey's
arrival at the meeting.
Greg Wrinen, 4663 Teasdale Avenue, Riverside, stated he hopes to purchase one of the homes to
be built.
Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Macias closed the public hearing.
Chairman Macias noted concerns had been expressed regarding the scale and mass of the
development and the depth of the lots had been questioned.
Planning commission Minutes -3- August 27, 2003
Mr. Buller stated the project is a classic case where a vadance is necessary. He noted that the
owner of the property indicated that three lots were developed on Klusman Avenue, leaving him with
a 100-foot depth. He said the City requires dedication of 20 feet for full street improvements, leaving
a lot depth of 80 feet. He noted the Commission could deny the setback deviation from the front or
rear yard boundaries but staff felt the vadance is reasonable in order to build comparable homes for
the neighborhood. He said staff supports the variance, as the property owner did not create the
situation.
Mr. Coleman observed that the houses step back from one-story at the front of the lot to two at the
rear.
Mr. Bullet noted that the lot would be unbuildable if the Commission did not support the lot depth
vadance.
Commissioner McNiel stated the property is a remnant piece that is undersized in depth. He noted
each lot is wider than normal in order to make up for the loss of depth. He said the lots would be
approximately % acre, to fit in with the surrounding neighborhood. He stated he understood the
concerns raised by the residents but he felt they would be less ceoncerned when they see the houses
on the wider lots. He observed the back yard setback requirement is 20 feet and the developer is
asking for 18 feet and the front yard setback requirement is 37 feet and they are requesting 35 fee. t.
Mr. Buller pointed out that the development meets City Code in all other requirements including lot
size.
Commissioner McNiel suggested that the setback vadance be utilized for the front yard and the rear
yard setback be left at 20 feet. He Stated that the lots are the same size they would be if 20 acres
were divided into 80 lots, as the streets would be carved out of the 20 acres.
Commissioner Fletcher asked the spacing between the houses.
Mr. Fisher indicated the side yard setbacks are 10 and 15 feet.
Mr. Buller stated there is a separation of approximately 30 feet between the houses as they are
currently plotted.
Commissioner Fletcher felt the major concern raised was pdvacy. He thought that concern could be
addressed in a number of ways. He felt the vadance is justified.
Chairman Macias noted that any decision by the Planning Commission can be appealed to the City
Council.
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Fletcher, to issue a Negative Declaration and adopt the
resolutions approving Pamel Map SUBTPM16038, Development Review DRC2003-00015, and
Variance DRC2003-00017. Motion carded by the following vote:
AYES: FLETCHER, MACIAS, McNIEL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: STEWART
ABSTAIN: McPHAIL - carded
H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP s~E
GREATER LOS ANGELES INC. - A request to subdividej~ &..,~ ut property ~r~[o 5
lettered lots and 1 numbered ICt~I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I~A"c~;~' tS,:,'~;0n~-miniums in the Medium Residential
District (8~cre), located at the southwest comer of Base Line Road and
Planning Commission Minutes -4- August 27, 2003
E. VARIANCE DRC2003-00017-CARNEY - A request for a vadance to reduce the required lot
depth and reduce the required front setback, for 4 proposed single family residences in the Low
Residential Distdct (2-4 dwelling units per acm), located on the west side of Klusman Avenue,
north of Diamond Avenue - APN: 1062-401-05. Related Files: Development Review
DRC2003-00015, Minor Exception DRC2003-00016, Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00419,
and Tentative Parcel Map SUBTPM 16038.
Commissioner McPhail recused herself from acting on Item E, as her firm receives remuneration
from the applicant.
Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff report and handed out illustrations of the
alternates using a reduced standard turnaround at the end of Klusman Avenue, as discussed with
the residents at the Neighborhood meeting on September 24, 2003. He sa~d the Rev'sed Exhibit"A"
was recommended by staff because it was discussed at that meeting. He noted that during the
meeting, the applicant also indicated a willingness to modify {he rear elevations by eliminating
windows along the upper story or frosting or glazing the glass.
Chairman Macias opened the public hearing.
Cecil Carney, 12841 Newport Avenue, Tustin, stated he was available to answer questions.
Chairman Macias opened the public hearing.
Glen Cozart, 6201 K]usman Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated the residents in the neighborhood
feel the development would affect only a few houses directly. He said he has lived in his house
since it was built in 1983. He indicated Mr. Buller spent a lot of time with the residents and he
appreciated his professionalism. He commented there are 1/2-acre lots just north of Banyan. He
indicated all of the lots in the neighborhood are large and the houses are spread out. He felt that the
proposed houses are too big because they are approximately 2,500 square feet and on smaller lots
than the surrounding homes. By comparison, he indicated his home is only 1,600 square feet. He
stated the proposed houses are on smaller and weird shaped lots. He believed pools and RV
parking would have to be placed in the side yardS. He did not think the proposed cul-de-sac would
happen because he felt the gentleman who owns the property would not be willing to give up the
property, as he wants to be left alone. He noted that the third lot has its house plotted only 5 feet off
the side property line. He noted the Development Code allows four houses per acre, but this
property is less than an acre. He asked if approval of the Variance would negate the Code. He did
not feel the end of the street will be finished and there will be no parldng permitted in the street for
his house or the last two homes at the end of the street. He thought the driveway for the fourth
house looks weird because it is incredibly close to the third lot and said he does not want to live in a
neighborhood that looks weird. He felt the City should only allow two houses or throe that are spread
out rather than allowing a fourth driveway that is jimmy rigged around a block wall.
Klm Felten, 6155 Diamond Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated that the Code calls for four houses
per acre, but the property is only .817 acre. She stated all other houses in the neighborhood are 1/3
to 1/4 acre and these lots would not conform to their neighborhood. She said she had a petition with
37 signatures from the immediate neighborhood in opposition to the development. (The petition was
not submitted to staff). She noted that Mr. Carney offered to remove the windows from the second
story rear elevations, but that did not mean that the new owners couldn't install windows. She did
not feel there would be enough reom for any street parking if there are seven houses on the half cu~-
de-sac.
Marion Kuri, 6221 Klusman Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated her home is on 1/4 acre and she
purchased it 20 years ago. She was concerned the parcel is less than an acre and will be split into
four lots. She said three of the homes will be very close together and the one home at the north will
Planning Commission Minutes -5- October 8, 2003
be on a large lot. She preferred that only two or three homes be built and spread out with lots that
are comparable in size to the surrounding area.
Sherrill Ichiho, 6147 Diamond Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, concurred with the other residents. She
said all of them have large lots and she feared allowing the smaller lots will lower her property value.
She said that the lot does not look large enough to hold even two houses. She felt the street should
be widened. She did not feel there would be reom for the new owners to put in pools or store their
recreational vehicles. She thought the lot could hold two or three house, but not four.
Hearing no further testimony, Chairman Macias closed the public hearing.
Commissioner McNiel stated the City often runs into this situation with in-fill projects where there are
remnant pieces of land. He said it is a developable parcel of land in an established neighborhood
and the house design of today is going to be different from house designs of 20 years ago because
of marketing purposes. He acknowledged it is unfortunate that such circumstances exist but he did
not find the house designs and the lot sizes objectionable. He thought the lots are comparable in
size to the neighborhood.
Brad Bullet, City Planner, replied that three lots are approximately 8,000 square fe~t and one is
approximately 1,200 square feet. He said most of the existing lets in the neighborhood are between
10,000 and 11,000 square feet.
Commissioner McNiel asked if some of the other lots are approximately 9,000 square feet.
Mr. Buller responded very few.
Commissioner McNiel felt that an 8,000 square foot lot is still a good-sized lot. He indicated the
property owner has a right to develop. He noted that the lot depth would not change even if there
were only two or three houses.
Mr. Bullet confirmed the Variance would still be necessary no matter how many lots.
Commissioner McNiel believed that the property values would not be damaged and would probably
be elevated because of the enhanced, more cun-ent houses.
Commissioner Stewart asked if there had been a discussion regarding reducing the footprints of the
houses.
Mr. Bullet stated the developer modified their plans so a Minor Exception is not necessary and a
Variance for the front yard setback is no longer needed. He said only the lot depth Variance is now
needed.
commissioner Stewart noted the parcel is an existing parcel of record. She thought there was
testimony in the last meeting that it was acknowledged when the previous houses were built, this lot
would be less than 100 feet deep. She asked for legal advice.
Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attorney, stated it was his understanding this is a remnant lot created by
the development of surrounding properties and it is a legal lot. He observed the Tentative Parcel
Map came before the Commission at a previous meeting and the Commission approved the
subdivision into four lots and that action was appealed to the City Council. Mr. Ennis said the
Variance as specified in this staff report is necessary to satisfy the conditions of the previously
approved Tentative Parcel Map. He explained that if the Commission denied the Variance this
evening, the applicant could not move forward with the four-lot subdivision. He observed the owner
has the ability to subdivide the property into the size range permitted in the Development Code and
Planning Commission Minutes -6- October 8, 2003
the City would have to have valid reasons if it would not allow the subdivision into the size range of
lots allowed by Code.
Mr. Bullet stated that if the parcel is divided into two lots, three lots, or four lots, a Variance is still
needed for the lot depth because it is not possible to get 100-foot deep lots. He said that was why
staff believes the Variance is appre priate. With respect to the comment that a homeowner could put
in windows where the applicant has chosen not to do so, he pointed out that would be tree for any
home. He said owners of single-story homes could chose to add a second story and the City cannot
deny that ability nor the ability to put windows where homeowners chose.
Commissioner Stewart observed that no matter what is done on the parcel, the Variance would be
necessary. She said the net effect of asking the developer to reduce the number of lots would not
help the situation. She agreed with Commissioner McNiel that it is not an objectionable
development. She thought the revised Exhibit A alternative is an appre priate revision. To some
extent, she felt the objections go back to an objection to loss of privacy and loss of view and she
believed that in order to pre tect those things, people must buy all the surrounding lots.
Commissioner Fletcher noted the approval of the Variance was for a Variance in lot depth only. He
asked if the developer would have to come back for design review,
Mr. Buller replied that the pre posed unit revisions am in substantial compliance with what the
Commission appre ved at a previous meeting. He said the Commission approved the Parcel Map,
Development Review, and a Variance for the pre ject and the pre ject has been appealed. He
indicated that appeal is still pending before the City Council. He explained that if the Commission
approved the Variance this evening and the appellant still wished to go forward with the appeal, it
would be heard by the City Council. He said if the Commission denies the Variance, the applicant
would have an opportunity to appeal that decision to the City Council and the appellants would most
likely drop their appeal.
Commissioner Fletcher acknowledged that the existing homes have been them a long time and it is
difficult for the homeowners to accept the new homes. He felt the residents am looking at the new
homes as being out of sync with the neighborhood. He said when he first heard about the size of the
homes, he felt it was good for the City because other homes in the City am 3,000 - 5,000 square
feet and he thought this would be a good size for new purchasers of homes in the City. He said he
was surprised at how narrow the lot looks and he tried to envision what it will look like; however, he
thought a development would look better than the weeds that are them now. He noted that homes
on the west side have deeper back yards. He questioned the height of the wall to the west.
Mr. Buller stated there could be a grede change and the wall could be higher than 6 feet on the lower
side.
Commissioner Fletcher stated the new homes would be up against a high wall because of the grede
differential. He acknowledged it is a difficult situation. He did not feel the commission should stop
development and he thought it is a good solution, even if it may not be the best solution. He
supported the Variance.
Chairman Macias did not object to the project. He felt it is a developable parcel of land and the
applicant did a good job of providing a good, compatible product.
Motion: Moved by Fletcher, second McNiel, to adopt the resolution approving Variance
DRC2003-00017. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: FLETCHER, MAClAS, McNIEL, STEWART
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
ABSTAIN: McPHAIL - carried
Planning Commission Minutes -7- October 8, 2003
.2//
RESOLUTION NO. 03-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION AND APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP SUBTPM16038,
A SUBDIVISION OF FOUR LOTS ON 1.1 GROSS ACRES OF LAND IN THE
LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF
KLUSMAN AVENUE NORTH OF DIAMOND AVENUE, AND MAKING
FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 1062-401-05.
A. Recitals.
1. Cecil Carney filed an application for the Development Review as described in the title of this
Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred to as
"the application."
2. On the 27th day of August 2003, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga held a meeting to consider the application and following the conclusion of said August 27,
2003 meeting, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 03-113 approving the application.
3. The decision represented by said Planning Commission Resolution was timely appealed to
this Council.
4. On October 1,2003, this Council continued the duly noticed public hearing on the appeal to
their November 5, and again to their November 19, 2003 agenda.
5. On the 8th day of October 2003, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga held a public hearing to consider the related Variance DRC2003-00017 again, including an
alternative site plan design that eliminated the need for two out of three variances, and following the
conclusion of said October 8, 2003 meeting, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution
No. 03-145 approving said Variance.
6. On November 5, and on November 19, 2003, this Council conducted a duly noticed public
hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date.
7. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, TH EREFORE, 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 Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council dudng the above-referenced
public hearing on November 5, and November 19, 2003, including written and oral staff reports, the
minutes of the above-referenced Planning Commission meeting, and the contents of Planning
Commission Resolution No. 03-113, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically
finds as follows:
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
SUBTPM16038 - CARNEY
November 19, 2003
Page 2
a. The application applies to a 1.1 acre property located on the west side of Klusman
Avenue, north of Diamond Avenue with a street frontage of 304 feet and lot depth of 80 feet (after
dedication for Klusman Avenue), and is presently vacant; and
b. The property to the north of the subject site is single-family residential; the property to
the south across Diamond Avenue consists of single-family residential; the propertyto the east across
Klusman Avenue is single-family residential; and the property to the west is single-family residential;
and
c. The applicant conducted a meeting on May 14, 2003, at which eight residents
attended, to inform surrounding neighborhood residents of the proposed project and to obtain their
feedback.
d. The proposed lots exceed the minimum standards of the Low Residential District,
except for lot depth. The applicant has submitted a request for Variance DR02003-00017.
e. The gross area of the project site as measured to the centerline of Klusman Avenue
and Diamond Avenue, is 1.108 acres; therefore, up to 4 homes are allowed in the Low Residential zone
(2-4 dwelling units per acre). Project density is 3.61 dwelling units per acre.
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 Tentative Tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Coda, and
any applicable specific plans; and
b. The design or improvements of the Tentative Tract is consistent with the General Plan,
Development Code, and any applicable specific plans; and
c. The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed; and
d. The design of the subdivision is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage
and avoidable injury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; and
e. The Tentative Tract is not likely to cause serious public health problems; and
f. The design of the Tentative Tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the
public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed
subdivision.
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for the
application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a
significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring
Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as
follows:
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
SUBTPM16038 - CARNEY
November 19, 2003
Page 3
a. That the Mitigated 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 Mitigated 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration with regard to the
application.
b. Although the Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies certain significant environmental
effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects have been reduced to an
acceptable level by imposition of mitigation measures on the project which are listed below as
conditions of approval.
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 Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project will
have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife depends.
Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the staff
reports and exhibits, and the information provided to the City Council during the public headng, the City
Council hereby rebuts the presumption of adverse effect as set forth in Section 753.5(c-1-d) of Title 14
of the California Code of Regulations.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, 3, and 4 above, this
Council hereby denies the appeal, upholds the action of the Planning Commission, and approves the
application subject to each and every condition set forth below and in the Standard Conditions,
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference:
Plannin.q Division
1) The project shall be developed consistent with the alternative Site Plan
layout based upon a reduced radius turnaround as shown on the attached
Exhibit "A."
2) Tree Removal Permit DR02003-00419 ~s hereby approved subject to ,
replacement planting as required by Environmental Mitigation Measures
contained herein.
3) This approval is granted contingent upon the approval of Variance
DRC2003-00017.
Enqineerin.q Division
1 ) Klusman Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with "Local
Residential" standards including, but not limited to, the following:
a)Provide curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approaches, street trees,
and asphalt pavement, as required.
b) Provide 5800 Lumen HPSV streetlights, as required per City Street
Lighting Standard.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
SUBTPM16038 - CARNEY
November 19, 2003
Page 4
o) Provide traffic striping and signage, as required.
d) Stop permanent improvements north of the southerly drive approach
on Lot 3 and provide interim asphalt pavement to serve Lot 4 and
the northerly driveway on Lot 3.
2) The developer shall deposit cash in-lieu of construction with the City for
frontage improvements on Lot 4 and the north half of Lot 3 prior to final
map approval. The deposit shall include removal costs for interim
improvements.
3) Diamond Street frontage improvements are to be in accordance with
"Local Residential" standards including, but not limited to, the following:
a) Protect existing curb and gutter, and sidewalk, or repair as required.
b) Protect existing traffic striping and signage, or replace as required.
c) Provide 5800 Lumen HPSV streetlights, as required per City Street
Lighting Standard.
d) Final Parcel Map 16038 shall be approved and recorded prior to
issuance of building permits.
Environmental Miti.qation
Air Quality
1 ) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating condition
so as to reduce operational emissions. The contractor shall ensure that
all construction equipment is being properly serviced and maintained as
per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records shall be available
at the construction site for City verification.
2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the developer shall submit
construction plans to City denoting the proposed schedule and projected
equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide evidence that
Iow-emission mobile construction equipment will be utilized, or that their
use was investigated and found to be infeasible for the project.
Contractors shall also conform to any construction measures imposed by
the South Coast Air Quality Management District, as well as City Planning
staff.
3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards noted
in South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1113. Paints and
coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume, Iow-pressure
spray.
4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in South
Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1108.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
SUBTPM16038 - CARNEY
November 19, 2003
Page 5
5) All construction equipment shall comply with South Coast Air Quality
Management District Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors shall
include the following provisions:
· Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through seeding
and watering.
· Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads.
· Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion
over extended periods of time.
Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed excavated
soil during and after the end of work periods.
· Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local
ordinances and use sound engineering practices.
· Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if silt
is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a result
of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year of
construction.
·Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds
exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements.
· Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks or
cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means.
6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent
(approved by South Coast Air Quality Management District and Region.al
Water Quality Control Board) daily to reduce PM10 emissions, m
accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403.
7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by South Coast Air Quality
Management District and Regional Water Quality Control Board) shall be
applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours
or more to reduce PM10 emissions.
8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative
fuel-powered equipment where feasible.
9) The construction contractor shall ensure that construction grading plans
include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in
use.
10) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate
high-efficiency/Iow-polluting heating, air conditioners, appliance, and water
heaters.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
SUBTPM16038 - CARNEY
November 19, 2003
Page 6
11) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to incorporate
thermal pane windows and weather-stripping.
Biology
1) Tree removal shall require replacement planting on a one-for-one basis
with the largest nursery grown specimens available as determined by the
City Planner.
Cultural Resources
1) If any prehistoric archaeological resoumes are encountered before or
during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to
monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect or
preserve them for study. With the assistance of the archaeologist, the
City of Rancho Cucamonga will:
· Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from
demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for the
City to establish its archaeological value.
· Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of
archaeological sites within new developments using their special
qualities as a theme or focal point.
· Pursue educating the public about the area's archaeological
heritage.
· Propose mitigation measures and recommend conditions of
approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant,
important, and unique prehistoric resources, following appropriate
CEQA guidelines.
· Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting
the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources
within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report
within original illustrations to the San Bernardino County
Amhaeological Information Center [or permanent archiving.
2) A qualified paleontogist shall conduct a preconstruction field survey of the
project site. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings that will
also provide specific recommendations regarding further mitigation
measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be appropriate.
Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program must include, but
not be limited to, the following measures:
· Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow the
rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to the site
full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
SUBTPM16038 - CARNEY
November 19, 2003
Page 7
· Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded,
divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has
completed salvage. If construction personnel make the discovery,
the grading contractor should immediately divert construction and
notify the monitor of the find.
· Submit a summary report to the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to the
San Bernardino County Museum.
Geology
1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent
(approved by South Coast Air Quality Management District and Regional
Water Quality Control Board) daily to reduce PMlo emissions, in
accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 403.
2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule
established by the City to reduce PM~0 emissions associated with vehicle
tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the time of year
of construction.
3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed
25 mph to minimize PM~0 emission from the site during such episodes.
4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by South Coast Air Quality
Management District and Regional Water Quality Control Board) shall be
applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for 96 hours
or more to reduce PM~0 emissions.
Water Quality
1) Structures to retain precipitation and runoff on-site shall be integrated into
the design of the project where appropriate. Measures that may be used
to minimize runoff and to enhance infiltration include Dutch drains, precast
concrete lattice blocks and bricks, terraces, diversions, runoff spreaders,
seepage pits, and recharge basins.
Noise
1) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of
8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time
on Sunday or a national holiday.
2) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards
specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at the
property line. The developer shall hire a consultant to perform weekly
noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code
Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
SUBTPM16038 - CARNEY
November 19, 2003
Page 8
Planning Division. Said consultant shall report their findings to the
Planning Division within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the
above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the Planning
Division. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then construction
activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of compliance with above
noise standards or halted.
3) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of 8:00 p.m.
and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any time on Sunday
or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used for hauling would
exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the construction site),
then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation plan denoting any
construction traffic haul routes. To the extent feasible, the plan shall
denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive land uses or residential
dwellings.
5. This Council hereby provides notice to the appellant and Cecil R. Carney that the time within
which judicial review of the decision represented by this Resolution must be sought is governed by the
provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6.
6. The City Clerk (~f the City of Rancho Cucamonga is hereby dire'cted to: (a) certify to the
adoption of this Resolution, and (b) forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified
mail, return-receipt requested, to appellant and Cecil R. Carney at the address identified in City records.
.2/I
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT#: SUBTPM16038
SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FOR FOUR SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS
APPLICANT: CECIL R. CARNEY
LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF KLUSMAN AVENUE NORTH OF DIAMOND AVENUE
,tiLL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE
WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
Completion Date
A. General Requirements
t
1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against tha City, its /__._/
agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to
relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse tha City, its agents, officers, or
employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or
employees may be required by a court to pay as a rasult of such action. The City may, at its sole
discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation
shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition.
2. Approval of Tentative Tract No. 160:38 is 9ranted subject to the approval of Variance ___/ /
DR02003-00017.
:3. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 03-113, Standard .__/ /
Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The
sheet(s) am for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and
are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect.
El. Time Limits
1. This tentative tract map or tentative parcel map shall expire, unless extended by the Planning .__/ /
Commission, unless a complete final map is filed with the City Engineer within :3 years from the
date of the approval.
C. Site Development
1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include
site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and
grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, and Development Code
regulations.
,2 2 /
Project No. SUBTPM16038
Completion Date
2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions / L
of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
3. Occupancy of the facilities shall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and ./ /
State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be
submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division
to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy.
4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be .__/ /
submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for
consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment,
building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved
use has commenced, whichever comes first.
6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, ail / /
other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the
time of building permit issuance.
7. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units with .__/ /
all receptacles shielded from public view.
8. Trash receptacle(s) are required and shall meet City standards. The final design, locations, and ._._/__../
the number of trash receptacles shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the
issuance of building permits.
9. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transfOrmers, AC condensers, etc., shall be /___/
located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete
or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. For single-
family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults.
I10. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property / /
owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape
maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to
the issuance of building permits.
11. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all ~ /
lots for City Planner and City Engineer approval; including, but not limited to, public notice
requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of construction
activity, dust control measures, and security fencing.
D. Landscaping
1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping ~n ./ /.~
the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and
submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior
final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision.
2. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 _/ /
slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion
control. Slope planting required by this section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be
installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
3. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater___/ /
slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as
follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1-gallon or larger size
shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks
in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or
larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in
staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall
include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
,22 2
) *} Project No. SUBTPM16038
Comeletion Date
4. For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously / /
maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold
and occupied bythe buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be
conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory condition.
5. The final design of the perimeter parkways, wails, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in / /.__
the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and
coordinated for consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the
Engineering Division.
6. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the / ./
perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer.
E. Environmental
1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of / /
implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to
post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the
amount of $719.00 prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory
performance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the Cityto
retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures.
Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be
considered grounds for forfeit,
F, Other Agencies
1. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location ___/ /
of mailboxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for
mailboxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the
~' overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of
building permits.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S)
Gl. General Requirements
1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: .~/ /
a. Site/Plot Plan;
b. Foundation Plan;
c. Flooi: Plan;
d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan;
e. Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached) including the size of the main switch, number and size
of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams;
f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams, water and waste
diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air
conditioning; and
g. Planning Division Project Number (i.e., SUBTPM16038) clearly identified on the outside of
all plans.
! I Project No. SUBTPM16038
Completion Date
2, Submit two sets ot structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils reportl ._~ /
Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet" signature are required prior to plan check submittal.
3. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers' Compensation coverage to .~/ /
the City prior to permit issuance.
4. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. /.---/
5, Business shall not open for operation prior to posting the Certificate of Occupancy issued by the /_._/
Building and Safety Division.
6, Developers wishing to participate in the Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP) can /___/
contact the Building and Safety Division staff for information and submittal requirements.
H. Site Development
1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be / /
marked with the project file number (i.e., SUBTPM16038). The applicant shall comply with the
latest adopted California Codes, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in
effect at the time of permit application. Contact the Building and Safety Division for availability of
the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts.
2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential project or major addition, the applicant / /
shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to:
City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and
Plan Check Fees, and School Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to
the Building and Safety Division prior to permit issuance.
3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building and Safety Official after tract/parcel map / /
recordation and prior to issuance of building permits.
4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday __/ /
through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays.
I. New Structures
1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances ___/ /
considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness.
2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. .__/ /
3. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's "high Wind" instructions. __/ /
J. Grading
1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with Califomia Building Code, City Grading ~__~
Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial
conformance with the approved grading plan.
2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to /___/
perform such work.
3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the / /
time of application for grading plan check.
4. The final grading, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be comp!eted, /___/
submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building
permits.
) ') Project No. SUBTPM16038
ComDletion Date
5. A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for /.__!
existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of
combined cut and fill. The grading plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a California
registered Civil Engineer.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
K. Dedication and Vehicular Access
1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, /~
community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment
and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map.
Private easements for non-public facilities (cress-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be
reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map.
2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from / /
street centerline):
30 total feet on Klusman Avenue. / /
3. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. / /
L. Street Improvements
1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: / !
I, Curb& A.C. Side- Drive StreetStreet Corem Median Bike
Street
Name
Gutter Pvmt walk Appr. Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other
r Klusman Avenue
X X X X xX X
/
Diamond
Avenue
Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement
reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) If so marked, sidewalk
shall be curvilinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be
provided for this item.
2. Improvement Plans and Construction:
a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights.__/ /
on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be
posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City
Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to
final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first.
b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a ___/ /
construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any
other permits required.
c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and ~ /
interconnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction ~.~/
project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and
interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside
of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer.
) ) Project No. SUBTPM16038
Completion Date
Notes:
1)Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200
feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer.
2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel
with pull rope or as specified.
e. Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City .~/ /
Standards or as directed by the City Engineer.
f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with .~/ /
adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits ara required. A cash
deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded
upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cross sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be .__/ /
installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots.
h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan chock. .~/ /
3. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in .~/ /
accordance with the City's street tree program.
4. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed .__J /
legend and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans.
Where public landscape plans are raquirad, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public
landscape improvement plans.
The City Engineer reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field conditions and other
variables. For additional information, contact the Projoct Engineer.
Street Name Botanical Name Fill-in
Common Name I Space I Spacing Size'
Klusman Avenue'st.Magn°liaMary'grandifl°ra NCN 3 feet 20o.c.feet 15-gal.
*TREES SHALL BE 15-GALLON SIZE UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED.
Construction Notes for Street Trees:
1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans.
2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils rapert shall be furnished to
the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil
amendments, as determined by the City inspoctor.
3)All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Division.
4)Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only.
5. Intersoction line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with /.~/
adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project
intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersoctions and commercial or
industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required.
Public Maintenance Areas
1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting
Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building
permits whichever occurs first. Formation costs shall be borne bythe developer.
SC-07-03 6 c:,~..¢~.' ~,
Project No. SUBTPM16038
Completion Date
IN. Drainage and Flood Control
1. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the ___/ /
property from adjacent areas.
O, Utilities
1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, __/ /
electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility
Standards. Easements shall be provided as required.
2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. __/ /
3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the .__/ !
Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the
Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from
the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first.
Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval
in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential
projects.
4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. .___/ /
Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from
them.
i='. General Requirements and Approvals
1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all .__/ /
new streetlights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building
perm~it issuance if no map is involved.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DIVISION, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING
SERVICES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
SEE ATrACHED
SC-07-03 7 C:~;~.. 7
')
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
FIRE SAFETY DIVISION
STANDARD CONDITIONS
FD PLAN REVIEW#: FD-03-0897
PROJECT #: SUBTPM16038
.PROJECT NAME: Klusman Residences
DATE: June 15, 2003
PLAN TYPE: SFR
APPLICANT NAME: Cecil Carney
OCCUPANCY CLASS: Group R-3
FLOOR AREA (S): Up to 2800 Square feet
TYPE CONSTRUCTION: Type V
FIRE PROTECTION
SYSTEM REQUIRED: Fire Sprinklers for Lot 4
LOCATION: Klusman S/O Banyan
FD REVIEW BY: Tim Fejeran, Fire Inspector
PLANNER: Rick Fisher
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DMSION, (909) 477-2770, TO VERIFY
COMPLIANCE WITH ~ FOLLOWING: ,
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE DISTRICT- STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS -
General, Procedural, Technical, or Operational Information that shall be Included,
Corrected, Or Completed as noted below. The following is applicable to the above
project.
FSC-1 General Requirements for Public and Private Water Supply
1. General Guidance for Fire Hydrants: The following provides general guidance for the spacing and
location of fire hydrants. Remember these are the maximum permitted distances between fire
hydrants:
a. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in single-family residential projects is 500-feet.
No portion of the exterior wall facing the addressed street shall be more than 250-feet from an
approved fire hydrant. For cul-de-sacs the distance shall not exceed 200 ft.
b. Fire hydrants are to be located:
i) At the entrance(s) to a project from the existing public roadways. This includes
subdivisions and industrial parks.
ii) At intersections.
iii) On the right side of the street, whenever practical and possible.
iv) As required by the Fire Safety Division to meet operational needs.
v) The location of fire hydrants is based upon the operational needs of the Fire District to
control a fire.
vi) Fire hydrants shall be located a minimum of forty (40) feet from any building.
Contact the Fire Safety Division (909) 477-2770
2. Minimum Fire Flow: The required fire flow for this project is 1500 gallons per minute at a minimum
residual pressure of 20 pounds per square inch. This requirement is made in accordance with Fire
Code Appendix Ill-A, as amended. Please see "Water Availability" attachment for reeuired
verification of fire flow availal~ility for the proposed project. Contact the Fire Safety Division
(909) 477-2770
3. Show Existing Fire Hydrants and Mains: Existing fire hydrants and mains within 600-feet of the
project shall be shown on the water plan submitted for review and approval. Include main size.
FSC-3 Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems- Technlcal Comments
1. Required Installations:
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Ordinance 15 or other adopted code or standard, requires an
approved automatic fire sprinkler system to be installed in any of the following:
a. All structures that do not meet Fire District access requirements (See Fire Access)
b. Lot 4 requires fire sprinklers to mitigate access.
Contact the Fire Safety Division (909) 477-2770
FSC-4 Fire District Site Access- Technical Comments
1. Access Roadways Defined: Fire District access roadways include public reads, streets, and
highways, as well as private roads, streets, drive aisles and designated fire lanes.
2. Location of Access: All portions of the structure or facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the first
story shall be located within 150-feet of Fire District vehicle access, measured by an unobstructed
approved route around the exterior of the building. Landscaped areas, unpaved changes in elevation
gates, and fences are an obstruction.
FSC-14 Alternate Materials and Methods
The Fire Safety Division will review requests for alternate materials and methods within the scope of our
authority. The request must be submitted on the Fire District "Application for Alternate Metho~ form along with
supporting documents. Contact the Fire Safety Division at (909) 477-2770 for assistance.
3RIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION- Complete the following:
1. Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire
hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection
District and City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "Installation of Reflective
Hydrant Markers." On private property these markers are to be maintained in good condition by the
property owner. Contact Building and Safety/Fire Construction Services (909) 477-2713.
2. Address Single-family: New single-family dwellings shall post the address with minimum 4-inch
numbers on a contrasting background. The numbers shall be internally or externally illuminated during
periods of darkness. The numbers shall be visible from the street. When building setback from the
public roadway exceeds 100 feet, additional 4-inch numbers shall be displayed at the property entry.
RESOLUTION NO. 03- .~/
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION AND APPROVING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
DRC2003-00015, THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW OF FOUR HOMES
WITHIN TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. SUBTPM16038, ON 1.1 GROSS
ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF KLUSMAN
AVENUE, NORTH OF DIAMOND AVENUE IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL
DISTRICT, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF -
APN: 1062-401-05.
A. Recitals.
1. Cecil Carney filed an application for the Development Review as described in the title of
this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review request is referred
to as "the application."
2. On the 27th day of August 2003, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga held a meeting to consider the application and following the conclusion of said August
27, 2003 meeting, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 03-112 approving the
application.
3. The decision represented by said Planning Commission Resolution was timely appealed
to this Council.
4. On October 1,2003, this Council continued the duly noticed 3ublic hearing on the appeal
to their November 5, and again to their November 19, 2003 agenda.
5. On the 8th day of October 2003, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga held a public hearing to consider the related Variance DRC2003-00017 again, including
an alternative site plan design that eliminated the need for two out of three variances, and following
the conclusion of said October 8, 2003 meeting, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution
No. 03-145 approving said Variance.
6. On November 5, and November 19, 2003, this Council conducted a duly noticed public
hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date.
7. 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 Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-
referenced meeting on November 5, and November 19, 2003, including written and oral staff
reports, the minutes of the above-referenced Planning Commission meeting, and the contents of
Planning Commission Resolution No. 03-112, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows:
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
DRC2003-00015
November 19, 2003
Page 2
a. The application applies to a 1.1 acre property located on the west side of Klusman
Avenue, north of Diamond Avenue, with a street frontage of 304 feet and lot depth of 80 feet (after
dedication for Klusman Avenue), and is presently vacant; and
b. The property to the north of the subject site is single-family residential, the property to
the south across Diamond Avenue is single-family residential, the property to the east across
Klusman Avenue is single-family residential, and the property to the west is single-family residential;
and
c. The applicant conducted a meeting on May 14, 2003, at which eight residents
attended, to inform surrounding neighborhood residents of the proposed project and to obtain their
feedback.
d. The proposed lots exceed the minimum standards of the Low Residential District,
except for lot depth. The applicant has submitted a Variance DRC2003-00017 request.
eo The gross area of the project site as measured to the centerline of Klusman Avenue
and Diamond Avenue, is 1.108 acres; therefore, up to 4 homes are allowed in the Low Residential
zone (2-4 dwelling units per acre). Project density is 3.61 dwelling units per acre.
f. Currently, Klusman Avenue has only been improved on the east side. This
development would complete the missing street improvements on the west side, thus doubling the
on-street parking capacity. Also, all of the proposed homes have 3-car garages, which exceeds the
City's standard of 2-car garage off-street parking, and reduces the demand for on-street parking.
3. Based upon the substantial' evidence presented to this Council during the above-
referenced meeting on November 5 and November 19, 2003, including written and oral staff reports,
' this Council hereby specifically finds and concludes as follows:
a. That the proposed project is consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and
bo That the proposed design is in accord with the objectives of the Development Code
and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and
c. That the proposed design is in compliance with each of the applicable provisions of
the Development Code; and
g. That the proposed design, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not
be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity.
4. Based upon the facts and information contained in the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration, together with all written and oral reports included for the environmental assessment for
the application, the City Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a
significant effect upon the environment and adopts a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Monitoring
Program attached hereto, and incorporated herein by this reference, based upon the findings as
follows:
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
DRC2003-00015
November 19, 2003
Page 3
a. That the Mitigated 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 Mitigated 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration with
regard to the application.
b. Although the Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies certain significant
environmental effects that will result if the project is approved, all significant effects have been
reduced to an acceptable level by imposition of mitigation measures on the project which are listed
below as conditions of approval.
co 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 Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project, there is no evidence that the proposed project
will have potential for an adverse impact upon wildlife resources or the habitat upon which wildlife
depends. Further, based upon the substantial evidence contained in the Mitigated 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-1 -d) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, 3, and 4 above,
this Council hereby denies the appeal, upholds the action of the Planning Commission, and
approves the application subject to each and every condition set forth below:
Plannin.q Division
1 ) The project shall be developed consistent with the alternative Site Plan
layout based upon a reduced radius turnaround as shown on the
attached Exhibit "A."
2) This approval is granted contingent upon the approval of Variance
DRC2003-00017.
3) The second floor windows on the west elevation shall be deleted or
changed to non-vision glass.
4) The Floor Plans shall be modified to reduce the size of the building
footprint in order to meet the 20-foot rear yard setback, while
maintaining the 32-foot minimum front setback.
5) Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00419 is hereby approved subject to
replacement planting as required by Environmental Mitigation
Measures contained herein.
Enclineerin.q Division
1) Klusman Avenue frontage improvements to be in accordance with
"Local Residential" standards including, but not limited to, the following:
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
DRC2003-00015
November 19, 2003
Page 4
a) Provide curb and gutter, sidewalk, drive approaches, street trees,
and asphalt pavement, as required.
b) Provide 5800 Lumen HPSV streetlights, as required per City
Street Lighting Standard.
o) Provide traffic striping and signage, as required.
d) Stop permanent improvements north of the southerly ddve
approach on Lot 3 and provide interim asphalt pavement to serve
Lot 4 and the northerly driveway on Lot 3.
2) The developer shall deposit cash in-lieu of constructioq with the City for
frontage improvements on Lot 4 and the north half of Lot 3 prior to final
map approval. The deposit shall include removal costs for interim
improvements.
3) Diamond Street frontage improvements are to be in accordance with
"Local Residential" standards including, but not limited to, the following:
a) Protect existing curb and gutter, and sidewalk, or repair as
required.
b)Protect existing traffic striping and signage, or replace as
required.
c) Provide 5800 Lumen HPSV streetlights, as required per City
Street Lighting Standard.
4) Final Parcel Map 16038 shall be approved and recorded prior to
issuance of building permits.
Environmental Mitiqation
Air Quality
1) All construction equipment shall be maintained in good operating
condition so as to reduce operational emissions. Contractor shall
ensure that all construction equipment is being properly serviced and
maintained as per manufacturers' specifications. Maintenance records
shall be available at the construction site for City verification.
2) Prior to the issuance of any grading permits, the developer shall submit
construction plans to the City denoting the proposed schedule and
projected equipment use. Construction contractors shall provide
evidence that Iow-emission mobile construction equipment will be
utilized, or that their use was investigated and found to be infeasible for
the project. Contractors shall also conform to any construction
measures imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management
District, as well as City Planning staff.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
DRC2003-00015
November 19, 2003
Page 5
3) All paints and coatings shall meet or exceed performance standards
noted in South Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1113.
Paints and coatings shall be applied either by hand or high-volume,
Iow-pressure spray.
4) All asphalt shall meet or exceed performance standards noted in South
Coast Air Quality Management District Rule 1108.
· 5) All construction equipment shall comply with South Coast Air Quality
Management District Rules 402 and 403. Additionally, contractors
shall include the following provisions:
· Reestablish ground cover on the construction site through
seeding and watering.
· Pave or apply gravel to any on-site haul roads.
· Phase grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to
erosion over extended periods of time.
· Schedule activities to minimize the amounts of exposed
excavated soil during and after the end of work periods.
· Dispose of surplus excavated material in accordance with local
ordinances and use sound engineering practices.
· Sweep streets according to a schedule established by the City if
silt is carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares or occurs as a
resdlt of hauling. Timing may vary depending upon the time of
year of construction.
· Suspend grading operations during high winds (i.e., wind speeds
exceeding 25 mph) in accordance with Rule 403 requirements.
· Maintain a minimum 24-inch freeboard ratio on soils haul trucks
or cover payloads using tarps or other suitable means.
6) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent
(approved by South Coast Air Quality Management District and
Regional Water Quality Control Board) daily to reduce PMlo emissions,
in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District
Rule 403.
7) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by South Coast Air Quality
Management District and Regional Water Quality Control Board) shall
be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for
96 hours or more to reduce PMlo emissions.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
DRC2003-00015
November 19, 2003
Page 6
8) The construction contractor shall utilize electric or clean alternative
fuel-powered equipment where feasible.
9) The construction contractor shall ensure that constriction grading plans
include a statement that work crews will shut off equipment when not in
use.
10) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to
incorporate high-efficiency/Iow-polluting heating, air conditioners,
appliance, and water heaters.
11) All residential and commercial structures shall be required to
incorporate thermal pane windows and weather-stripping.
Biology
1 ) Tree removal shall require replacement planting on a one-for-one basis
with the largest nursery grown specimens available as determined by
the City Planner.
Cultural Resources
1 ) If any prehistoric archaeological resources are encountered before or
during grading, the developer will retain a qualified archaeologist to
monitor construction activities, to take appropriate measures to protect
or preserve them for study. With the assistance of the amhaeologist,
the City of Rancho Cucamonga will:
Enact interim measures to protect undesignated sites from
demolition or significant modification without an opportunity for
the City to establish its archaeological value.
· Consider establishing provisions to require incorporation of
archaeological sites within new developments by using their
special qualities as a theme or focal point.
· Pursue educating the public about the area's archaeological
heritage.
· Propose mitigation measures and recommend conditions of
approval to eliminate adverse project effects on significant,
important, and unique prehistoric resources, following
appropriate CEQA guidelines.
· Prepare a technical resources management report, documenting
the inventory, evaluation, and proposed mitigation of resources
within the project area. Submit one copy of the completed report
with original illustrations to the San Bernardino County
Archaeological Information Center for permanent archiving.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
DRC2003-00015
November 19, 2003
Page 7
2) A qualified paleontogist shall conduct a preconstruction field survey of
the project site. The paleontologist shall submit a report of findings
that will also provide specific recommendations regarding fur[her
mitigation measures (i.e., paleontological monitoring) that may be
appropriate. Where mitigation monitoring is appropriate, the program
must include, but not be limited to, the following measures:
· Assign a paleontological monitor, trained and equipped to allow
the rapid removal of fossils with minimal construction delay, to
the site full-time during the interval of earth-disturbing activities.
· Should fossils be found within an area being cleared or graded,
divert earth-disturbing activities elsewhere until the monitor has
completed salvage. If construction personnel make the
discovery, the grading contractor should immediately divert
construction and notify the monitor of the find.
· Submit a summary ~eport to the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
Transfer collected specimens with a copy of the report to the
San Bernardino County Museum.
Geology
1) The site shall be treated with water or other soil-stabilizing agent
(approved by South Coast Air Quality Management District and
Regional Water Quality Control Board) daily to reduce PM~o emissions,
in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District
Rule 403.
2) Frontage public streets shall be swept according to a schedule
established by the City to reduce PM~o emissions associated with
vehicle tracking of soil off-site. Timing may vary depending upon the
time of year of construction.
3) Grading operations shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed
25 mph to minimize PM~o emission from the site during such episodes.
4) Chemical soil-stabilizers (approved by South Coast Air Quality
Management District and Regional Water Quality Control Board) shall
be applied to all inactive construction areas that remain inactive for
96 hours or more to reduce PM~0 emissions.
Water Quality
1 ) Structures to retain precipitation and runoff on-site shall be integrated
into the design of the project where appropriate. Measures that may
be used to minimize runoff and to enhance infiltration include Dutch
drains, precast concrete lattice blocks and bricks, terraces, diversions,
runoff spreaders, seepage pits, and recharge basins.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
DRC2003-00015
November19,2003
Page 8
Noise
1) Construction or grading shall not take place between the hours of
8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any
time on Sunday or a national holiday.
2) Construction or grading noise levels shall not exceed the standards
specified in Development Code Section 17.02.120-D, as measured at
the property line. The developer shall hire a consultant to perform
weekly noise level monitoring as specified in Development Code
Section 17.02.120. Monitoring at other times may be required by the
Planning Division. Said consultant shall report their findings to the
Planning Division within 24 hours; however, if noise levels exceed the
above standards, then the consultant shall immediately notify the
Planning Division. If noise levels exceed the above standards, then
construction activities shall be reduced in intensity to a level of
compliance with above noise standards or halted.
3) Haul truck deliveries shall not take place between the hours of
8:00 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, including Saturday, or at any
time on Sunday or a national holiday. Additionally, if heavy trucks used
for hauling would exceed 100 daily trips (counting both to and from the
construction site), then the developer shall prepare a noise mitigation
plan denoting any construction traffic haul routes. To the extent
feasible, the plan shall denote haul routes that do not pass sensitive
land uses or residential dwellings.
5. This Council hereby provides notice to the appellant and Cecil R. Carney that the time
within which judicial review of the decision represented by this Resolution must be sought is
governed by the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6.
6. The City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is hereby directed to: (a) certify to the
adoption of this Resolution, and (b) forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified
mail, return-~eceipt requested, to the appellant and Cecil R. Carney at the address identified in City
records.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
STANDARD CONDITIONS
PROJECT #: DRC2003-00015
SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FOR FOUR SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES
APPLICANT: CECIL R. CARNEY
LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF KLUSMAN NORTH OF DIAMOND AVENUE
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE PLANNING DIVISION, (909) 477-2750, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE
FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
A. General Requirements Completion Date
1. The applicant shall agree to defend at his sole expense any action brought against the City, its / /
agents, officers, or employees, because of the issuance of such approval, or in the alternative, to
relinquish such approval. The applicant shall reimburse the City, its agents, officers, or
employees, for any Court costs and attorney's fees which the City, its agents, officers, or
employees may be required by a court to pay as a result of such action. The City may, at its sole
discretion, participate at its own expense in the defense of any such action but such participation
shall not relieve applicant of his obligations under this condition.
2. Approval of Development Review DRC2003-00015 is granted subject to the approval of Variance / /
DRC2003-00017 and Minor Exception DRC2003-00016.
3. Copies of the signed Planning Commission Resolution of Approval No. 03-112, Standard / /
Conditions, and all environmental mitigations shall be included on the plans (full size). The
sheet(s) are for information only to all parties involved in the construction/grading activities and
are not required to be wet sealed/stamped by a licensed Engineer/Architect.
B, Time Limits
1. Conditional Use Permit, Variance, or Development/Design Review approval shall expire if / /
building permits are not issued or approved use has not commenced within 5 years from the date
of approval. No extensions are allowed.
C. Site Development
1. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans which include / /
site plans, architectural elevations, exterior materials and colors, landscaping, sign program, and
grading on file in the Planning Division, the conditions contained herein, and Development Code
regulations.
2. Prior to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions /___/__
of Approval shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Planner.
,c.o,-o3 1 '¢
Project No. DR02003-00015
Completion Date
3. Occupancy of the facilities ~hall not commence until such time as all Uniform Building Code and I /__/
State Fire Marshal regulations have been complied with. Prior to occupancy, plans shall be
submitted to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District and the Building and Safety Division
to show compliance. The buildings shall be inspected for compliance prior to occupancy.
4. Revised site plans and building elevations incorporating all Conditions of Approval shall be /~
submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
5. All site, grading, landscape, irrigation, and street improvement plans shall be coordinated for __/ /
consistency prior to issuance of any permits (such as grading, tree removal, encroachment,
building, etc.) or prior to final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision, or approved
use has commenced, whichever comes first.
6. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of the Development Code, all ___/ /
other applicable City Ordinances, and applicable Community or Specific Plans in effect at the
time of building permit issuance.
7. If no centralized trash receptacles are provided, all trash pick-up shall be for individual units with ~ /
all receptacles shielded from public view.
8. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be _.__/ /
located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete
or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the City Planner. For single-
family residential developments, transformers shall be placed in underground vaults.
9. All building numbers and individual units shall be identified in a clear and concise manner, .~J /
including proper illumination.
10. All parkways, open areas, and landscaping shall be permanently maintained by the property ___/ /
owner, homeowners' association, or other means acceptable to the City. Proof of this landscape
maintenance shall be submitted for City Planner and City Engineer review and approved prior to
the issuance of building permits.
11. The developer shall submit a construction access plan and schedule for the development of all ~ /
lots for City Planner and City Engineer approval; including, but not limited to, public notice
requirements, special street posting, phone listing for community concerns, hours of construction
activity, dust control measures, and security fencing.
12. Six-foot decorative block walls shall be constructed along the project perimeter. If a double wall ___/ /
condition would result, the developer shall make a good faith effort to work with the adjoining
property owners to provide a single wall. Developer shall notify, by mail, all contiguous property
owner at least 30 days prior to the removal of any existing walls/fences along the project's
perimeter.
13. On corner side yards, provide minimum 5-foot setback between walls/fences and sidewalk. / /
14. For residential development, recreation area/facility shall be provided as required by the / /
Development Code.
15. Where rock cobble is used, it shall be real river rock. Other stone veneers may be manufactured / /
products.
16. Distance between rear of house and toe of slope shall be 15 feet minimum / /
17. Construct block walls between homes (i.e., along interior side and rear property lines), rather than /.__/__
wood fencing, for permanence, durability, and design consistency.
D. Building Design
1. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or / /
projections, shall be shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and
streets as required bythe Planning Division. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated
with the building design and constructed to the satisfaction of the City Planner. Details shall be
included in building plans.
SC-07-03 2 ~/i t~)
Project No. DRC2003-00015
Completion Date
E. Parking and Vehicular Access (indicate details on building plans)
1. All units shall be provided with garage door openers if driveways are less than 18 feet in depth / /..__
from back of sidewalk.
2. Multiple car garage driveways shall be tapered down to a standard two-car width at street.
F'. Landscaping
1. A detailed landscape and irrigation plan, including slope planting and model home landscaping in / /
the case of residential development, shall be prepared by a licensed landscape amhitect and
submitted for City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits or prior
final map approval in the case of a custom lot subdivision.
2.. All private slopes of 5 feet or more in vertical height and of 5:1 or greater slope, but less than 2:1 / /__
slope, shall be, at minimum, irrigated and landscaped with appropriate ground cover for erosion
control. Slope planting required bythis section shall include a permanent irrigation system to be
installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
3. All private slopes in excess of 5 feet, but less than 8 feet in vertical height and of 2:1 or greater
slope shall be landscaped and irrigated for erosion control and to soften their appearance as
follows: one 15-gallon or larger size tree per each 150 sq. ft. of slope area, 1 -gallon or larger size
shrub per each 100 sq. ft. of slope area, and appropriate ground cover. In addition, slope banks
in excess of 8 feet in vertical height and 2:1 or greater slope shall also include one 5-gallon or
larger size tree per each 250 sq. ft. of slope area. Trees and shrubs shall be planted in
staggered clusters to soften and vary slope plane. Slope planting required by this section shall
include a permanent irrigation system to be installed by the developer prior to occupancy.
4. For single-family residential development, all slope planting and irrigation shall be continuously __/ /
maintained in a healthy and thriving condition by the developer until each individual unit is sold
and occupied bythe buyer. Prior to releasing occupancy for those units, an inspection shall be
conducted by the Planning Division to determine that they are in satisfactory condition.
5. Front yard and corner side yard landscaping and irrigation shall be required per the Development /__/
Code. This requirement shall be in addition to the required street trees and stope planting.
6. The final design of the perimeter parkways, wails, landscaping, and sidewalks shall be included in /___/
the required landscape plans and shall be subject to City Planner review and approval and
coordinated for'consistency with any parkway landscaping plan which may be required by the
Engineering Division.
7. Landscaping and irrigation systems required to be installed within the public right-of-way on the /__/
perimeter of this project area shall be continuously maintained by the developer.
8. All walls shall be provided with decorative treatment. If located in public maintenance areas, the /.~
design shall be coordinated with the Engineering Division.
G. Environmental
1. Mitigation measures are required for the project. The applicant is responsible for the cost of __/ /
implementing said measures, including monitoring and reporting. Applicant shall be required to
post cash, letter of credit, or other forms of guarantee acceptable to the City Planner in the
amount of $719.00 prior to the issuance of building permits, guaranteeing satisfactory
pedormance and completion of all mitigation measures. These funds may be used by the City to
retain consultants and/or pay for City staff time to monitor and report on the mitigation measures.
Failure to complete all actions required by the approved environmental documents shall be
considered grounds for forfeit.
SC-07-03 3 ~.~//
Project No. DRC2003-00015
Completion Date
H, Other Agencies
1. The applicant shall contact the U.S. Postal Service to determine the appropriate type and location /.~/
of mailboxes. Multi-family residential developments shall provide a solid overhead structure for
mailboxes with adequate lighting. The final location of the mailboxes and the design of the
overhead structure shall be subject to City Planner review and approval prior to the issuance of
building permits.
AIPPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2710, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
NOTE: ANY REVISIONS MAY VOID THESE REQUIREMENTS AND NECESSITATE ADDITIONAL REVIEW(S)
I. General Requirements
1. Submit five complete sets of plans including the following: / /
a. Site/Plot Plan;
b. Foundation Plan;
c. Floor Plan;
d. Ceiling and Roof Framing Plan;
e. Electrical Plans (2 sets, detached) including the size of the main switch, number and size
of service entrance conductors, panel schedules, and single line diagrams;
f. Plumbing and Sewer Plans, including isometrics, underground diagrams, water and waste
diagram, sewer or septic system location, fixture units, gas piping, and heating and air
conditioning; and
g. Planning Division Project Number (i.e., DRC2003-00015) clearly identified on the outside
of all plans.
2. Submit two sets of structural calculations, energy conservation calculations, and a soils report. ~/ /
Architect's/Engineer's stamp and "wet" signature are required prior to plan check submittal.
3. Contractors must show proof of State and City licenses and Workers' Compensation coverage to ~ /
the City prior to permit issuance.
4. Separate permits are required for fencing and/or walls. ~ /
5. Developers wishing to participate in the Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP) can .~ /__
contact the Building and Safety Division staff for information and submittal requirements.
J. Site Development
1. Plans shall be submitted for plan check and approved prior to construction. All plans shall be ___/ /
marked with the project file number (i.e., DRC2003-00015). The applicant shall comply with the
latest adopted California Codes, and all other applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations in
effect at the time of permit application. Contact the Building and Safety Division for availability of
the Code Adoption Ordinance and applicable handouts.
2. Prior to issuance of building permits for a new residential project or major addition, the applicant __/ /
shall pay development fees at the established rate. Such fees may include, but are not limited to:
City Beautification Fee, Park Fee, Drainage Fee, Transportation Development Fee, Permit and
Plan Check Fees, and School Fees. Applicant shall provide a copy of the school fees receipt to
the Building and Safety Division prior to permit issuance.
sc:-07-03 4
Project No. DRC2003-00015
Completion Date
3. Street addresses shall be provided by the Building and Safety Official after tract/parcel map /. /
recordation and prior to issuance of building permits.
4. Construction activity shall not occur between the hours of 8:00 p,m. and 6:30 a.m. Monday /_.__/
through Saturday, with no construction on Sunday or holidays.
K. New Structures
1. Provide compliance with the California Building Code (CBC) for property line clearances .__/ /
considering use, area, and fire-resistiveness.
2. Provide compliance with the California Building Code for required occupancy separations. .__/ /
3. Roofing material shall be installed per the manufacturer's "high wind" instructions. ~_/ /
L. Grading
1. Grading of the subject property shall be in accordance with California Building Code, City Grading / /
Standards, and accepted grading practices. The final grading plan shall be in substantial
conformance with the approved grading plan.
2. A soils report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer licensed by the State of California to / /
perform such work.
3. A geological report shall be prepared by a qualified engineer or geologist and submitted at the / /
time of application for grading plan check.
4. The final grading, appropriate certifications and compaction reports shall be completed, /__/
submitted, and approved by the Building and Safety Official prior to the issuance of building
permits.
5. A separate grading plan check submittal is required for all new construction projects and for /. /
existing buildings where improvements being proposed will generate 50 cubic yards or more of
combined cut and fill. The grading plan shall be prepared, stamped, and signed by a California
registered Civil Engineer.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEERING DIVISION, (909) 477-2740, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
M. Dedication and Vehicular Access
1. Rights-of-way and easements shall be dedicated to the City for all interior public streets, / /
community trails, public paseos, public landscape areas, street trees, traffic signal encroachment
and maintenance, and public drainage facilities as shown on the plans and/or tentative map.
Private easements for non-public facilities (cross-lot drainage, local feeder trails, etc.) shall be
reserved as shown on the plans and/or tentative map.
2. Dedication shall be made of the following rights-of-way on the perimeter streets (measured from / /
street centerline):
30 total feet on Klusman Avenue. /. /
3. Corner property line cutoffs shall be dedicated per City Standards. /_.._/
sc., 7.o3 5
Project No. DRC2003-00015
Completion Date
N.. Street Improvements
1. Construct the following perimeter street improvements including, but not limited to: /___/
Curb& A.C. Side- Drive Street Street Comm Median Bike
Street Naroe Gutter Pvrot I walk I Appr. I Lights Trees Trail Island Trail Other
Klusman Avenue X X X X X X
x
Diamond Avenue
Notes: (a) Median island includes landscaping and irrigation on meter. (b) Pavement
reconstruction and overlays will be determined during plan check. (c) if so marked, sidewalk
shall be curviiinear per Standard 114. (d) If so marked, an in-lieu of construction fee shall be
provided for this item.
2. Improvement Plans and Construction:
a. Street improvement plans, including street trees, street lights, and intersection safety lights /___/
on future signal poles, and traffic signal plans shall be prepared by a registered Civil
Engineer and shall be submitted to and approved by the City Engineer. Security shall be
posted and an agreement executed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City
Attorney guaranteeing completion of the public and/or private street improvements, prior to
final map approval or the issuance of building permits, whichever occurs first.
b. Prior to any work being performed in public right-of-way, fees shall be paid and a ._~__~
construction permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer's Office in addition to any
other permits required.
c. Pavement striping, marking, traffic signing, street name signing, traffic signal conduit, and _~ /
intemonnect conduit shall be installed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
d. Signal conduit with pull boxes shall be installed with any new construction or reconstruction ___/~
project along major or secondary streets and at intersections for future traffic signals and
interconnect wiring. Pull boxes shall be placed on both sides of the street at 3 feet outside
of BCR, ECR, or any other locations approved by the City Engineer
Notes:
1 ) Pull boxes shall be No. 6 at intersections and No. 5 along streets, a maximum of 200
feet apart, unless otherwise specified by the City Engineer.
2) Conduit shall be 3-inch (at intersections) or 2-inch (along streets) galvanized steel
with pull rope or as specified.
e.' Handicapped access ramps shall be installed on all corners of intersections per City ___/ /
Standards or as directed by the City Engineer.
f. Existing City roads requiring construction shall remain open to traffic at all times with _~ /
adequate detours during construction. Street or lane closure permits are required. A cash
deposit shall be provided to cover the cost of grading and paving, which shall be refunded
upon completion of the construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
g. Concentrated drainage flows shall not cress sidewalks. Under sidewalk drains shall be .~ /
installed to City Standards, except for single family residential lots.
h. Street names shall be approved by the City Planner prior to submittal for first plan check. ___/ /
3. Street trees, a minimum of 15-gallon size or larger, shall be installed per City Standards in / /
accordance with the City's street tree program.
sc..o7.o3 6
Project No. DRC2003-00015
Completion Date
4. Install street trees per City street tree design guidelines and standards as follows. The completed /.~/
legend and construction notes shall appear on the title page of the street improvement plans.
Where public landscape plans are required, tree installation in those areas shall be per the public
landscape improvement plans.
The City Engineer reserves the right to adjust tree species based upon field conditions and other
variables. For additional information, contact the Project Engineer.
Common Name GrowMin' Fill-in
Street Name Botanical Name Space Spacing Size* Qty.
Klusman Avenue"st.Magn°liaMary"grandifl°ra NCN 3 feet 20 o.c. 15-gal.
*TREES SHALL BE 15-GALLON SIZE UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED.
Construction Notes for Street Trees:
1) All street trees are to be planted in accordance with City standard plans.
2) Prior to the commencement of any planting, an agronomic soils report shall be furnished to
the City inspector. Any unusual toxicities or nutrient deficiencies may require backfill soil
amendments, as determined by the City inspector.
3)All street trees are subject to inspection and acceptance by the Engineering Division.
4)Street trees are to be planted per public improvement plans only.
5. Intersection line of sight designs shall be reviewed by the City Engineer for conformance with / /
adopted policy. On collector or larger streets, lines of sight shall be plotted for all project
intersections, including driveways. Local residential street intersections and commercial or
industrial driveways may have lines of sight plotted as required.
O. Public Maintenance Areas
1. A signed consent and waiver form to join and/or form the appropriate Landscape and Lighting / /
Districts shall be filed with the City Engineer prior to final map approval or issuance of building
permits whichever occurs flint. Formation costs shall be borne by the developer.
P. Drainage and Flood Control
1. Adequate provisions shall be made for acceptance and disposal of surface drainage entering the /___/
property from adjacent areas.
Q, Utilities
1. Provide separate utility services to each parcel including sanitary sewerage system, water, gas, /~
electric power, telephone, and cable TV (all underground) in accordance with the Utility
Standards. Easements shall be provided as required.
2. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of existing utilities as necessary. / /
3. Water and sewer plans shall be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the / /
Cucamonga County Water District (CCWD), Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, and the
Environmental Health Department of the County of San Bernardino. A letter of compliance from
the CCWD is required prior to final map approval or issuance of permits, whichever occurs first.
Such letter must have been issued by the water district within 90 days prior to final map approval
in the case of subdivision or prior to the issuance of permits in the case of all other residential
projects.
4. Approvals have not been secured from all utilities and other interested agencies involved. /____/
Approval of the final parcel map will be subject to any requirements that may be received from
them.
sc,.07-03 7
Project No. DRC2003-00015
Completion Date
R. General Requirements and Approvals
1. A non-refundable deposit shall be paid to the City, covering the estimated operating costs for all __/ /
new streetlights for the first six months of operation, prior to final map approval or prior to building
permit issuance if no map is involved.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, (909) 477-2800, FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
S. Security Hardware
1. A secondary locking device shall be installed on all sliding glass doors. / /
2. One-inch single cylinder dead bolts shall be installed on all entrance doom. If windows am within /___/
40 inches of any locking device, tempered glass or a double cylinder dead bolt shall be used.
T. Windows
1. All sliding glass windows shall have secondary locking devices and should not be able to be lifted / /
from frame or track in any manner.
U. Building Numbering
1. Numbers and the backgrounds shall be of contrasting color and shall be reflective for nighttime .~/ /
visibility.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DIVISION, FIRE PROTECTION PLANNING
SFRVlCES AT, (909) 477-2770, FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
SEE AI-I'ACHED
SC.07-03 8 ~:~,/~
FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
FIRE SAFETY DIVISION
STANDARD CONDITIONS
FD PLAN REVIEW#: FD-03-0897
PROJECT #: DRC2003-00015
PROJECT NAME: Klusman Residences
DATE: June 15, 2003
PLAN TYPE: SFR
APPLICANT NAME: Cecil Carney
OCCUPANCY CLASS: Group R-3
FLOOR AREA (S): Up to 2800 Square feet
TYPE CONSTRUCTION: Type V
FIRE PROTECTION
SYSTEM REQUIRED: Fire Sprinklers for Lot 4
LOCATION: Klusman S/O Banyan
FD REVIEW BY: Tim Fejeran, Fire Inspector
PLANNER: Rick Fisher
ALL OF THE FOLLOWING STANDARD CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR PROJECT.
APPLICANT SHALL CONTACT THE FIRE SAFETY DIVISION, (909) 477-2770, TO VERIFY
COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING:
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE DISTRICT- STANDARD CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS -
General, Procedural, Technical, or Operational Information that shall be Included,
Corrected, or Completed as noted below. The following is applicable to the above
, project.
FSC-1 General Requirements for Public and Private Water Supply
1. General Guidance for Fire Hydrants: The following provides general guidance for the spacing and
location of fire hydrants. Remember these are the maximum permitted distances between fire
hydrants:
a. The maximum distance between fire hydrants in single-family residential projects is 500-feet.
No portion of the exterior wall facing the addressed street shall be more than 250-feet from an
approved fire hydrant. For cul-de-sacs the distance shall not exceed 200 ft.
b. Fire hydrants are to be located:
i) At the entrance(s) to a project from the existing public roadways. This includes
subdivisions and industrial parks.
ii) At intersections.
iii) On the right side of the street, whenever practical and possible.
iv) As required by the Fire Safety Division to meet operational needs.
v) The location of fire hydrants is based upon the operational needs of the Fire District to
control a fire.
vi) Fire hydrants shall be located a minimum of forty (40) feet from any building.
Contact the Fire Safety Division (909) 477-2770
2. Minimum Fire Flow: The required fire flow for this project is 1500 gallons per minute at a minimum
residual pressure of 20 pounds per square inch. This requirement is made in accordance with Fire
Code Appendix Ill-A, as amended. Please see "Water Availability" attachment for required
verification of fire flow availability for the proposed project. Contact the Fire Safety Division
(909) 477-2770
3. Show Existing Fire Hydrants and Mains: Existing fire hydrants and mains within 600-feet of the
project shall be shown on the water plan submitted for review and approval. Include main size.
FSC-3 Automatic Fire Sprinkler Systems- Technical Comments
1. Required Installations:
Rancho Cucamonga Fire District Ordinance 15 or other adopted code or standard, requires an
approved automatic fire sprinkler system to be installed in any of the following:
a. All structures that do not meet Fire District access requirements (See Fire Access)
b. Lot 4 requires fire sprinklers to mitigate access.
Contact the Fire Safety Division (909) 477-2770
FSC-4 Fire District Site Access- Technical Comments
1. Access Roadways Defined: Fire District access roadways include public roads, streets, and
highways, as well as private roads, streets, drive aisles and designated fire lanes.
2. Location of Access: All portions of the structure or facility or any portion of the exterior wall of the fimt
story shall be located within 150-feet of Fire District vehicle access, measured by an unobstructed
approved mute around the exterior of the building. Landscaped areas, unpaved changes in elevation,
gates, and fences are an obstruction.
FSC-14 Alternate Materials and Methods
The Fire Safety Division will review requests for alternate materials and methods within the scope of our
authority. The request must be submitted on the Fire District "Application for Alternate Method" form along with
supporting documents. Contact the Fire Safety Division at (909) 477-2770 for assistance.
PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR FINAL INSPECTION- Complete the following:
1. Hydrant Markers: All fire hydrants shall have a blue reflective pavement marker indicating the fire
hydrant location on the street or driveway in accordance with Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection
District and City of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering Standard Plan 134, "installation of Reflective
Hydrant Markers." On private property these markers are to be maintained in good condition by the
property owner. Contact Building and Safety/Fire Construction Services (909) 477-2713.
2. Address Single-family: New single-family dwellings shall post the address with minimum 4-inch
numbers on a contrasting background. The numbers shall be internally or externally illuminated during
periods of darkness. The numbers shall be visible from the street. When building setback from the
public roadway exceeds 100 feet, additional 4-inch numbers shall be displayed at the property entry.
RESOLUTION NO. 03- ~. ~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO .
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION AND APPROVING VARIANCE DRC2003-00017
TO REDUCE THE LOT DEPTH FROM 100 FEET TO 80 FEET FOR THE
1.1 ACRE PROPERTY IN THE LOW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, LOCATED
ON THE WEST SIDE OF KLUSMAN AVENUE, NORTH OF DIAMOND
AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF
APN: 1062-401-05.
A. Recitals.
1. Cecil Carney filed an application for the issuance of Variance No. DRC2003-00017, as
described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Variance request
is referred to as "the application."
2. On the 27th day of August 2003, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and following the conclusion
of said hearing, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution No. 03-114 approving the
application.
3. The decision represented by said Planning Commission Resolution was timely appealed
to the City Council. Subsequently, the City Planner contacted the appellant and residents within the
surrounding neighborhood to discuss their concerns. Said discussions culminated in a meeting with
the residents, the City Planner, and. the applicant on September 24, 2003. During said
September 24, 2003, meeting, the City Planner presented an alternative Site Plan concept based
upon the City's standard for a reduced 25-foot radius turnaround, instead of a 38-foot radius
cul-de-sac bulb. This alternative offers several advantages: 1 ) eliminates a need for front setback
variance on Lot 3; 2) reduces the amount of variance for lot depth on Lot 3 (lot depth would be
80 feet, the same as Lots 1 and 2; and 3) works within a standard 60 foot right-of-way (no additional
dedication needed from existing homeowners). Additionally, the applicant offered to redesign the
homes to reduce the footprint to eliminate a need for minor exception for rear setback and delete
second floor windows or use frosted "non-vision" glass along the west elevations to maintain privacy
of the existing neighborhood.
4. On October 1,2003, this Council continued the duly noticed public hearing on the appeal
to their November 5, and again to their November 19, 2003 agenda.
5. On the 8th day of October 2003, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga held a public hearing to consider the related Variance DRC2003-00017 again, including
an alternative Site Plan design that eliminated the need for two out of three variances, and following
the conclusion of said October 8, 2003 meeting, the Planning Commission adopted its Resolution
No. 03-145 approving said Variance.
6. On November 5, and again on November 19, 2003, this Council conducted a duly
noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date.
7. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
DRC2003-00017 - CARNEY
November 19, 2003
Page 2
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 Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-
referenced public hearing on November 5, 2003, including written and oral staff reports, the minutes
of the above-referenced Planning Commission meeting, and the contents of Planning Commission
Resolution No. 03-145, together with public testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as
follows:
a. The application applies to a 1.1 acre property located on the west side of Klusman
Avenue north of Diamond Avenue, with a street frontage of 304 feet and lot depth of 80 feet (after
dedication for Klusman Avenue), and is presently vacant; and
b. The properly to the north of the subject site is single-family residential; the property
to the south across Diamond Avenue is single-family residential; the property to the east across
Klusman Avenue is single-family residential; and the property to the west is single-family residential;
and
c. The existing lot depth of 80 feet precludes the proposed development from
complying with the 100-foot minimum lot depth.
d. The applicant conducted a meeting on May 14, 2003, at which eight residents
attended, to inform surrounding neighborhood residents of the proposed project and to obtain their
feedback.
e. The proposed lots exceed the minimum standards of the Low Residential District,
except for lot depth. The proposed lots range in size from 7,247 square feet to 12,000 square feet,
and the average lot size is 8,912 square feet The proposed development exceeds the City's
standard for the Low Residential zone of 7,200 square feet minimum and 8,000 square feet average
lot size.
f. The gross area of the project site as measured to the centerline of Klusman
Avenue and Diamond Avenue, is 1.108 acres; therefore, up to 4 homes are allowed in the Low
Residential zone (2-4 dwelling units per acre). Project density is 3.61 dwelling units per acre.
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 strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulations
would result in practical difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship inconsistent with the objectives
of the Development Code.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 03-
DRC2003-00017 - CARNEY
November 19, 2003
Page 3
b. That there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable
to the property involved or to the intended use of the property that do not apply generally to other
properties in the same district.
c. That strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of the specified regulation would
deprive the applicant of privileges enjoyed by the owners of other properties in the same district.
d. That the granting of the Variance will not constitute a grant of special privilege
inconsistent with the limitations on other properties classified in the same district.
e. That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety,
or welfare or materially injurious to properiies or improvements in the vicinity.
4. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the project identified in this Resolution
is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of
1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15305 of the
State CEQA Guidelines.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, 3, and 4 above,
this Council denies the appeal, upholds the action of the Planning Commission, and hereby
approves the application subject to each and every condition below:
Plannin.q Division
1 ) The project shall be developed consistent with the alternative Site Plan
layout based upon a reduced radius turnaround as shown on the
attached Exhibit "A."
2) The second floor windows on the west elevation shall be deleted or
changed to non-vision glass.
3) The Floor Plans shall be modified to reduce the size of the building
footprint in order to meet the 20-foot rear yard setback, while
maintaining the 32-foot minimum front setback.
6. This Council hereby provides notice to the appellant and Cecil R. Carney that the time
within which judicial review of the decision represented by this Resolution must be sought is
governed by the provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6.
7. The City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is hereby directed to: (a) certify to the
adoption of this Resolution, and (b) forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified
mail, return-receipt requested, to appellant and Cecil R. Carney at the address identified in City
records.
NOV-lO-2003 NED 08:20 RI1 GOOD~IILL IND FR× NO, 1 P, O1
:.0~mc.~, November, 17,2003 VIA: US Mall
v,.,~ v,. c,,.,,, Ci~ of Rancho Cueamonga
l~wid bl~Q~dtt~
~., ,,,,,, ~,,, t,..,, R~cho Cucamong~ CaliforNa 91030
~'~":"~'~ Re: Project DRC 2003-00468
s,,,~ ,,,~ Proposed Ggodwill Stem
~,,~,,, ~ ,t.~ ye I m wriling you to infonn you that due to the sale of ~e above stated property 1o ~e ~ound
m,.6,, t ~, .~. aCs ~ Lessor, we have elected lo windrow our Conditional Use Permit appeal to the City Council.
PIe~o notify the appropriate staffto remove us from the November 19, 2003 City Council
agenda.
We am continuing our search to find a ~plaeement location in R~cho Cuemong~ and will be
looking fo~ard to working Mth your city in the near furore.
Viceq)resideut, Retail Operations
Cc. Brad Bullet, Mike Smith
-~-~5t~-I~.'~o. .F,g'rIb2olZ(z.~af;I.:-I~.Ct_,~zgoles. ..¢.Mt. · - , 3231 343-9927. gtw~.aood~
S¢;rving the Counties of Los Angeles. RiversMe and Sari EBorr~ardino
THE CITY OF
IIIII II
I~ANCHO CUCAMONGA
Staff Report
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP City Manager
FROM: Brad Buffer, City Planner
BY: Mike Smith, Planning Technician
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES - A request to operate a
non-profit second-hand store of 9,500 square feet within an existing shopping
center in the Neighborhood Commercial District, located at 9749 Base Line Road -
APN: 1077-011-50.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council uphold the Planning
Commission's decision to deny the application for a Conditional Use Permit requesting to
establish a Goodwill retail store through the adoption of the attached Resolution of Denial.
BACKGROUND: On July 8, 2003, the City Planner conducted a public hearing for this item.
During the meeting, the property manager, Mr. Craig Dootson, raised concerns about the
operating characteristics of the proposed use and its impact on the rest of the shopping center.
Goodwill Industries simultaneously requested that the City allow unrestricted unloading of
donated items at the rear of the building during normal operating hours. The City Planner
continued the item to a special public hearing on July 29, 2003, to allow both parties to prepare
and collect additional documentation for the City's analysis.
At the public hearing on July 29, 2003, the City Planner received verbal testimony and read
written comments from several of the Albertsons Center's tenants, including Albertsons, and the
property owner, Roger de Young, which expressed concerns about the negative impacts of
having Goodwill as a tenant. They were all opposed to Goodwill Industries' Conditional Use
Permit request. Because of existing lease and ownership conditions on the site, the property
owner of the overall shopping center does not have lease control over the tenant space that
Goodwill is considering. The City Planner also reviewed additional documentation and
testimony provided by the applicant. Due to the opposition to the applicant's request and the
facts presented, the City Planner denied the Conditional Use Permit. Goodwill Industries
subsequently appealed the City Planner decision for the Planning Commission's consideration.
On September 24, 2003, the Planning Commission reviewed the applicant's appeal. The
Commission received additional written and verbal testimony from the affected parties and
reviewed the Staff report and previously submitted correspondence. The new correspondence
reviewed included supportive letters from owners of property where Goodwill Industries was a
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468- GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
November 19, 2003
Page 2
tenant. The Planning Commission also reviewed numerous letters from numerous tenants
within the subject commercial center who objected to the applicant's proposed use. Note that
on August 20, 2003, Albertsons submitted a letter stating that they were no longer opposed to
the application and that they were taking a 'neutral' position on the matter.
Based on their review of the facts and additional documents presented, two of the
Commissioners upheld the City Planner's decision to deny the application while a third
Commissioner voted to overturn the denial. Because the two other Commissioners were not
present for part or all of the public hearing, they could not render a decision. As S'~ate law
requires that at least three members of the full Commission must agree on an~ decision, a
motion on the matter failed to pass. Thus, the hearing was continued to October 8, 2003, to
allow the remaining two Commissioners an opportunity to listen to a taped recording of the
public hearing.
On October 8, 2003, the full Planning Commission resumed the hearing and completed their
review of the proposed project. No additional testimony or exhibits were presented. Following
their deliberations, the Commission voted 3 to 2 upholding the City Planner's denial of Goodwill
Industries' Conditional Use Permit application. Goodwill Industries subsequently appealed the
Planning Commission's decision. Minutes of all public hearings are attached.
ANALYSIS: The applicant's project as described in the attached City Planner Staff Report
dated July 8, 2003, remains largely unchanged with the exception of a request that the City
consider and approve unloading of donated items at the rear of the lease space on a regular
basis. Staff's original analysis and recommendation limited drop-offs through the front entrance
and, as needed, at the rear by appointment only.
Prior to the City Planner hearing, the applicant submitted a proposal for a loading area at the
rear of the tenant space. This proposal did not include any physical changes with the exception
of lane striping. Staff did not have any objections to this proposal and forwarded it to the City
Planner for his review. However, as the application was denied by the City Planner, no
discussion of the proposal occurred.
Prior to the Planning Commission hearing on October 8, 2003, the applicant submitted another
proposal showing changes to the rear loading area that included "filling-in" the existing truck
well behind the Dollar Tree store. As the Planning Commission also denied the application, no
discussion of this proposed loading area revision occurred. Staff believes that this version of
the loading area does not meet the City's requirements for site development, including
landscaping and minimum fire lane width. In addition, the existing residence to the south will be
particularly sensitive to effects such as noise generated by any activity in the newly improved
area. Furthermore, the additional loading area could encourage unauthorized dumping that
may prove difficult to control.
This proposed modification is included with the overall ~)roposal, at the applicant's request, for
the City Council's review. Note that although Commissioner Pam Stewart voted in favor of the
applicant's request at the October 8th Planning Commission hearing, she did so with the
condition that no rear area receipt of donations or drop-offs occur at any time. Detailed analysis
of the proposal is contained in the attached reports.
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
November 19, 2003
Page 3
PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: All property owners within 300 feet of the project site were mailed a
notice, the property was posted, and an advertisement placed in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin
newspaper. Staff has not received any additional comments or telephone calls from anyone
regarding this application since the Planning Commission hearing on October 8, 2003. Letters
and faxes submitted prior to that date are attached for review.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
City Planner
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Correspondence from the Applicant dated October 15, 2003
Exhibit "B" - Proposed Loading Area Detail (revised version 10/08/2003)
Exhibit "C" - October 8, 2003, Planning Commission Staff Report
Exhibit "D" - Minutes of the September 24, 2003, Planning Commission Meeting
Exhibit "E" - Minutes of the October 8, 2003, Planning Commission Meeting
Exhibit "F" - City Planner Resolution No. 03-15, dated July 29, 2003
Exhibit "G" - Planning Commission Resolution No. 03-144, dated October 8, 2003
Draft Resolution Denying the Applicant's Appeal of the Planning Commission's Decision
October 15, 2003 VIA: Hand Delive~
RECEIVED
Ms. Debra Adams, Ci~ Clerk
c~ Ci~ of Rancho Cucamonga
~ B~r P~c,, H
Rancho Cucamonoa, California 91030
Dav~~ McQui~
~,~.,~.~ o~o~. Re: Appeal of Planning Commission's Decision
s~co~ v,~ ~. DRC 2003-00468 CI~ CLERK
]~=~ D. n~ Proposed Goodwill Store
T~U~ Dear Ms. Adams:
M~:n ~ S~ John
At its regularly scheduled meeting held O~ober 8, 2003, ~e Ci~s Planning Commission voted ~ree
Dar~neM~imn members to ~o to uphold the Planning Director's d~ision to deny Goo~ill a conditional use pe~it
~.,~.iv ~.~ to operate a secondhand store at 9749 Baseline Road (southeast comer of Baseline and Archibald).
~,~.mv s~v Because it is Goodwill's contention that ~e Commission's decision was based largely on speculation,
Bea Olvem-Sto~ misinfo~ation and misperception, and because additional info.align that was not originally
~.~ mti~ considered is now available, we are hereby asking Ci~ Council to review the fa~ of our request,
vm,~ & ceo with confidence ~at the Council will find it appropriate and desirable to approve Goo~ilFs requested
Douz~ H. Ba~ MSW conditional use p~it.
The pu~ose of the conditional use permit process is to dete~ine if a propos~ use w~ll have a
negative affect on ~e suffounding communi~, and to impose appropriate ~nditions in order to
prevent potential adverse affe~ on neighboring uses. It is not designed to be a contest to dete~ine
the populari~ of one tenant as compared to another. Histo~ proves that having Goo~ill as a
neighbor does not result in lost revenue for neighboring businesses, nor does it cause an increase in
criminal activities, diminish prope~ values, or create any other significant negative consequents.
In fact, several leRers have been submiffed to the Planning Depaflment ~om prope~ ownem ~ere
Goodwill stores are located, clearly indicting ~at we are a quali~ tenant, ~i~ operates with a high
degree of integfiW and concern for our neighbors. We have never experienced a situation ~ere
there has been an affempt by any municipali~ or neighboring resident to deny the continuing
presence of any of our stores due to cleanliness, noise, crime, or any other reason, planning staff
con~cted several local similar cities' planning depaRments and m~ived generally ~sitive and
no negative feedback on Goodwill's use.
At public hearings, some tenan~ of the shopping center expressed concern that illegal dumping
would occur due to Goodwill's presence. Some of ~ose same tenants stated ~at ill~al dumping
already happens in the shopping center. Our detractors conjure up images of mountains of
abandoned stoves and refrigerators piling up in the parking lot. This simply does not ~r. The
store will be staffed for the acceptance of donated goods directly into the building seven da~ a week
~om early morning until late evening. Any overnight dumping that d~s o~ur~hether or not due to
Goodwill's presenco will be removed daily by Goodwill, before most of the other tenan~ in ~e
shopping center oPen for business. Commissioner Stewafl, ~o suppofl~ our application,
commented that she works near Goodwill's Fontana store and has never seen evidence ~at the
location is di~ or unsightly. In addition, Goodwill has submiRed a list of over 140 shopping center
tenants that neighbor our business in other communities. ~e know of none ~o have expressed
concern over our presence.
Goodwill has proposed using the existing freight door at the rear of the premises for the purpose of
accepting material donations~a process that is incidental to the prima~ use of the building as a
retail store. This suggestion has met with some opposition, primarily from the shopping center's
ground lessor, who is not Goodwill's landlord. This opposition, which is based on the configuration of
EXHIBIT 'A' Anon. les. CAgO031 .{323) 223-1211. FAX[323) 343-gg27.WWW. OOodwilIsocaI-oro.
:he Counties of Los Angeles, Riverside and San 8ernardino 5,2-. 6
the rear alley area of the shopping center, continues despite the fact that both. the Fire Department
and Planning Department have indicated they are not opposed to Goodwill's design of a loading
zone. In response to this concern, Goodwill, with support from our landlord and Dollar Tree (the
adjacent tenant), has recently suggested removing the existing truck delivery well to create a fire lane
and delivery area fully thirty-two feet wide at the rear of the store (see attached sketch). Due to
similar design constraints, Goodwill accepts donations at the rear of its stores in Arcadia, Palmdale,
North Hollywood, Culver City, La Mirada, Riverside, Fontana, and Cathedral City, all without detriment
to the surrounding businesses or residents.
In his comments, Commissioner McNiel suggested that Goodwill continue its search for a "more
suitable" alternative location in the City Rancho Cucamonga. It was also suggested that the
northwest section of the City has recently seen a proliferation of discount-oriented businesses, which
is evidently pemeived by some Commissioners as a problem. In fact, Goodwill has twice conducted
an exhaustive search for available, appropriately zoned, commercial properties and found that the
chosen location is the only building available which is suitable for our use. While other buildings may
come available in the future, the likelihood that any would be both zoned and sized appropriately is
exceedingly slim. We submit this is due, at least in part, to the restrictive nature of the City's zoning
codes, which prohibit Goodwill from operating its business in all but a very few locations. This, along
with the claim of Commissioner Macias, who stated without further explanation that he had visited
some of our existing stores and "didn't like them," raises questions of exclusionary zoning, when
Goodwill is denied approval to locate where permitted by zoning and the only alternative presented by
the Planning Commission is to locate where zoning prohibits our use.
Despite the Planning Commissions resolution to the contrary, Goodwill has shown and the Planning
Department staff has repeatedly stated that the findings in this case are:
A. The operation as proposed is consistent with uses expected in a shopping center.
B. The proposed use is in accord with the General Plan, the. Development Code, and the
purposes of the district in which the site is located.
C. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will not be detrimental
to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in
the vicinity.
I look lo.yard to the opportunity to review our case in more detail at an upcoming Council meeting at
which time I hope you will agree with Mayor Alexander who tells us, "Having spent time and effort to
physically visit existing facilities, my personal observation is that they appear to be well kept and
blend well with other upscale businesses."
Vice President, Retail Operations
cc: Diane Williams, Mayor Pro Tem
Rex Gutierrez, Councilmember
Robert Howdyshell, Councilmember
Donald Kurth, MD, Councilmember
William Alexander, Mayor
Brad Buller, Ci~ Planner
rTl
"'
VBNUFI~;JllU UH~INV~ ::10 AJJCI
I H E CITY OF
~ANCHO CUCAMONGA
&'tan=Report
DATE: October 8, 2003
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Mike Smith, Planning Technician
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468 -
GOODWILL INDUSTRIES - A request to operate a non-profit second-hand store
of 9,500 square feet within an existing shopping center in the Neighborhood
Commercial District, located at 9749 Base Line Road -APN: 1077-011-50.
BACKGROUND: This item was heard at the September 24, 2003, Planning Commission
meeting.' Testimony was taken, the public hearing was closed, and deliberations were
commenced. Because of a lack of three votes to pass a resolution, deliberations on this item
were continued to October 8, 2003. The two Commissioners who were not present to hear all of
the testimony have been provided with copies of the audio tape of the meeting for their review.
Attached is a FAX from Goodwill Southern California listing Goodwill Store Co-Tenants at
various shopping centers in Southern California (Exhibit "A") and four letters received from
shopping canter tenants following preparation of the Staff Report for September 24, 2003
(Exhibit "B"). Also attached is the Planning Commission Staff Report from September 24, 2003
(Exhibit "C").
RECOMMEN__DATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continue its
deliberation regarding this item and take action on one of the two resolutions provided: the
Resolution of Denial upholding the City Planner's decision to deny the Conditional Use Permit
o~ the Resolution of Approval approving the applicant's appeal and request to establish a
Goodwill retail store.
City Planner
BBLMS\gs
Aft~c. hmP. nt.~' I::yhihit "A" - FAX from Goodwill listing Goodwill Store Co-Tenants ~" - Correspondence from Neighboring Tenants
:" - September 24, 2003 Planning Commission Staff Report
EXHIBIT 'C'
., . SE~-2472003 NED 03:51 PM IILL Ii,~ FRX NO, 1 P, 02/03
GOODWILL STORE CO-TENANTS
.... ~ !z.,,~l Tak~lmPh Rd,
327 E. OI~A~, ~ "~1~' R~
. . . SE.P-24:-2003 !,,IED 03:51 PM C,~ILL It~ F~ NO, 1 P. 03/03
GOODWILL STORE CO.TENANTS
Star Nails 11
9779 Baseliae.Road
Rancho Cueamoaga, CA 9173~6826 ~
Septcmber 18, 2003
M~e Sm~ C{ty Planner
City of Rancho C'ucam~nga
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
Dear Mr. Smith:
· ' n's'Shopping Centex, I ~m strongly
As thc current te~ of Star Nails un the Albertso
opposed to Goodwill lndustxics opexati,~g in this shopping e, cntex. I know that Goodwil]
is a great company; however, it is still rnarkctod as a second hand store. I bolieve that
Ooodwill cnte~ng this ~ can j~opar~i-~ our overall image.
We have boon st this location for ovex five years and would l~c to maintain its current
environment. If you have any other questions or conc~ns, pleas~ call me at (909) 484-
0552.
Klm Pham
09/22.4~ t~:3:41 F~9~ C.~ 125 -> 4"/"/"~I~? i~].3~5 PO~
$~1, 200:1
c~~c~
P.O. ~owSO?
~c~.~.~ c~ 9~ ~9
~ ~r.
~ ~~~~~~' C~ OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
SEP 2 2 2003
RECEIVED - PLANNING
Owner, ¢~a'~t~~m:r C~.
FROR : CO~ PHO~ NO, : 9~9 9~13414 Sep. 24 2~ 1~5:~4PPt P2
t ~,.Z__
Mr. Mite Smith, City Planner
City of Rancho Cucamon~
Po Box 807
Rancho Cucamon/a, CA 91729
Dear Mr. Smith,
As a tcmmt in the Albertson's Shoppiu~ Center wh~rc the proposed Goodwill Indus-tries
store will b~ located, I have ~rcat concern for the types ofi.-sues we can for~ee in ~he
shopping center. Issues conccrni~'cle~llncs~ and safety arc the most important to my
b.~ness and me.
Our business has bccn located in that shopping center for many years and a~ the property
manager does, We do everything we can to maintain the center to a neat and clean
environmcat. My greatest concern is the d-mpha8 of object in our partdng lot. Second
hand stores are lenown for the dumpin8 ofunwauted object in front of them, and I do not
thlnlc th~ wou~d appe~] to my customers or me.
I really feel if this is something the City of Rancho Cucamonga decides to aptxove, there
should be some strict rules to prevent an tmattraefive environment fox those already
existing in the shoppin$ center and their customers.
Thaak you for your consideration.
THE CITY OF
~ANCHO CUCAMONCA
Staf[ Report
DATE: September 24, 2003
TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Mike Smith, Planning Technician
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468 -
GOODWILL INDUSTRIES - A request to operate a non-profit second-hand store
of 9,500 square feet within an existing shopping center in the Neighborhood
Commercial District, located at 9749 Base Line Road - APN: 1077-011-50.
BACKGROUND:
On July 8, 2003, the City Planner conducted a public hearing for this item. During the meeting,
the property manager, Mr. Craig Dootson, and a neighboring resident raised concerns about the
operating characteristics of the proposed use. In addition, Goodwill Industries requested that
the City allow unrestricted unloading of donated items at the rear of the building during normal
operating hours. The City Planner subsequently continued the item to a special public hearing
on July 29, 2003, to allow both parties to prepare and collect supporting documentation for the
City's analysis.
At the public hearing on July 29, 2003, the City Planner received verbal testimony and read
written comments from several of the Albertsons Center tenants. Albertsons, and the property
owner, Roger de Young, both expressed concerns about the negative impact of having Goodwill
as a tenant. They were all opposed to Goodwill Industries' Conditional Use Permit request
(Exhibit "D"). Note that because of existing leasing and ownership conditions on the site, the
property owner of the overall shopping center does not have lease control over the tenant space
that Goodwill is considering. The City Planner also reviewed additional documentation and
testimony provided by the applicant.
Because of the opposition to the applicant's request and the facts presented, the City Planner
denied the Conditional Use Permit. Goodwill Industries subsequently appealed the City Planner
decision for the Planning Commission's consideration.
ANALYSIS:
A. General: The applicant is not proposing any changes to their original request as described
in the attached City Planner Staff Report dated July 8, 2003. The applicant is requesting
that the City consider and approve unloading of donated items at the rear of the lease
space (Exhibit "E"). Staffs original analysis and recommendation limited drop-offs through
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
September 24, 2003
Page 2
the front entrance and, as needed, at the rear by appointment only. Following the
applicant's submittal of a detailed site plan showing the rear unloading area, staff believes
that the physical conditions on the site can allow this specific activity to occur.
B. Albedsons recently submitted a letter changing their position from "opposed" to "neutral" in
regards to the applicant's proposal (Exhibit B). Staff has also received numerous letters of
support from other property management companies who have leasing contracts with
Goodwill Industries in their respective commercial centers. The comments they provided
are all positive and supportive of Goodwill Industries as a tenant (Exhibit C). Not including
correspondence sent to the City prior to the July 29, 2003, City Planner hearing, staff has
not received any additional comments or telephone calls from anyone opposed to the
application. Finally, staff spoke to the Planning and Code Enforcement Departments of
several cities with a Goodwill Industries store in their community, including Santa Clarita,
Fontana, Arcadia, Palmdale, Riverside, West Covina, Upland, and Azusa. The responses
from those contacted were generally positive or neutral and reference how well Goodwill
maintains its stores.
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.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct the public
hearing and consider the new information, particularly the letters of support, presented
regarding this item. Staff has provided for the Planning Commission's review and consideration
a Resolution of Denial upholding the City Planner's decision to deny the Conditional Use Permit
and a Resolution of Approval approving the applicant's appeal and request to establish a
Goodwill retail store.
City Planner
BBLMS\Is
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Correspondence and Appeal Letter from the Applicant
Exhibit "B" - Correspondence from Albertsons dated August 18, 2003
Exhibit "C" - Correspondence from Property Management Companies
Exhibit "D" - Correspondence from Neighboring Tenants
Exhibit "E" - Proposed Loading Area Detail
Exhibit "F" - July 29, 2003, City Planner Staff Report
Exhibit "G" - City Planner Hearing Minutes of July 8 and July 29, 2003
Draft Resolution Approving the Applicant's Appeal of the City Planner Decision
Draft Resolution Denying the Applicant's Appeal of the City Planner Decision
! ,
........... ;-- i , ~~R N J~ A L I F O R N I A
Ho NO~.~Y C~'~J~
~ ~,// September 8, 2003 VIA: F~
~""~ Cl~ OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
D~
s=~v,=~ Mr. Richa~ Macias, Chai~an SEP ] 1
l,-~ a ~ Ci~ of Rancho Cucamonga
u~.~ 10500 CMc Center D~e RECEIVED - PLANNING
~o~ ~ Rancho Cu~monga, CalEomia 91030
~.~ RE: Appeal of Denial of CUP for new Go~ll Store
~ ~ 9749 Baseline Road
~s~ Rancho Cu~monga, Cal~omia 91730
~ O~
~ Dear Mr. Macias,
I am w~ing in an effo~ to assist you in making an info.ed decision regarding
Goodwill's appeal of ~e Planning Depa~enfs denial of CUP (DRC2003-00468).
Good~ll Industries has been in the pro.ss of se~ng a CUP to mn a th~ store in
the Albe~on's Shopping ~nter Io~t~ at the so~heast ~mer of Baseline and
Archibald. The pmpos~ GoodWill store is to be lo.ted be~een Albe~son's and
Dollar T~.
We fee ~at we would be su~ssful in obtaining a CUP sin~ ~e proje~s Planning
S~ff Repo~ was ~vomble and we re~ived no ~mments regarding info~ation
pa~ages sent to ama lando~em. We were su~fised that a few tenants in ~e
shopping ~nter sent leffem of ~n~m and affended the JuN 29, 2003 s~cial public
healing with the ~ntefs prope~ manager. Goodwill Industries ~ So.em Cal~mia
has never experien~d an incident wherein there has been an a~empt to deny the
~ntinuing presen~ of any of our stores or donation ~ntem due to cleanliness, noise,
or clime by any pa~. After reading the leffem and listening to the tenants' ~n~ms I
strongly believe that opinions s~ted at the healing were based on mis-per~ptions
and not on ~ual inflation.
We are sending the Planning Commission and the tenants of the shopping ~nter the
follo~ng materials to help dispel some of ~e mis-per~ptions abo~ Good~ll:
Photos of some of our newer stores
· Most re~nt audE~ annual financial statements.
Info~ation regarding Goodwill's mission and re~il operations
List of Store Lo~tions
EXHIBIT 'A'
the ~unti~ of Los ~geles, Rivemide md
You may wish to note that approximately half of our stores are located in
neighborhood shopping centers where our co-tenants include a vadety of national and
regional chains such as Dollar Tree, Skechers, Pep Boys, Rent-a-Center, Rite Aid,
Kragen Auto, 24 Hour Fitness, Smart and Final, Walgreens, Dulux Paints, Vons,
Payless Shoes, Bank of America, Stater Bros., and 99 Cent Only Stores, among
others. We have proven to be a compatible co-tenant in this type of shopping center in
several higher income communities. I can assure you that we would also be a
suitable, non-competing tenant for the Albertson's Center.
Goodwill Industries is comprised of more than 180 autonomous agencies throughout
the United States. Goodwill Industries of Southern California successfully runs 35
retail stores in Los Angeles, San Bemardino, and Riverside Counties plus a like
number of satellite donation centers. As you can see from our photos we take pride in
our stores, and decisive measures are taken to ensure that our stores and the areas
surrounding them are kept clean.
Please review the enclosed information, which I know will help you become more
acquainted with our mission and commitment to excellence. We would be pleased to
meet with you at your convenience to discuss any question you may have regarding
Goodwill. My direct line is (323) 539-2050.
Sincerely,
Dougl
President and C.E.O.
OODWiLL,.
Sro O T H E R N C A k I ~ O R N [ A
Vlo.o~,~ c~. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONG.
So~ oF Gow~J~o~s ADMINI~Tm
Bo~x~ oF D,~cro.~ August 6. 2003
200, AU6 1 1 2003
]. Blair pent~, I1
~,, ,~...~.~, c~. 7,8,9,10,11,1 2,1,2,3;4,5,~
~,.~ v~c~ c~ Mayor Bill Alexander
o~,~,q.~rv c"*,, of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
.~,n,, o. ~q~h,,, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
:r.~ Dear Mayor Alexander:
Mo~m W. S~ John
S~cur~ Thanks so much for speaking with us on Jul), 31st regarding Ooodwill's reqt~st for
Dar~ne McMillan
co~,~o~, approval of a conditional use permit to operate one of our non-profit stores at 9'/49
~,~ s~carr~, Baseline Road. We hope that we wer~ able to convey to you the important work Goodwill
m~ ot~.~-s,~ carries out in local communities in assisting disabled and vocationally disadvantaged job
seekers find meaningful work, as well as the professional manner in which we conduct our
ooa~ n. ~m mst business. We are pleased with your offer to visit some o£ our other stores near your City.
' We anticipate that you will find them to be attractive, olean, professionally managed and
an asset to the centers in which they located.
Attached please find a list of our current store and donation center locations. Tra~¥
Powers, our V.P. Retail Operations, has attached a memo identifying the locations that arc
in shopping centers so that you can ¢ompar~ "apples to apples". Please pass this list on to
the members of the Planning Commission whose visits we would also welcome. If a
"picture is worth a thousand words," a personal visit is worth even more!
We look forward to elaborating on our ease at an upcoming meeting of the Planning
Commission. As promised, we shall present hard evidence and testimony that the presence
of a Goodwill store will entrance rather than detract from the shopping experience of
neighboring businesses and local residents in general.
Thanks again for taking the time to chat with us last week. We look forward to becoming
part of the Rancho Cucamonga community.
Sincerely,
Dougl~. Bart, MS%
President & CEO
dhb. ez. rm~.letters 2~03. doc
.342 N. Sen FerPp. ndo Ro.~d . Los An~_le_~. CA ~o~JOR1 . (~q~R! ~.~-1211 · FAX (R2.?,! 343-9977. ww,,~_¢3o~dwill~oc~kor¢7 ~,
Sewing the Counties of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino ~qo
~OODWTLL MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 1, 2003
TO: Mayor Bill Alexander
Planning Commission Members
FROM: Tracy Powers
RE: Goodwill Store & Donation Center Locations
Attached are listings of stores and donation centers operated by Goodwill Industries of Southern
California (GlSC). You are, of course, welcome to visit any or all of the locations listed. I have indicated
with a "v "the locations that are in shopping centers. The other locations are freestanding sites.
Regarding the two locations that are in closest proximity to Rancho Cucamonga, Upland and Fontana,
please be advised that we acquired both of these locations in January 2003 from Goodwill Industries of
the Inland Counties (based in San Bernardino), which was essentially bankrupt at the time. Neither of
these locations quite represents the quality of store we would choose to open. The Fontana store lease
expires in early 2005, and we are considering relocating er upgrading the store to our current standards.
The Upland store, which opened in 2000, presents more professionally, but is plagued by trash created
(surprise!) not by Goodwill but by the neighboring carpet retailer/installer, who (a) dumps remnants in the
trash bins that are overflowing and clearly visible from Mountain Avenue, and (b) keeps a storage trailer
on the front of the property. Our calls to the property owner asking for these issues to be corrected have
never been honored, so our reputation suffers due to their proximity.
If you would like to get a taste for a store that our organization developed (albeit a freestanding one)
please visit our Pomona location on Foothill Blvd. just east of Garey Ave.
If you would like to see how we fit in a shopping center, please stop by our Arcadia store on the
northwest corner of Santa Anita and Las Tunas, or see our Azusa store on the northeast comer of Azusa
Ave. and Gladstone.
GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF SOUTHERN CAMFORNIA STI~RF
-- LOCAT.O. STORES DONA O.
A"CADIA I I c.o LOC^ O. I
17 La Tunas Dr. Santa Anita ARCADIA 2tl E. Foothill BI. Second St
USA 465 E. Gladstone Ave Azusa Ave ARCADIA 1151 W.Hunflngto~ Dr. Mlchillieda
I CANOGA PARK 7107 Owensmouth Ave Sherman Way BEVERLY CENTER 8430 Beverly 51. Croft St.
CATHEDRAL CITY 69-175 Remon Rd. Date Palm CANYON COUNTRY Golden Valley Rd Highway 14
~)OWNTOWN L.A. 235 S. Broadway St. 3rd St DIAMOND BAR Path~nder Rd 57 Freeway'
=-AGLE ROCK 1600 E. Colorado St 2 Fwy EAGLE ROCK Harvey Dr Wilson Ave
FONTANA 8270 Sierra Ave. Upland EL SEGUNDO 630 Sepulveda BI./5B Madposa Ave
~LENDALE 1622 W. Glenceks BI. Winchester Ave ENClNO Victory BI. Balboa BI.
HANCOCK PARK 1535 Westam Ave Venice BI. .=NCINO 17660 Vontura BI, White Oak
LA MIRADA 14535 Telegraph Rd Leffingv~ll Rd ."~LENDORA Lone Hill Ave 210 Freeway
LANCASTER 767 West Ave, I Pens St. West -IIGHLAND 7201 Boulder Ave. Baseline
[JNCOLN HEIGHTS 342 San Femando Rd Flgueroa Bt LA CRESCENTA 2926 Foothill BI. LaCrascenta BI.
LOS FEEZ 4575 Holly~v~zI BI. Hillhumt Ave .A VERNE 1500 Foothill El. Wheeler Ava
~IIRACLE MILE 817 S. La Braa Ave 8th & ~th St LADERA HEIGHT~ 6907 La Tijere BI. La Cienega
:ULVER CITY 8905 Venice BI. National BI. MAR VISTA 12215 Venice BI. Grand View
~IORTH HOLLY~NOOD 5855 Lankershim BI. Oxnard St MARINA DEL REY 13360 Washington BI. Glencoe
~IORTHI~DGE 10170 Reseda BI. Devonshire St. MONTEREY PARK 381 E. Garvey Ave Alhambra Ave
~ =ALMDALE 2140 E, Palmdaie BI. 20th St. East PALM DESSERT 77-734 Country Club Dr. Unit C
;PANORAMA 14600 Roscoe BI, Van Nuys BI. PASADENA 112 E. Callfomia BI. Arroyo
PASADENA 183 N. Altadana Dr. Foothill BI. PASADENA 3801 E. Foothill BI. Rosemead BI.
iPOMONA 210 E. Foothill Blvd. Garay Ave PLAYA DEL REY 8319 Uncoln Blvd. 83~h St.
RESEDA 7126 Reseda BI. Sherman Way RANCHO CUCAMONGA 8143 N. Haven Ave. Arrow Hn~y
~IVERSIDE 6086 Magnolia Ave, Jurupa Ave, REDLAND8 700 E. Redlands BI. Citrus
~AN BERNARDINO ti120 Palm Lane 3rd Street ROWLAND HEIGHT8 18993 Colima Rd Nogalee St
~AN FERNANDO 1132 Pico St Brand BI. SAN GABRIEL 600 E. Valley BI. Ste B San Gabriel
~ANTA CLARITA 26883 Bouquet Cyn Rd Seco Canyon SANTA CLARITA 22830 Soledad Cyn. Bouquet Cyn
SHERMAN OAKS 14760 Venture BI. Cedros Ave SANTA MONICA 1803 Lincoln Blvd. A 10 Fwy
rUJUNGA 6545 Foothill BI. Tujunga BI SHERMAN OAKS 12912 Riverside Dr Coldwater Cyn
[JPLAND 1240 W. 7th St. Mountain STUDIO CITY 4358 Laurel Canyon Moorpark St.
~SC FRATERNITY ROW 2823 S. Figueroa St 28th St STUDIO CITY t 1548 Ventura BI. Big Oak Dr.
VAN NUYS 14550 Victory BI. Van Nuys BI. TARZANA 19207 Ventura BL Vanalden Ava
~IOLLYWOOD 1200 Vine St. Lexington UNIVERSal. CITY Vontura BI. Riverton Ave
~/EST COVINA 1035 Amar Rd Valinda Ave VALENCIA 23222 W. Valencia BI. Bouquet Cyn
~/EST LOS ANGELES 11726 Santa Monlca BI. Stoner Ave WARNER CENTER 6360 Topanga Canyon Victory BI.
RIALTO Baseline at Riverside Ave Coming Fall 2003 WEBTWOOD 1894 N. Westwo~ BI. Santa Monice BI.
VICTORVILLE 7th Street at La Paz Coming Fall 2003 APPLE VALLEY Happy Trails Highway Coming Fall 2003
LADERA HEIGHTS La Tijera at La Cienega coming Winter 2003
BALDWIN HILLS Cranshaw at Colicoum Comlng Fall 2004
PHILLIPS RANCH Garay Ave. at Philadelphia Coming Fall 2004
_.. APPEAL OF CI~ PLANNER A~t~w 'REQUEST FORM
Case File No. Project DRC2003-00468
Project: Proposed Goodwill Store
Location: 9749 Baseline Road (APN 1077-011-50)
Appellant: Goodwill Industries of Southern C.~] ~forn~m
Address: 342 San Fernando Road, Los Angeles, C~ 90031
Phone: 323-539-20~3 Fax: 323-3~3-9927
E-mail Address: tpowers@~oodwillsocal.org
Please see attached Exhibit "A".
I acknowledge the filing of this appeal an~[y that all of the above information is true and COrTect.
P#nt Name and Ti#e
7~.ecelVed Received By Fee.~eceived Receipt No. Fire Receipt NO.
i;\Fina~Fonns\OountefiAppeal Raques! Form 04103103
EXHIBIT "A"
Attachment to Appeal of City Planner Action Request Form
Project DRC2003-00468
Proposed Goodwill Store 9749 Baseline Road
Reason for Appealing City Planner's Decision:
Goodwill Industries of Southern California has requested approval of a
conditional use permit to operate a secondhand retail store in a vacant space at
an existing shopping center at 9749 Baseline Road, in the Neighborhood
Commercial district. The proposed Goodwill store is in accord with the general
plan, the objectives of the development code, and the purposes of the
Neighborhood Commercial district. Moreover, the proposed Goodwill store will
not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, or be materially injurious
to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Finally, the proposed Goodwill
store will comply with each of the applicable provisions of the development code.
For these reasons, Goodwill requests reconsideration of the City Planner's
decision and the granting of the requested conditional use permit.
~t. lhertsort~
1421 South Manhattan Avenue Michael S. Rccd
Pho~.': (? 14) 300-6303 Southcm California Division
Fax: (714) 300-6941
August 18, 2003 CITY OF RANCHo CUCAMoNGA
Mr. Brad Buffer, City Planner
City of Rancho Cucamonga /4U$ 2 0 2003
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 RECEIVED. PLAIVIWIIlG
Re: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00468
Goodwill Industries
AIbertsons ~506 - Alta Loma
Dear Mr. Buller,
I am writing this letter in response to the letter that I sent on July 23, 2003 regarding the
above-referenced conditional use permit for Goodwill Industries proposed location next
to the Albertsons store at 9775 Baseline Road.
Albertsons would like to recall the letter sent to you on August 18, and take a neutral
position on both Goodwill Industries coming into the center, as well, as the proposed
conditional use permit.
If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me at (714)
300-6303.
Sincerely,
Albertsons. In~.
Michael S. Reed
Real Estate Representative
Cc: Mark Lavin - VP Real Estate
Jeff Dierck - Sr. Real Estate Manager
EXHIBIT 'B'
GE1
"
............ Real Estate Investment, Development, Consult~ ~.q~.F nance
Affiliate Companies: Gortikov/Harek Partners * FriggerAssociates, Ltd.· Capital
August 27, 2003
Mr. Brad Bueller, City Planner
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
Re: Project DRC2003-0046g
Proposed Goodwill Store
9749 Baseline Road
Dear Mr. Buller:
Gortikov Enterprises Inc. is a real estate development and commercial property management
company that has developed over 120 commercial retail projects over the past 30 years and has
handled well in excess of 1000 leasing transactions. We have also served as the preferred
developer for Rite Aid Stores.
In 1987, our affiliate company, Bouquet Seco Partners Ltd. leased approximately 5,000 square
feet to Goodwill for use as a store and donation center. Their tenancy is part ora 114,000 square
foot anchored shopping center project in Santa Clarita. In 1998, we approached Goodwill to
relocate and expand their premises to approximately 11,000 square feet where they continue to
flourish today.
Most recently, Goodwill has entered into a lease arrangement with us in Victorville in an
anchored project on 7th Street consisting of approximately 117,000 square feet. We are investing
in excess of $300,000 in tenant improvements for Goodwill to build out their premises. We
anticipate their store opening in October of this year.
Dating back to 1987, our first reaction was "who would want thrift store selling second-hand
merchandise?" We would! The stores are well-merchandised, professionally run, generate
excellent foot traffic which benefit our other merchants, and Goodwill offers an interesting and
diverse choice of merchandise. All rental is paid on time and without issue. Goodwill
specializes in what they do and they do it the best! As a tenant, Goodwill is an excellent
merchant and has always displayed longevity do to their minimal cost of goods. We have never
had a co-tenant that has complained about Goodwill. In fact, when we have negotiated C, C, and
R's or use limitations with other users, typically you will see language that will exclude your
everyday thrift store operators hut "specifically" include Goodwill.
EXHIBIT 'C'
lifornia 91426-0128 Phone (818) 789-3163 Fax (818) 789-3457
Page Two
Goodwill Store
Rancho Cucamonga
Aside from the accolades stated above, Goodwill represents an outstanding cause which my
family and I have deeply supported annually for over 20 years. We have donated antiques,
valuable collect/bles, $1,000 suits, Juicy Coutre outfits, etc. Do not think that all you are getting
are used clothes for street people. In fact, Goodwill clothing has become a paradise for the
eclectic shopper.
I urge the City of Rancho Cucamonga to SUPPORT Goodwill's proposed tenancy. Don't be
misled by any naive third party groups that may question their proposed tenancy.
Should have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 818-789-3163.
~t Gortikov
Mr. Brad Bueller, City Planner ClI¥£FR'~NCNO CUc~t4ONGA
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia 91730
Re: Project DRG2003-00468
Proposed Goodwill Store
9749 Baseline Road
Dear Mr. Bullet:
I, Daniel Santos, am the owner of a podion of a Starer Bros. shopping center
located in Fontana. My potion of the prope~y consists of an 8,000 square foot
Goodwill store and several small shop spaces. The Fontana Goodwill store,
which originally opened in 1966, is the oldest operating Goodwill unit in the
Inland Empire.
Several months ago, responsibili~ for the Fontana Goodwill store transferred to
Goodwill Industries of Southern California. They have worked diligently to clean
up the location, which I felt had been allowed to deteriorate by the prior lessee,
Goodwill Industries of the Inland Counties, in both in appearance and operating
standards.
Goodwill's lease currently expires in Febma~ 2005, and I am looking fo~ard to
executing an e~ended term to retain Goodwill as my tenant, as I have done
several times previously.
Daniel Santos
3
AXIOM REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC.
164.32 Vanowen Street Tel# (818) 780-8'PI'I,
Van Nuys, CA 91406 Fax# (818) 780-3526
VIA: Regular Mail
August 27, 2003 C[TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Mr. Brad Bueller, City Planner SEP 0 2 2003
City of Rancho Cueamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive REP~E[VE0 ~ D~ANNING
Rancho Cueamonga, CA 91730
Re: ?rojec DRC2003-004eS
Propo~d Go°dWill Store
9749 Baseline Road
Dear Mr. Bueller,
Axiom Real Estate Services, Inc. is proud to have worked in concer~ wifla Goodwill Southem
California since 1998, when we completely remodeled and refurbished a derelict I 1,000 square
foot building in Los Angeles' Miracle Mile district for use as a store and doDa~OD ¢~Dter. Since
that small begirmin§, we have also built for Goodwill a 12,000 square foot fi'eestanding building
in Panorama City and conver~ed a former 11,000 square foot movie flaeatre in a shopping center
in Norflaridge. ID ~he latter case, our ownership included only ~he Goodwill store which is ~e
major tenant in the shopping center. It is interesting to note that a~er Goodwill opened, the
exterior fagade of the entire shopping center was upgraded to match Goodwill's remodeled
building, at the separate owner's expense.
Currently we are constructing a 12,900 square foot Goodwill store iD a 74,000 square foot
shopping center in Ladera Heights, which will replace a storefmnt donation center ~at they have
operated in the center for approximately three years. We have also submi~ed plans to build an
18,000 square foot store and donation center ill Baldwin Hills as a par~ o£ a 63,000 square foot
shopping center, which will have Walgreen's as flae other major tenant. ID addition, we are
CuDFenfly iD plan review to build a 1.4,000 square foot freestanding store and donation center in
~he City of Redlands.
In all our dealings with Goodwill, we have never received a complaint from a neighboring tenant
regarding their presence. They uphold the same store presentation and operating standards as
would be expected of any major tenant and in fact exceed onr expectations as a Landlord.
Very truly yours,
President
Santa Anita Plaza Partnership
731 pamela Circle, A~ai~. CA 91006.Phone:(626) 446-4160, Fax:: (626) 446-0208
C TY Of: At Oi'IO COCAMONGA
Mr. Brad Bueller, City Planner
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive R~:C£1VEO ' P~A
Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 NNIN~
Re: Proje~ DRC2003-00468
Proposed Goodwill Store
9749 Baseline Road
Dear Mr. Bullet
I am the owner of Santa Anita Plaza, a 57,000 squarb foot shopping center in the
ci~ of Arcadia, For the past year, Goodwill has been my tenant, oc~pying an
11,000 square foot potion of a larger space shared with Arcadia Adult Day Care
Center. Also in the center are Rite Aid, Kragen Auto, and several small,
independent tenants.
Due to ciW regulations, at this padicular location Goodwill could not establish its
desired storefront donation entrance and is thereforg forced to accept incoming
donations at the rear of the store in the loading zone adjacent to the fire lane. I
can repod that there have been no negative comments from any of the
su~ounding neighbors regarding Goodwill's activities in the center.
I am pleased to have Goodwill as my tenant. If I can offer ~her information on
my experience with Goodwill, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
/
Kenny C. Chang ~ o/.
General Padner
C[TY OF}~ANCHO CUCAMONGA
sEP 0 4 2003
RECEIVED~ PLANNIN~
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 21Oxnord Strut.
R~ol Estate Development · F;roperty Management Suite 1 '760
Woodlond Hills, CFI 9136'7
Tel. (818) 710-3636
Fax (818) 710-3639
August 28, 2003
Mr. Brad Buller, City Planner cl'r~ oF ~[~t~CblO CUCI~IlllO~JGA
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive ,-qEP 0 4 2005
Rancho Cucamonga, Ca. 91730
RE: Project DRC2003-00468 [qEOEIV D. PLAf~]~I~IG
Proposed Goodwill Store
9749 Baseline Road
Dear Mr. Bullet,
Palmdale Towne Square / MG Paimdale Associates own the Palmdale Towne Square
Shopping Center in Palmdale, Ca.
Palmdaie Towne Square is an approximately 130,000 square foot shopping center. Our
tenant mix includes a Cinemark multi-plex movie theater, 24 Hour Family Fitness, U.S.
Post Office, Department of Motor Vehicle, Herritage Health, IHOP, Steer & Stein
Restaurant, as well as a multitude of other smaller retailers and food establishments. In
addition to the above tenants, Goodwill stores leases an 8,000 square feet space in a
prime, highly visible location. The center is currently 100% occupied and historically
operates at between 97% and 100% occupancy. Goodwill has been a tenant in the center
since 1993, and I find them to be a highly desirable tenant and have recently extended
their lease for an additional five (5) year tenn.
Should you wish to discuss in further detail Goodwills' operation, please feel free to
contact me.
Sincerely,
David Mendelsohn
Partner MG Development Company
General Partner ofPalmdale Towne Square and MG Palmdale Associates
range of national, regional and smaller credit tenants and just a few noncredit tenants who
have been in the shopping center for many years.
We are pleased to be among Goodwill's preferred developers, having just
completed the ground-up construction of Goodwill's newest store on Foothill Boulevard
in Pomona. Again, due to city codes, we were required to obtain a conditional use
permit, which was approved by the local planning commission. The planning
commission was so impressed with the quality of the building after construction that they
also granted us a variance to put a monument sign on Foothill Boulevard.
We look forward to additional developments with Goodwill in the future and have
no reservations about recommending them as a tenant to other developers and landlords.
If you would like to discuss my experience with Goodwill or if you have any questions
regarding Goodwill as an operator and/or tenant, please call me at (818) 841-4141
Steven Schechter
President
cc Tracy Powers (Via Facsimile)
7
LION
PROPERTIES LLC
CF CUOM,'i.,ONGA
September ~, 2003
Mr. Brad Bueller, City Planner
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Cemer Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Re: Project DRC2003-00468, Proposed Goodwill Store, 9749 Baseline Road
Dear Mr. Bueller,
Our finn owns a portfolio of high quality, grocery anchored shopping centers in the
western United States. In Cathedral City, California we own the Cathedral Village
Shopping Center, located on the main intersection of that city, Date Palm and Ramon. It'
is a 142,000 square foot, fully leased retail center anchored by Stater Brothers and Rite
Aid, and approximately 50,000 square feet of smail shops and pad buildings as well as a
13,000 square foot Goodwill store and donation center.
Goodwill is located at the "inside elbow" location of the center, leaving it with very little
storefi'ont visibility. To accommodate the flow of donation drop offs that is inherent in
their operation, Goodwill included in their space layout a "donation center" door to
accept donations at the rear of their store. While this arrangement is surely not convenient
for Goodwill's donors, it has not been problematic for the shopping center.
Goodwill maintains the area at the rear of the shopping center to ensure that they are not
held responsible for illegal dumping that typically happens on this type of commercial
property. In fact, they have been know to clear debris left on the neighboring vacant land,
just to insure that their operating standards are fully met.
We are very concerned about maintaining our centers in a first class manner. In dealing
with the thousands of tenants that we have over the last twenty five years in the shopping
centre business, I can say f~om personal experience that there are few tenants that are as
concerned about cleanliness in a center as Goodwill. Goodwill functions like a sub-
anchor at Cathedral Village, drawing additional customers to the center that then shop at
our smaller stores. It is our experience that Goodwill is all around benefit to our center, as
I assume they would be to any center that they choose to locate in.
Leonard Hortick ' -
President
O~T~/~' ,~/i~*'ICHO 0U0A~0~-"n fhe Office of
"Dbvid J. Negel
~ J 5 2~ President
DEVELOPMENT -- ~AGEMENT -- CONSTRUCTION
J?r) .. ¢, ,.,., ....
September 4, 2003
~. Brad Bueller, City Plier
Ci~ ofRmcho Cucmonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
R~cho Cucmong~ Califo~a 91730
Re: ~t DRC 2003-00468
~*'~'~ed G6~dwill StOre
9749 B~eline Road
De~ Mr. Bullet:
I ~ the president of Decron Prop~ies, which o~s ~d operates shoppMg centers ~d
other co~ercial buildings t~ou~out South~ Califoma. Goodwill h~ bern o~
tenet since 1992, in a 35,000 squ~e foot shopping center ne~ the H~cock P~k ~ea of
Los ~geles. ~e Goodwill store ~d donation center h~ been enl~ged ~ce over ~e
years from its initi~ size of approximately 6,000 squ~e feet, so ~at it now occupies
ne~ly 11,000 squ~e feet. Goodwill also operates one of~eir ofi~nal store~ont
donation centers in o~ shopping center in ~e city of E1 Se~do. Bo~ of~ese
shopping centers ~e heavily occupied by food uses, wMch, ~ you mi~t expect, ~e
seriously concerned wi~ cle~liness ~d genial upke~ of~e prope~y.
M over ten ye~s of experience in havMg GoodMll ~ a ten~t, we have yet to receive a
complMnt ~om nei~bofing ten~ts or residents reg~ding ~eir use. We were ~tially
concerned M~ how well their premises would be m~ntaMed, ~ven ~at one of~e key
elements of~eir business involves collecting donated matefiM. My prope~ m=agers
tell me that they c~ot dete~ine if Goodwill is experiencing illegal ~=h draping
because the ~ea ~o~d ~e premises is always kept in first cl~s condition. I c= state
· at o~ co~on ~ea expenses ~e no ~eater where Goodwill is present ~m ~ey would
be if ano~er ten=t were to occupy ~e space.
Veu ~ly yom,
Pre~
5350 Shermen Way, Suite 410 · Van Nuys, California 91406
(8i8) 901-8862, FAX (818) 997-7804
dnoget@decronpro~edies.com ~l~ ¢
www.decronpropedies.com
The
Braemar
Group
30495 Canwood Street, Suite 101
Agonra Hills, CA 91301
818/ 889-63o2 CITy OF Rflj~ICHo
FAX 818/991-6728 CUCAMONGA
SEP 1 5 2003
September 9, 2003 RECEIVED. PLANNIN~
Mr. Brad Bueller, City Planner
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Dear Mr. Bueller:
The Braemar Group has hosted, free of charge, a Goodwill donation center at the Highland
Village Plaza in Highland California, since the late 1990's. The shopping center currently
contains over 130,000 square feet of leasable floor space, including an Albertsons
supermarket and a Longs Drag Store, plus nearly 60,000 square feet of pad building and
shop space.
Goodwill's donation trailer is clearly visible in a prime location in the center's main
parking lot adjacent to the Albertsons store. The donation center has operated without
major incident for the entire time it has been in existence. In fact, we are presently
negotiating with Goodwill regarding the possibility of having them locate one of their
stores in "Phase 2" of our center, which is now under conslxuction.
/Sidney'~H. Dinl~w
Principal
Jul 25 03 04:56p TI id&d C. Calma 90,~ 87-2815 p.1
Mr. Brad Bullet, City Planner
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
Dear Mr. Bullet,
I am n dentist whose practice is located at the Albertson's Shopping Center, ~ proposed site ~or
Goodwill Indus~es store. I wish to convey Io you my disapproval for said application for permit due to
the nature of their business and how this would aff~ct our business ns well.
I imve a high regard for Craig Dootson who has du~e a wonderful job of kceping the center clean and 1
would h'ke to scc this stay tbe same. ihavejustranewedmylensefor another ten y~ars and forthisl
stxongly believe that this would have the highest impact on my practice considering that the overall
acceptability of this location by virtu~ of thc imsiness~ in it would be diminished considerably.
The center at Rds llme presents a wholesome, clean environment With this new renter, I firmly believe this
willimjeopardizcd. Itrust that you would take this into ounsideratiou kifalmc~totbese whohave
outstanding lusses and those of us who have contn'l~uted to fl~is business community for
Thank Yo~ . ·
Sincerely,
EXHIBIT 'D'
07125/2003 14:S8 90998~_ _~..il .....
SPLASH POOLS & SPAS
9759 Baseline Rd.
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91750
(909)980-6210
July 25, 2003
Mr. Brad Buller, City plann~n'
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
Dear Mr. Buller:
As a major tenant in the Albertson's Shopping Center located at thc comer of Basvline &
Archibald in Rancho Cucamonga, I strongly oppose to the location of a Goodwill
Industries store in our center. I am unable m attend the meeting on Tuesday July 29th in
regards to this matter, however, I do want to formally notify you of my opposition against
the location ora Goodwill store in this center.
Sincerely,
Cathie M. Barney
Vice President
,,{~ DRUGS BECAUSE
Mr. Brad Buller
City pl~mner
City of Rancho Cueamonga
Date: July 29t~, 2003
RE: _Co da!!i~nal Use p~.nnlt #DRC2003'00468.
at the addressed site and since the proposed theft sto~
ti As a store ovn~r of Econo Drags I'd like to voice my position
and collection center within a short distance fxom my store,
in this maiter.
My company is ~ .mmh proposal because:
A Itu'irt sion: is to auract a totally tti~ferent kind of cliental to our e. znler. T~ose
(1) customers will have xeD' little disposable income for the other stOres in our
center. The high quality stores will exeal~mlly disapl~ar from our center.
,, (2) The higher income people, geaerally residing north of Baseline, will have a down
· grading perception on the shopping center and will tend to s~ay away from that
: ....... £o-,,--~ as the City Manager, you
area~ if you allow such proposal m.~.° ~'.' "'.~. "'__~:_. ,~o ecom lexion
enlart0n~ thc Arrow Hishway netta~ornooa, pusm ~
farther up north to Baseline. ·
] (3) If you should ever drive around to look for a thr~ stor¢-collecuon center, you
:~ will have better luck finding it on Holt, Mission or Arrow lqwT- If~you appro, V¢
~ such proposal, you are putting th¢flrst thrift store-collection center on Baseline
':~ Road, counting west to Glcadom and east to the City ofKancho Cucsmonga-
I Please be very care_C-ul and conscious about the class of busine-sses along Baseline.
~ You'v~ done an outstanding job on Foothill cast of Haven. Please vote no to
proposal.
Fred~ck el:mn
Presidm:tt
Econo Drugs 9713 Baseline Road, P,h ~onga, CA 91730 (909) 948-2700 F~ (909) 948-2703
_ ~oo~
07/29/2003 11:58 FAX 909466557 Descry Cal., Inc.
Ltttle gaesa
Mike Smith, Planning Division:
My name is Kevin Manquen and I am a tenant at 9799 Baseline R& in Rancho
Cucamonga. I own the Little Caesars Pizza restaurant in that center. I am apposed to the
Good Will store going in to the center. The dumping that will occur will be a nuisance to
my business and the center as a whole. I will be unable to attend the meeting.today at
city hall but I wanted my views to be heard prior to the meeting. Thank you for your
thoughtfulness in this matter. If you need to speak to me you can reach me at (909)545-
6672.
Sincerely,
Kevin Manquen, Presideat Descry Cal.,Lac.
JUL 2 8
142~l Sou~ M~ Av~ Michel S. R~
F~I,~o~ CA ~831 R~ E~ Rep~e
~:~: (714) 30~03 ~ C~ifo~a ~ion
(714) 3~1
July 23, 2003 ~1~ 0~ ~A~0
Mr. Brad Buller, Ci~ Planner
Ci~ of Rancho Cu~monga ~L
P.O. Box 80~
Rancho Cu~monga, CA 91729 RECEI~E~-P~~ING
Re: Conditional Use Pe~it DRC2003-00468
Goodwill Industries
Albe~sons ~6506 - Alta Loma
Dear Mr. Bullet,
It has come to my a~ention that Goodwill Industries is t~ing to Io~te ne~ to our
Albedsons store located at 9775 Baseline Road. I also undemtand that many issues
were raised at the last public hearing over the proposed conditional use pe~it, and, as
a result, another public hearing has been planned for July 29, 2003 at 2 P.M. at the CiW
of Rancho Cu~monga Planning Division. I will not be able to a~end the meeting due
to schedule confli~s; however our store dire~or will be able to a~end.
I would like to state a couple issues that Albe~sons has with the proposed use in the
shopping ~nter. Maintaining a neat and orderly shopping center is something that
Albedsons takes great pride in for its customers. Allowing a second hand store, such
as Goodwill, to come into the center increases the likelihood of keeping the clean and
safe ~nter that has become accustomed to our customem. From our past
experien~s, I believe that by allowing this conditional use pe~it to pass, that
unwanted goods would be dumped in the parking lot and sidewalks in both the front
and the rear of the shopping ~nter during and after store bourn. Not only does this
dumping make the ~nter look unprofessional and un.red for, but it a~ra~s people
into the pa~ing lot to rummage through the unwanted items. The same holds true for
dumping in the rear of the store, and it can also block ac~ss to our loading docks for
our delive~ trucks.
Please take our ~ncerns into consideration and if you have any questions or con.ms,
please do not hesitate to conta~ me at (714) 300~303.
Sin~rely,
Albe~soos, In~
Michael S. Reed
Real Estate Representative
I~
THE CITY OF
I~AN CI~ 0 CUCAHONGA
StaffR
DATE: July 29, 2003
TO: Brad Buller, City Planner
FROM: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner
BY: Mike Smith, Planning Technician
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DR02003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES - A
request to operate a non-profit second-hand store of 9,500 square feet within an
existing shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial District, located at
9749 Base Line Road - APN: 1077-011-50.
BACKGROUND:
On July 8, 2003, the City Planner conducted a public hearing for this item. During the meeting,
the property manager, Mr. Craig Dootson, and a neighboring resident raised concerns about the
operating characteristics of the proposed use and its unintended consequences such as
excessive trash, illegal dumping, and incompatibility of the proposed use with the existing
shopping center's tenants. In addition, Goodwill Industries requested that the City allow
unrestricted unloading of donated items at the rear of the building during normal operating hours
contrary to staff's recommended condition of approval requiring all donors to pre-arrange their
drop-offs at the front counter. The City Planner therefore continued the item to a special public
hearing on July 29, 2003, to allow Mr. Dootson more time to review the proposal with the
neighboring tenants, including Albertsons, and to allow Goodwill Industries the opportunity to
prepare a preliminary plan that would clearly show a viable location for a loading area at the
rear of their leased tenant space.
Since that time, Mr. Dootson has not been able to provide staff with any new comments from
the surrounding tenants as he is on vacation. Staff anticipates, however, that Mr. Dootson will
provide additional written comments or documentation at the July 29, 2003, meeting for the City
Planner's consideration.
The applicant has submitted a Detailed Site Plan showing a 30-foot by 20-foot loading area that
will allow a donor to temporarily park his vehicle at the existing rear door. This loading area
exceeds the minimum dimensions for a parking space located adjacent to a wall, which is 18
feet long by 11 feet wide. Staff spoke with Moises Eskenazi, Senior Plans Examiner in the Fire
and Safety Division, and he indicated that his department had no reservations about the
EXHIBIT 'F'
CITY PLANNER STAFF REPORT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
July 29, 2003
Page 2
proposed loading area layout and location provided that the adjacent fire lane remains clear, is
clearly striped, and that signs are installed per City standard. The applicant's proposal has
xhibit "C") for the City Planner's review.
Dan Coleman
Principal Planner
DC:MS/jm
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - July 8, 2003 City Planner Staff Report
Exhibit "B" - Correspondence provided at the July 8, 2003, City Planner hearing
Exhibit "C" - Proposed Loading Area Detail
Exhibit "D" - Correspondence from the applicant regarding the loading area
Exhibit "E" - Draft Minutes of July 8, 2003, City Planner Hearing
Draft Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00468
THE CITY OF
I~ANCHO C[ICAHONGA
Staff Report
DATE: July 8, 2003
TO: Brad Buller, City Planner
FROM: Dan Coleman, Principal Planner
BY: Mike Smith, Planning Technician
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
- A request to operate a non-profit second-hand store of 9,500 square feet
within an existing shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial District,
located at 9749 Base Line Road - APN: 1077-0'11-50.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of a Conditional Use Permit is to create the flexibility necessary to achieve the
objectives of the Development Code and General Plan, and to ensure that the proposed use
is compatible with neighboring uses. Selected uses in each zone are only allowed subject
to the granting of a Conditional Use Permit because of their unique site development
requirements and operating characteristics, which require special consideration to ensure
compatibility with surrounding uses. The Conditional Use Permit process is intended to
afford opportunity for public review and evaluation to provide adequate mitigation of any
potential adverse impacts and to ensure that all Code requirements are met.
"Second-hand stores" are defined in Section t7.02.f40 of the Development Code as "A
retail store or resaler offering used clothes, furniture, household appliances, and similar
merchandise, provided; (1) clothes may be displayed in heaps or piles, as distinguished
from racks or folded on shelves or tables; (2) merchandise may be accepted on sale for
consignment; and (3) offers used materials or goods for sale that requires cleaning, repair,
assembly or refurbishment before it can be worn or put to normal use. Merchandise may be
donated; however, all collection and storage shall be conducted inside the building." Table
17.'10.030 of the City's Development Code permits the operation of second-hand stores in
Neighborhood Commercial Districts subject to a Conditional Use Permit and City Planner
approval.
ANALYSIS:
A. Site Characteristics: The project site is located in an existing 8.6 acre commercial
center located at the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Base Line Road. The
center is comprised of five buildings with a combined area of 10f,000 square feet.
The center includes numerous retail and service businesses, several restaurants/fast
CITY PLANNER STAFF REPORT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
July 8, 2003
Page 2
food establishments, and a supermarket. The shopping center is served by a parking
lot with about 500 parking stalls. Parking in the street is not permitted.
B. Proposed Use: The applicant proposes to establish a Goodwill retail store in a 9,500
square foot leased space located between Albertsons supermarket and Dollar Tree, a
discount retail store. The store will sell to customers a variety of donated, "second-
hand" clothing and household goods, excluding large appliances. Photographs of a
typical Goodwill store are provided in Exhibit "E." All operations will be conducted
entirely within the building, including storage. No outdoor storage containers, bins,
trailers, or receptacles are proposed nor will they be allowed. Donations will be
received at the front counter.
The applicant has also proposed the drop-off of donations at the rear door of the
leased space. According to the applicant, there will be an employee available to
collect and process the donations when they arrive. However, staff believes that
having drop-offs at the rear will be complicated by the narrow, 15-foot wide driveway.
Donors' parked vehicles could block this driveway and interfere with the neighboring
tenants' normal truck deliveries. Furthermore, donors may mistakenly assume that it is
permitted to leave donations outside at the rear of the building. To prevent this from
occurring, staff recommends that the applicant direct all donors to enter to the building
at the front and make arrangements with the store's staff prior to making any deliveries
at the rear of the building. Regularly scheduled deliveries from Goodwill's main
collection center will be permitted.
C. Operatinq hours and staffinq: The proposed hours of operation are Monday to
Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. and Sundays from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. There
will be up to 15 employees; 10 employees on a typical afternoon shift. These
operating hours are typical of the surrounding businesses within the shopping center
(Exhibit "F").
D. Parkinq: There are about 500 stalls on-site available to all the tenants. The parking
requirement for the shopping center is calculated at 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet
of floor area. The parking required for this 101,000 square foot center, 455 stalls, is
adequately met by the existing parking on-site. There is adequate parking available
behind the building to allow donors to park their vehicles for drop-offs at the rear of the
building as needed. Parking in the driveway or at the rear door will not be permitted
because of the limited width of the driveway.
E. Compatibility with other uses and noise: The proposed use will be compatible and
consistent with the existing neighboring tenants in the shopping center. As the
applicant will be required to conduct all operations indoors, the use is not expected to
have any negative effects on the adjacent businesses or the residential neighborhood
located behind the center to the south.
F. Correspondence: All property owners within 300 feet of the project site and adjacent
tenants in the shopping center were notified by mail of the proposed use. Staff
received a letter from a property owner in the neighboring mobile home park to the
north commenting on the upkeep of the site and outdoor storage of donated items
CITY PLANNER STAFF REPORT
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
July 8, 2003
Page 3
(Exhibit "G"). Staff believes that the conditions of approval for this project will
satisfactorily address the neighboring residents' concerns.
RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above analysis, staff recommends that the City Planner
approve the applicant's request for Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00468 through the
adoption of the attached Resolution.
R es~u~
pDria~n c~p~a~ ~lla~ e r'~l/~--~
DC:MS,rna
Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Summary Sheet
Exhibit "B"- Location Map
Exhibit "C" - Site Plan
Exhibit "D"- Floor Plan
Exhibit "E" - Correspondence from the Applicant and Photographs
Exhibit "F" - Descriptions and Operating Hours of Neighboring Tenants
Exhibit "G"- Correspondence from Neighbors
Draft Resolution of Approval for Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00468
INFORMATION SHEET
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FILE NO: Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00468
PROJECT NAME: Goodwill second-hand retail store
APPLICANT: Goodwill Industries
LOCATION: 9749 Base Line Road
FLOOR AREA OF BUILDING: about 9,500 square feet
LAND USE CLASSIFICATION: Commercial
EXISTING ZONING: Neighborhood Commercial (NC)
EXISTING LAND USE: Commercial Shopping Center
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: Commercial
ADJACENT ZONING/LAND USE:
ZONING LAND USE
North: Neighborhood Commercial (NC) District Shopping Center
South: Low (L) Residential District Single-Family Residences
East: Low (L) Residential Distdct Single-Family Residences
West: Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and
Office Park (OP) Districts Shopping Center/Library
SITE DESCRIPTION: The site consists of five, single-story commercial buildings. In addition to
the applicant, tenants include a supermarket, and multiple small retail shops and restaurants.
SITE SIZE: The overall shopping center is about 101,000 square feet on 8.6 acres
PARKING CALCULATIONS:
Use Area Parking Calculation Parking Required Parking Provided
Shopping Center 101,000 sq.ft 4.5 spaces/1000sq.ft 455 about 500
TERRA VISTA
s~ TOWN CENTI:;R
FOOTHILL BL
; · CITY
i HALL
r'rl
APPLICATION FOR
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
9749 BASELINE ROAD
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA 9:1701
REQUEST: The applicant Goodwill Industries of Southern California (-Goodwill"),~.
re uests isSuance of a Conditional Use Permit allowing the operation of a not-for-~of'it
q ...... ,.A k~,,hborhood Commercial zone.
"secondhana store Itl Ul~
PROPERTY: The subject property consists of approximately 9,591 square feet, which is
the easterly portion of the former 30,000 square foot Albertson's supermarket. The
property is located in an existing building in an existing shopping center. The westerly
portion of the former Albertson's has recently been occupied by Dollar Tree stores. The
building is on a portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 1077-011-050-0000. (See Exhibits
"3-A' and "3-B').
PROPOSED USE: Goodwill is a California 501(c)3 corporation which currently operates
stores throughout.Los Angeles, San Bemardino, and Riverside Counties. The stores
36 . .- ~--,-.~ ~,,,,arel and househo d goods (excluding large appliances and
sell h gn-qua [Y ao.~,=,~
hazardous materials) in a first class retail setting. Merchandise mix and presentation are
similar to that found in national "off-price" retailers such as Marshall's and Ross Dress
for Less (see sample photo Exhibit "3-C(b)'). Proceeds will support Goodwill's not-for-
profit mission of providing vocational training and job placement services for people with
disabilities in San Bernardino County.
HOURS OF OPERATION: The store will be open for business from 9:00 A.M. until 8:00
P.M. Monday through Saturday, and 10:00 A.M. until 7:00 P.M. Sunday. Staff will be
present in the store for approximately one hour prior to opening until one hour after
closing each day.
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES: Subject to business need, a Goodwill store of this size
typically employs 12 to 15 full time staff, including store management. On a daily basis,
the afternoon shift would include approximately 10 employees.
REASON FOR REQUEST: Due to the nature of its business (sale of secondhand
goods) Goodwill's presence in Rancho Cucamonga is restricted by code to operating in
the City's Neighborhood Commercial and General Commercial zones, outside of the
various Specific Plan and Overlay zones. After an exhaustive search of all the
applicable areas, Goodwill has determined that the subject property is the only currently
available location within the City that meets minimum size requirements.
EXHIBIT 'E'
NORTHRIDGE
ITl
Shopping Center at S/E/C of Baseline and Archibald
Address Business Hours of Operation Square Footage Parking
Baseline
9709 Fouthill Independent Bank Mou-Thu; 9AM-4PM,Fr~ 9AM-6PM, Sun Closed 5.401
9713 Good Neighbor Pharmacy Mos-F~ 9AM-TPM, Sat 9AM-2PM, Sun closed 2,700
9721 Maui Doughnuts MomF~ 4AM-5PM, Sat 5AM-3PM, Sun 6AM-1PM 900
9723 Harv's Cleanem MomFri 6:30AM-7PM,Sat9AM -2P M, Sun Clo-'~.,d 1,500
9743 Dollar Tree Men-Sat 8AIVl-9PM,Sunl0AM-6PM 20,000
~""' 9749 Proposed Goodwill Store Mo.-Sat 9AM.SPM,Sun 10AM-SPM 9,591
9759 Splash Pool & Spa Mun-Sat 9AM-SPM,Closed Sun 2,400
9775 Nbe~son's 6AM-lAM Men-Sun 44,310
9779 Star Nails II Mo~,~Sat 9AM-7Pm, Sun 9 AM-5PM 1,000
9781 Cuosmonga Hai~ Co. Tue-Fri 10AM-SPM,Sat 9AM-5PM, Closed Surt-Mou 1,000
9783 Classic Homes Mo~-F~i 9AM-SPM, Sat 9AM-4PIVI,Sun 10AM-4PM 1,000
9785 Post-Ne{ Mun-Ri 9:30AM-7PM, Sat 9:30AM-4PM,Sun Closed 1,250
9789 Nancy's Hailma~ Mm-Ri 9:30AM-7PM, Sat 9:30AM-6PM,Sun 10:30AM-5:00PM 2,250
9791 Fam~ Dentist Tue-Frt 10AM-TPM,Sat 10AM-4PM, Closed Sun 1,000
9795 Beautiful Things Not Posted 2,000
9799-A · ' Taco Factmy 'Mon-Thur 9AM-9PM.Ffi-Sat 9AM-IOPM Sun 9AM-9PM 1,225
9799-B LitUe Caeaam Pizza Mo~-Thur 11AM-10PM,Ffi-Sat 11AM-11PM Sun 11AM-10PM 1,100
9799.D Yama Sushi Mo~-Fri 11:30AM-I O:00PM, Sat-Sun 5:00PM-10:00PM 2,475
Total 101,102 464 spaces
4.5 per 1000
W. CRAIG DOOTSON, CPM
234 E. ! 7T" STREE'r, SUITE 209
COSTA MESA, CA
PHONE: (949) 631-6799
FAX (949) 631-463!
July 7, 2003
Mr. Brad Buller, City Planner
City of Rancho Cucamonga
P.O. Box 807
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729
Re: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468
GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
Dear Mr. Bulier,
As the Property Manager for the Albertson's Shopping Center where the
proposed Goodwill Industries store would be located, I have sedous ooncems
over the impact of this .use on the cleanliness, hygiene and safety of the
shopping center.
We go to considerable lengths to maintain a neat and clean shopping center for
the benefit of all tenants, customers and residents of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga. In my experience, a second hand store attracts the dumping of
unwanted goods to the parking lot, whether during store hours or after stora
hours. This further attracts people to the parking lot to sort through the discards
and scatter them around the parking lot and sidewalks of the shopping canter.
As the Common Area Manager, It is my job to maintain the Common Area and I
believe this use would greatly in~rease the trash and dumping probiems in the
shopping center. As wIth every neighborhood shopping center, we have a
certain amount of problems already with public dumping of large items such as
old sofas and water heaters, and we don't want to make it worse by becoming
known as a place to dump unwanted items.
The City Planning Staff has done an excellent job and proposed a series of
appropriate conditions to attempt to minimize the effect of this use on the
appearance and hygiene of the shopping center. In practice however, i'm not
sure that it will work to require donors to first make arrangements with the store
to drop off donated Items at the rear of the store, and then park in a regular
parking space and carry all donated items into the store. I believe that many
people will not comply with these requirements and simply dump in the rear of
the store. This will create a daily trash and debris removal problem and I would
CI'I'Y 0F RANCH0 CUOAI~I(]I~
EXHIBI
like to require Goodwill Industries to directly contract and pay for daily trash and
debris removal. This should be an additional condition under the Conditional Use
Permit. Otherwise the owner and the other businesses in the shopping center
will end up paying for the trash removal problem caused by Goodwill Industries,
In addition, at the mar of the store is a fire lane only 15' wide. The dumping of
any large items such as sofas or refrigerators in the fire lane will effectively block
access to the mar of the center, creating a dangerous situation.
If this Conditional Use Permit is approved, I intend to strictly enforce the
conditions of approval and, as stated in the conditions, I will notify the City
Planner in case of any adverse effects upon the shopping center.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Commercial Property Manager
Gi'iY OF RANCHO CUCAM£
JUL 0'l 2003
RECEIVED - PLANN1NI
277
, , F~ P,
I~ON 02:50 PI~DDI4ILL I1~, NO, / ,
VIA: Facsimile 909.4~.2847
July 7, 2003
Mr, Mike Smith, Planning Te~nldan
Ci~ ~ ~ncho Cucame~ga
10500 CMc Center D~
~n~o Cu~monga, California
Prop~d G~II S~m
9749 Ba~line R~
Thank you for fo~a~lng the ad~n~ ~PY ~ ~e C~s m~mmendaaons ~a~ing our
appli~fion for a ~nditional use petE. We ~uld like to offer the fotl~ng ~mme~ on
four o[ the planning depa~nt's ~u~on I~:
~at the subJe~ spa~ does not offer the op~duni~ for
I~ms 5,4 and 5.5: We m~n~ H~e~r, given the Ci~s zenlng
~e ideal G~d~ll s~m and dona~on ~n~r la.ut
regula~ons, It Is ~e on~ spa~ a~ilable ~at la ~ a si~ su~b~ for our use.
Ideally, ~ would ha~ 1~' ~ fmn~ge, them~ allowing us ~e oppo~unity to have ~he
usual stomfmnt e~n~, plus a se~nda~ entmn~ ~ ~ us~ as our 'dona~on ~nte~.
In ~ls ~se, ~use the na~ 60' ~n~ge pmhibi~ ~e Inclusion of ~e front dona~on
~n~r enffan~, we datelined it would ~ ne~a~ ~ a~pt donations at ~e ~r of
~e store. We roached ~ls ~mpmml~ ~nct~lon only after de~inlng that ~e s~ce at
~e mar of ~e store, out of ~e ~ffic aisle, ~s s~clent for ve~ shoff [erm pa~lng ~ ~
~m (24' ~de by 20' deep), in add~on, you might n~e ~at the entire mar lot ~ ~e
shopping ~nter Is ~uipp~ wl~ I~ing gates and slgn~ "No Track Deliveries 9pm -
~a.
We suggest, as an a~ve ~ st~s m~mmenda~on of Io~ing ~r rear d~r to donom,
~at we sM~ ~e deli~ ama apron as a 'loading zone one' and the adja~nt ~ffic aisle
as a 'no paAing' zone. Bemuse the donatlon d~r ~uld be mann~ during busings
bourn, ~c ~uld ~ mn~lled ~ ensure the ~fe~ and ~nvenlen~ of all tenants and
our donom. We ~ll be prepa~ ~ present phot~ IllusVa~ng ~ls re~mmenda~on at
tomo~s mee~ng.
Item 5.6: Our land use affomey, ~o ~11 be present at tomo~'s baaing, sugges~
this language ~ chang~ to, ~hem fully to ~e om~slo~s d its lea~,
a~ree~ent m~ardin~ maintenan~ of the I~edor and e~edor of app~
~." ~ is ~l~lly the ~se In multiAenant leases, the lendlo~ is
responsible for ~erior ~inflng (e.g, graftS). ~ OF ~NGHO CUGAMONGA
' JUL-O?-2003 llON 02:51 P~OD!~ILL I1{) F~ NO, P, 03
2
· me su ests a'language modification such as, "If operation
em 5.7. Again, our atto ..y, gg : es or residences, e_~xcept
It ...... ~---- ,.wects unnn adjacent business
of the racl ty causes auv=.~
~omic najg~ the Conditional Use Permit shall be brought before the City
' termination of the use," This would deter a
Planner for consideration and possible
neighboring merchant from filing a complaint in Instances where we might be considered
compe~.ing retailer.
clate the o portunity to discuss these suggestions with you by
I would very much appre . P ..... .-- -, ~o3,539.2001 until §:30pm and
phone prior to the hearing. I
tomorrow between the hours oy u:uuam a.u ,. ....
Best regards,
Ter~/Tak
Rebl'Estate Director
c~: Tracy powers
$1TY OF RANCHO CtlCAI~0~GA
JUL 01 2{)03
BEI3FJVED - PLANNING
Al
~LBERTSON'S GOOT)WILL DOU. AR 'IREE
Ooodw~ll Indu~t~ of ~ou~lmm California
9749 Bas~llrm Road
Rancho Cummoflg&, California
· ' P~ L.o~dlng Zone Plan
7-12-2003
.,,
GOODWILL .....
Hc $oP,,~¥
VIA:
Ba~o~D~=m~ July ~B, 2003
2003 O~
m~ Mr. Mik~ Smith, PlanninD Technician
~ lr~ir Pence, H
p~i~,~o. ~i~ of Rancho ~u~amon]a
~0~00 Givi~ G~nt~r
m,~c~ Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730
s~o.~ v~ c~. Re: Project DRC2003-00468
/an,e, D. Hkk~ Proposed Goodwill Store
u.,.. ~.~ ~/~ 9749 Baseline Road
Mo~. ~ s~ jo~. Dear Mike:
D.~ ~. AS requested at the July 8~ planning heating, enclosed for the Ci~'s use am ~° (2) full 1/8"
c~,=.~ ~/~.~ scale drawings and several reduced vemions of the same sketch, showing the mar potion of
~ ~ s~ the shopping center adjacent to the proposed Goodwill donation center. I have indicated our
Be~ 0l~-~
~_~ ~ suggestions for striped "loading zone" and "no pa~ing' areas. Note that the dimensions of ~e
~ e ceo loading zone would be approximately 30' long and 20' deep. If more ~an one donor should
Do,,g~ ~ ~ ~SW a~ive at one time, there is ample free space available in the mostly unused pa~ing lot at ~e
mar of the shopping center for a donor to wait, out of ~e line of traffic, for the Goodwill loading
zone to clear.
RegaMing your suggestion that them exis~ the potential for confli~ be~een Goodwill and
Dollar Tree over access to the track well, our landloM advises us that ~e loading areas at ~e
rear of the promises are all a pa~ of the common a~a and available for use by both tenant.
Therefore, while Goodwill does not intend to use ~e track well for our own pu~oses, we have
the fight to do so E we please. This of coume would also mean that we would also enjoy the
use of the ~ck well access area immediately behind our store. With Dollar Tree cu~nfly
receiving a track deiive~ just ~ice weekly, it would seem that Goodwill would create no mom
of an inconvenience to Dollar Tree E one of our donom stops in the proposed "loading zone" for
a few minutes ~an Dollar Tree is likely to create for Goodwill while a Dollar Tree delive~
temporarily blocks access to Goodwill's freight door. Remember also, ~at Goodwill's donom
will not be "pa~ing' even in the loading zone. T~i~lly, with our affendant s~fioned at the mar
door, the process of receiving a donation takes no more that throe minutes.
I hope this info~ation, and the accompanying drawings help resolve any remaining questions
you may have about using the rear of our store for receiving donations; however, please feel
free to call if need be. We look fo~aM to meeting with you again on the 29~.
Best regards,
cc: T. Powem
encls.
~ the Counties of Los ~gel~, Riverside and ~n Bema~ino
'"~_n~- for periodic reviews. He added that it is staff's hope that Game Structure will also come to
the plac-e.w-b~re they are no longer required to have periodic reviews· He then continued the item to
the August 12,~2030~.. meeting. He mentioned that it is encouraging that no cells or correspondence
was received from the-eth.e.r tenants or neighboring residents.
Thomas Ly sa~d they could come ~n-ea_~er.
Mr. Buller said 30 days is what staff recommer~ded.~. ~
Mr. Buller continued the item to the regularly sche~i~ t 12, 2003 meeting for
DRC2002-00113. led~?~us
operate a non-profit second hand store of 9,500 square feet within an existing shopping center
in the Neighborhood Commercial District, located at 9749 Base Line Road - APN: 1077-011-50.
Mike Smith, Planning Technician, gave the staff report. He noted that correspondence had been
received from Craig Dootson, the property manager of the shopping center, and from Terry Takeda,
Real Estate Director for Goodwill Industries. Mr. Smith reported that a letter had also been received
from Jerry Lee, a resident of Ramona Village Mobile Home Park, which cites concerns regarding the
dumping of large items, items being scattered in the parking lot and the possibility of fire hazards.
Brad Buller, City Planner, asked for details regarding the notices that were mailed out regarding the
public hearing.
Mr. Smith stated that staff performed standard noticing within a 300-foot radius of all property
owners including the new tract to the south that currently only has 1 new property owner. He
explained that not everyone in the mobile home park received a notice because some were beyond
the 300-foot limit.
Tracy Powers, Vice President of Retail Operations, Goodwill Industries, 342 San Femando Road,
Los Angeles, stated that he had few comments pertaining to the findings in the staff report and that
he could accept the conditions of approval found in the draft resolution, however, he suggested
more emphasis be placed on the logistics of taking in donations a{ the rear of the building. He
commented that he recognizes the validity of staff's recommendation to onlytake donations through
the front entrance of the building· He reported that there is a fire line in front of the building,
therefore, people would have to walk a distance from the parking area into the front of the store to
drop off their donations· He added that they always process the incoming goods at the rear of the
store· He noted that this space is smaller than the ideal and the front area within the store is not
large enough to take in the donations and s nconvenient. He suggested that they be allowed to
stripe the area at the rear of the building near the ramp of the Dollar Tree store as a loading zone.
Mr. Buller asked how many stores they have and what percentage of their stores experience
donations just being left at the back when no one is attending the area·
Mr. Powers indicated that they have 36 stores and donation centers within his region. He stated that
they all take donations but some take in more than others. He said the intent is to have someone
there to take in the donations inside the store, but that there are always a few 'midnight' donors.
He said some sites are more problematic than others but in any case the percentage is small,
perhaps I per day, per location· He commented that it appears the back drive area is gated and
locked and that the sign states that no deliveries may occur between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and
8:00 a.m. He added that because they are open 7 days a week with extended hours that 'midnight'
. , .~'donors are less likely·
EXHIBIT 'G' Ju,ys, 2oo3
Mr. Buller asked if the drop off methods and areas vary among stores.
Mr. Powers stated they are all different.
Mr. Buller asked what would be ideal because the City has dealt with similar situations before and
we get 'mixed reviews' and therefore the he is cautious and wants to be sure that the business will
be a good neighbor. He reported that the neighbors to the east of this space had regular truck
deliveries and therefore the neighbors became sensitive to the noise which finally resulted in the ·
installation of the gates and the times for which deliveries are prohibited. He noted that this is a
reason that allowing more activity on this driveway requires careful consideration.
' Mr. Powers commented that Goodwill industries received 1,000,016,000 donations last year,
approximately 5,000 donations per month and that their standards are very high. H~ added that
they have a transportation department that comes by every day, 365 days a year to every donation
site to pick up discards.
Mr. Buller asked if donations are ever dropped directly into the building.
Mr. Powers stated that is never done because of the possibility of a fire h~7~rd.
Mr. Buller opened the public hearing.
Jerry Lee, 9800 Base Line Road, Space 138, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he lives in Ramona Villa
Mobile Home Park, located across the street from the project. He reported that he has had 9 years
experience working with similar organizations (Disabled Veterans and Purple Heart) and his
experience with them has raised concerns about the proposed location of the Goodwill store. He
commented that the Alta Loma area is an 'upgrade' area and he and his neighbors are concerned
as to how large items such as mattresses will be handled, 'off-hour' dumping of large items, and
trash in the parking lot. He mentioned that people would even dig through dumpstere near collection
sites looking for items they can sell at swap meets and garage sales. He wanted to know how they
would handle "bailed' items such as rags and if they would remain in the store.
Terry Takeda, Real Estate Director, Goodwill Industries, replied that Goodwill has a transportation
department that runs trucks to every store/center, every day of the year to handle all dumped items,
salvage and trash. He indicated it is all picked up by their trucks, nothing is left behind as trash.
Craig Dootson, 234 E. 17th Street, Suite 209, Costa Mesa, Property Manager for the Albertson's
Center, reported that this particular space in the center has a ground lease and although his
company has no right to approve or refuse a particular tenant coming into the center, it is his job to
create a happy mix of tenants in the center. He indicated that Albertson's controls most of the space
in the center and that they generally defer to their wishes. He commented that he has managed the
center since 1983 and that the owners have been willing to leave this space vacant for some time.
He expressed concern that even with the conditions of approval in place, 'you can not condition the
public.' He said he is concerned the center will get a reputation and attract dumping. He said that
since the gates at the rear of the store are locked at night, people would most likely dump right in
front of the gates. He noted that the owners of the property inspected another Goodwill store and
their employees admitted that people sometimes drop donations at night. He indicated he supports
the concept of the Goodwill Stores but he does not believe this is the right location. He reported that
the fire lane is only 15 feet wide and any large items.dumped in it could present a problem if there
was a fire.
Mr. Buller asked if he manages other shopping centers with this kind of store as a tenant.
City Planner Meeting 3 July 8, 2003
Mr. Dootson said no, but he felt he is familiar enough with their operations and that it attracts
dumping. He reported that he has spoken with the manager of the Albertson's store and he is
strongly opposed to the project. He stated that Albertson's did not receive advance notice of the
project until the public hearing notice was received by mail just prior to the long holiday weekend.
Mr. Buller asked if he is aware of the position of the Dollar Tree management and if there is any kind ·
of agreement that stipulates advance noticing to the tenants if negotiations are in process for a new
tenant..
Mr. Dootson indicated that there is no requirement for that but that he had contacted the leasing
agent and they already knew negotiations were occurring with Goodwill Industries.
Mr. Buller asked if Mr. Doctson knew in advance that the Goodwill store was coming before the City
for approval.
Mr. Dootson replied that they City's notice of public hearing was the first indication he had of the
proposed project.
Mr. Buller asked if they intend to hold sidewalk sales or use window signs.
Mr. Powers stated they prohibit sidewalk safes because they do not want that kind of image. He
stated Mr. Lee is correct that most stores of this type have problems with trash and dumping, but
that because of Goodwill's central operations, no salvage is kept at their store, everything is hauled
away on a daily basis. He admitted that unwanted items are part of the territory with this kind of
business.
Mr. Takeda said their trucks run everyday, 365 days a year, even on holidays, to every store to pick
up these items. He commented that it is a proactive operation, not reactive.
Mr. Lee stated that he heard a secondhand store had a fire in the parking lot.
Mr. Powem said it was in Santa Aha. Someone ignited items that were stored under a shed
covering. He indicated their items are all kept inside the building.
Mr. Buller asked Mr. Dcotson if the other tenants are notified when a new tenant is planning to come
into the center.
Mr. Dootson replied they are not.
Mr. Buller asked what happens if they are unhappy.
Mr. Dootson stated it is his job to create a good tenant mix. The owner would wait for the right
tenant.
Mr. Buller noted that if the property manager is concerned with having the Goodwill store as a
neighbor and because of the short notice and limited time for dialogue, he indicated it might have
been better to let a few more people know that this was coming in advance. He expressed concern
because it is his job to make a reasonable decision but with these factors in mind, it raises
questions. He remarked that the City has two other similar operations that have had some concems
but not with the property manager in opposition. Mr. Buller noted the positive aspects he had heard
such as the applicant's gestures to be a good neighbor, but also questioned if they could find a 'win-
win' in this arrangement. He added that he would prefer not to force the issue and then experience
appeals of the decision. Mr. Buller commented that he has not received any complaints about the
other secondhand stores in town.
City Planner Meeting 4 July 8, 2003
Mr. Dootson indicated he would be more favorable to the proposal if the rear of the store were not
so constricted in space with the rear fire lane.
Mr. Buller noted that staff has asked the Fire Division to provide comments. He noted that it would
be better if the applicants had actually plotted out their suggestions for striping so that they could be
presented to the Fire Division to see if it would be acceptable.
Mr, Dootson indicated that he would like time to notify the regional managers and wait for their
response.
Mr, Buiier asked if there is a final date the Goodwill stores must meet before giving good faith money
or signing a lease.
Mr. Powers thought it might be July 31, 2003.
Mr. Buller asked Mr. Powers if he would be willing to take the issue to the owners before money is
put down on the space and if 2-4 weeks would be sufficient to do that,
Mr, Powers said 3 weeks would be acceptable.
Mr. Bullet indicated a special meeting could be held in 3 weeks time.
Mr, Dootson noted that Albertson's controls 44,000 square feet of space and therefore pay the
greatest portion of the costs in maintaining the property.
Kevin Kemper, of Piper Rudnick (attorney for Goodwill Stores), 1999 Avenue of the Stars, Fourth
Floor, Los Angeles, asked why Albertson's did not send a representative to the meeting.
Mr. Dootson claimed Albertson's did not know in advance, that they did not receive notice.
Mr. Buller asked staff to produce the list of property owners that were mailed notices.
Mr. Smith pointed out the address to the owners of Albertson's stores on the list.
Mr. Buller suggested that Goodwill stores introduce themselves to the other tenants in advance and
show them how they could be a good neighbor to their businesses.
Mr. Takeda stated that they did by sending everyone a letter informing them of their intentions,
information about their stores, and a request for their support in advance, and that they used the
same list used by the City for the public headng notices,
Mr, Buller commented that he believes the Goodwill store can be a good neighbor. He suggested a
better striping plan to present to the Fire Distdct and if the owners and property manager are willing
to dialogue with Mr. Powers and his team from Goodwill Industries, then continuing the headng to a
specific date is worthwhile. He noted that if for some reason the store became a bad neighbor then
the City could revoke the Conditional Use Permit but that would follow an investment from the
applicant to opening the store as well as the lease costs, and therefore, it would be better to address
these concerns eady on in the process. He added that he has reviewed the signage used at other
Goodwill stores and suggested that they work with staff on what will be permissible. He then asked
Mr. Dootson if the owner is open to discussion on the proposal.
Mr. Dootson indicated that he has spoken to the owner everyday since he received his notice and
the more they discuss it, the less the owner likes it.
Mr. Bullet asked what the applicant's preference would be for square footage in their stores.
City Planner Meeting 5 July 8, 2003
Mr. Powers indicated approximately 100 feet of frontage and 120 feet of store depth.
Mr. Buller asked if they had reseamhed this location.
Mr. Powers stated they did and they used the Ci~s website as well as coming to the counter in
advance to determine a permissible location. He commented that they were discouraged from
looking at Foothill Boulevard as a possible location. He noted that Rancho Cucamonga came up
number 1 in their research for the right demographics. He admitted this site is smaller than they
would like, but is workable. He added that they did not want this to be a surprise to anyone and that
they took measures to prevent that.
Mr. Buller directed staff to give a current copy of the applicable sections of the Development Code to
Mr. Powers to assist them in considering other locations.
Mr. Buller asked where the closest trash enclosure is located.
Mr. Smith indicated that Dollar Tree has one in the rear of the building.
Mr. Powers noted that they do not use the shopping center dumpsters because nearly all of their
discards are recyclable in some way.
Mr. Buller commented that we could condition the trash pickups.
Mr. Powers said that is not a problem.
Mr. Bulier then continued the hearing and adjourned the City Planner meeting to a special meeting
to be held on July 29, 2003, at 2:00 p.m. in the Planning Division Conference Room.
ADJOURNMENT
The City Planner meeting adjourned at 3:23 p.m.
Sincerely, ,~
Lois Schrader
Planning Division Secretary
City Planner Meeting 6 July 8, 2003
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY PLANNER MINUTES
Special Meeting
July 29, 2003
Brad Buller, City Planner, called the Special Meeting of the City of Rancho Cucamonga City Planner
to order at 2:00 p.m. The meeting was held in the Planning Division Conference Room at the
Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, Califomia.
STAFF PRESENT Brad Buller, City Planner; Dan Coleman, Principal Planner; Mike Smith,
Planning Technician; Lois Schrader, Secretary
ANNOUNCEMENTS
No announcements were made at this time.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES - A request to
operate a non-profit second hand store of 9,500 square feet within an existing shopping
center in the Neighborhood Commercial District, located at 9749 Base Line Road - APN:
1077-011-50. (Continued from July 8, 2003)
Brad Buller, City Planner, repoded that since this item was continued from July 8, a number of items
of correspondence had been received from the following persons noting the following concerns.
A letter dated July 25, 2003 was received from Trinidad C. Calma, DMD in opposition of the
proposed project citing concern that the shopping center would no longer be clean for the
customers.
A letter dated July 25, 2003, was received from Splash Pools in opposition because of the location.
A letter dated July 25, 2003, was received from Shirley Garcia.of Nancy's Hallmark Shop in
opposition because of the location.
A letter dated July 29, 2003, was received from Frederick Chan of Econo Drugstore, voicing
opposition because of the type of clientele that would be attracted, the down graded perception of
the center as a whole, and because of the location.
A letter dated July 29, 2003 was received from Kevin Manquen, owner of Little Caesar's in
opposition because of dumping and nuisance issues.
A letter dated July 28, 2003 was received from Ingber and Klapper, LLP, representing Travis
Associates, supporting approval of the project because the ground lease does not give Albertson's
the authority to oppose the application.
Mr. Buller commented that when he continued the hearing from the July 8 meeting, he had hoped
that more discussion and resolution would have occurred since then. He mentioned that he has
City Planner Meeting I July 29, 2003
heard opposition form the property manager, from neighboring residents and a number of tenants in
the shopping center where the store is proposed. He noted that he did get support for the proposed
loading and unloading zone from the Fire Department in regard to the east/west access. He added
that because it is a continued hearing, he would allow Goodwill Industries to comment then the
representative from the shopping center and then he would open the hearing to public comment.
He remarked that many lettem were received today and that he was just briefed on the status just
prior to the meeting. He asked staff to be sure that all interested parties received copies of all the
:correspondence received since the production of the staff report.
Tracy Powers, Vice President of Retail Operations, Goodwill Industries, 342 San Femando Road,
Los Angeles, stated that he felt "blindsided" in the process because of all the information being
shared just prior to the meeting. He expressed frustration in that he felt Goodwill Industries had
informed all of the other tenants months ago of their intentions and only now are they receiving a
response. He mentioned that he also received hearsay information from the property manager
regarding opposition from Albertson's during the first hearing on July 8. He indicated that he has
heard two issues that were fully covered at the initial hearing, the first being how overnight dumping
of donations would be handled and the second being whether their choice of Rancho Cucamonga is
an appropriate location. He commented that the average income in Rancho is in the mid-60
thousand range and Santa Clarita is in the 90 thousand range. He noted that the Santa Clarita store
is their biggest producer and the demographics are very similar to those found in Rancho
Cucamonga.
Kevin Kemper, Piper Rudnick, 1999 Avenue of the Stars, Fourth Floor, Los Angeles, commented
that Goodwill industries addressed the concern about unwanted dumping and noted that their trucks
come every morning to pick up left items, if any, and that they ensure them are not any left behind
items. He commented that this practice benefits all of the tenants and the center on the whole and
that Goodwill does it because it is their policy to do so, not because they are required to do so in
light of being a good neighbor. He added that because the application is for a Conditional Use
Permit, that unless there is not a condition that can be applied then the request should be granted.
He remarked that the conditions placed on the permit by staff address the concerns and therefore
the application should be approved.
Terry Takeda, Real Estate Director, Goodwill Industries, 342 San Femando Road, Los Angeles,
distributed for the record a list of various Goodwill locations with their neighboring tenants, indicating
that these locations have neighbors that do not believe that the Goodwill sites negatively affect
them. He also distributed for review, photographs of several Goodwill stores.
Mr. Buller asked if the locations shown are actual stores or drop-off sites.
Mr. Takeda indicated the list includes drop-off sites.
Mr. Buller asked which locations would most closely emulate or be most similar to the type of
location that is being proposed, a neighborhood commercial center with in-line tenants next door to
the Goodwill store.
Mr. Powers indicated the Azusa, Arcadia, Santa Clarita, Culver City, Hancock Park, La Mirada,
Northridge, Highland, Palmdale, Cathedral City and Upland sites would fit that category.
Mr. Buller reiterated that he is trying to find a store like this one specifically.
Mr. Powers said that those he noted on the list with the exception of the Highland store are all actual
stores.
City Planner Meeting 2 July 29, 2003
Mr. Bulier noted that one of the sites is located in a center with an Albertson's. He asked if there
would be a possibility of the manager from that Albertson's store would cell the manager from this
Albertson's store and would they listen to one another?.
Craig Dootson, 234 E. 17th Street, Suite 209, Costa Mesa, Property Manager for the Albertson's
Center, stated he had sent a copy of the agenda packet to all of the tenants of the center and asked
for their comments. He noted that 8 of the 14 took the time to voice their opposition to the project.
He added that the Albertson's in Costa Mesa never received the information. He added that their
position has not changed and that although they believe Goodwill Industries does good work, that
this is not the right Iocetion for their store.
Roger De Young, 355 Bristol Street, Suite C, Costa Mesa, stated he is the owner of the shopping
center. He commented that he visited the Goodwill store in Pomona and talked with the employees
and they disclosed items are dumped. He added that the store is free standing and painted in wild
colors. He added that Albertson's has objected but he was unaware if the other Albertson's was
unhappy with the Goodwill store. He commented that he purchased the shopping center with the
ground lease and that he does not have control over the center. He noted that he has owned it for
20 years as he does not like the fact that he does not have control, but that it was in effect when he
bought it, Albertson's was occupying the space in question and when Albertson's vacated the space,
he was left with this open space with its attached ground lease.
Mr. Dootson commented that the space has now been vacant since 1995 and that Albertson's
controlled that store until 2 years ago and then they sold it to a company in New York and they are
now leasing it. He added that Albertson's did not receive the Notice of Public Hearing mailer.
Mr. Smith checked the file and reported that nothing has been retu. med from the postal sen/ice and
he confirmed that Albertson's is on the address list.
Mr. Buller opened the public hearing.
Adam Caruso, Slim and Tone, 9795 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucemonga, said his shop is close to
the proposed Goodwill store. He noted that the Goodwill store would be located in the 'dead center'
position of the shopping center and that created concem because he operates a 'ladies only'
business that ceters to middle class women. He remarked that this would be a different type of
location for this type of store and he asked to be shown where this kind of arrangement has worked
within a neighborhood shopping center. For this reason he expressed major concem as a teni~nt.
He stated he believes that beceuse the unit isso large it would be very noticeable and because of
the possibility of dumping and the impact on the site, he did not feel this was the best location for the
store. He stated he felt a little guilty because he supports the ceuse of Goodwill Industries and yet
he could not support this location for their store.
Nga Pham, Star Nails, 9779 Base Line Road commented that she does not support the project
because of the possibility of dumping, a perception of cleanliness that the center holds now, but
would not have if the Goodwill Store was permitted in the center, concerns about the 'image' of the
center, the service, a perceived environment for their client base, concerns about the possibility of
losing clients if the store was there, safety, and the fear of increased loitering and night time
vandalism. She added she feels Goodwill does great things, but she opposes the project.
Jerry Lee, 9800 Base Line Road, Space 138, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he is a resident of the
Ramona Villa Mobile Home Park, located across the street from the Albertson's center. He noted
that although Goodwill Industries is known for running a clean operation, he opposes the project
because of the possibility of dumping. He added that some donation centers run by other
organizations are dirty and attract a different clientele. He commented that he understands the
concerns of both sides and he hopes for a resolution and that he learned a lot from both meetings.
City Planner Meeting 3 ' July 29, 2003
Adam Caruso added that they will soon open their store at 5:30 a.m. and they do not want their
clients to see items left as donations when they ardve in the center.
Mr. Buller asked staff what Albertson's hours of operation are and to confirm the proposed hours for
the Goodwill store.
Mr. Smith indicated that he believes Albertson's hours are 6:00 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. and the Goodwill
store is 9:00 a.m. to 8!00 p.m. Monday through Saturday and 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Sundays.
Mr. Powers commented that Mr. Caruso described the typical customer of Goodwill stores. He
commented that this store is smaller than most, but that it was the only place they could find in
Rancho Cucamonga that could accommodate the business. He remarked that this was the first time
anyone had implied that loitering would be a problem associated with their operation.
Mr. Kemper noted that the space has been vacant since 1995 and that empty space is never an
asset to a shopping center. He added that dumping and loitering is more likely to occur when large
tenant spaces are vacant for long periods of time and that this sends a bigger message. He
reported that Travis has the right to market and lease this space and that the Goodwill store would
be operated in a manner that is sensitive to the community. He remarked that the property owner
made his purchase with full awareness of the terms of the ground lease and that he understands the
concem about keeping the center viable. He added that he believes the Goodwill store will advance
this objective. He noted that the issue remains with the ground lease in that it has 20 or more
excluded uses and that lease was a product of negotiation and that a business such as a Goodwill
store was not named among those excluded, but that many other uses were identified. 'He
commented that he believes the 'parties should have benefit of their bargain.' He felt that if they
could come up with conditions of approval, wi'iich he believed staff had already done, then he
concluded that further opposition to the proposed project is not warranted.
Mr. Buller closed the public hearing and commented that he had hoped that during the 3 weeks
since the last meeting for more discussion and subsequent resolution between the parties and
instead senses the same or even a larger chasm between them. He reported that second hand
stores are allowed in the General Commemial and Neighborhood Commercial Centers subject to a
Conditional Use Permit. He added that space always becomes available and Goodwill found this
site in a professional manner and entered into the process but a Conditional Use Permit is required
because the uses vary and it is for these reasons that we allow the public to comment. He noted
that in today's market it is not uncommon to find the owner of the shopping center and another
owner owns some of the buildings. They do not have the authority to deny Tracy from renting or
leasing the space but they can comment in the public headng. He explained that his role is to hear it
out and make a decision and determine if ~Ne can condition it to make it a good neighbor. He noted
that it is unfortunate that we do not have one tenant, or the owner, or the manager in support of
allowing the Goodwill store in. He commented that their reasons vary, some reasons he could
agree with and others were weak in their opposition and why they feel Goodwill would not be a good
neighbor. He commented that regardless of his decision, it could get appealed. He reported that he
has the option to just refer it directly to the Planning Commission, a citizen's board selected by the
City Council that could raise the same discussion and questions and a resolution or no resolution.
He remarked that the Commission historically has been extremely cautious with second hand stores
and they have all dealt with them and the concerns that adse from them. He concurred with Mr.
Caruso in that he would like to be shown that this operation would be good in a typical in line
neighborhood shopping center and he would like to talk to the cities where that has been done to
discover what conditions were applied and what kind of cooperation occurred between the
management and tenants. He reported that in this case he has a management that has to take care
of all the City's concerns such as trash, lights, and hours of operations, but he also has a tenant that
says he will do his best to work with the management but that he does not have to agree with him
City Planner Meeting 4 July 29, 2003 ,-)
because his lease is not with him. He asked what authority he (the management company) has with
tenants that are not responsive. He noted he is extremely reluctant to press them into the position
where they allow a tenant in where no one wants them. He commented that there have been
problems in the past in this shopping center with loitering, trash and noise and it has always been
difficult to get cooperation from Albertson's and the manager and the ownership of the center. He
remarked that it would be compounded if he added a tenant that they don't want; it would be even
harder to get resolve to problems. He remarked that his inclination is to deny the application even
though he is confident his staff placed good conditions on the project. He stated that in light of all
the opposition and the fact that the applicant stated that he does not like some of those conditions
and that Goodwill industries has asked to have some of those conditions deleted with respect to
loading and unloading. He added that because of previous activity problems in the center, the
loading area in the back had to be gated. He remarked that this center is unique. He expressed his
thanks to Mr. Takeda for providing the list of shopping centers containing other Goodwill stores. He
noted that the most probable cities to call would be Arcadia, Azusa, and Cathedral City for code
enforcement information and to see whether these are in-line centers with a similar operation to the
one proposed. He reported that his position today is to deny the request and the Conditional Use
Permit and that Goodwill has 10 days to appeal the decision. He added that staff would work with
Goodwill Industries and that at this time it does not appear both sides are working toward a
resolution.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No additional comments were made at this time
.ADJOURNMENT
The City Planner meeting adjourned at 3:00 p.m.
Lois Schrader
Planning Division Secretary
City Planner Meeting 5 July 29, 2003
J. APPEAL OF DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL
INDUSTRIES - A request to operate a non-profit second-hand store of 9,500 square feet within
an existing shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial District, located at 9749 Base Line
Road - APN: 1077-011-50.
Mike Smith, Planning Technician, presented the staff report and indicated staff received five letters
of opposition from other tenants in the shopping canter and a FAX from Goodwill listing tenants in
other centers with Goodwill stores. He stated that if the Commission decided to allow rear
unloading, the Resolution of Approval would have to be revised because it prohibits
Ioading~unloading in the rear of the building.
Vica Chairman McNiel opened the public hearing.
Tracy Powers, Vice President of Retail Operations, Goodwill Industries Southern California, 342 San
Femando Road, Los Angeles, presented a bdef overview of the purpose of Goodwill Industries and
its operation. He stated they have 36 stores in Los Angeles, San Bemardino, and Riverside
Counties and provided vocational training and job placement servicas for over 6,000 people with
disabilities and other disadvantages in the last year. He said the two comments they most often hear
when opening new stores are that they do not belong in high-income areas and that their stores are
a magnet for trash. He indicated their most successful store on a per capita basis is in Santa Clarita,
a community with a median household income of $96,000 per year. He said {hat disposable income
generates both customers and donors. He acknowledged some of their donations are trash and a
few donors drop off in the night but said Goodwill is proactive in dealing with trash by generally
establishing an early morning dean up routine. He commented that shopping centers are notorious
dumping grounds for trash but Goodwill generally takes the blame for any illegal dumping so any
items not suitable for sale in the store are picked up daily and hauled away. He said they perform a
valuable service of hauling away trash that would normally be hauled away by the shopping canter
owner. He reported that in the past year over 1,000,000 people donated to Goodwill and over
30,000 tons of material was sold or recycled. He stated they received one housekeeping complaint
that they dealt with by revising their transportation schedule. He assertad there is no evidence that
having Goodwill as a neighbor causes any negative consequences. He commented they are simply
operating a retail store that sells donated goods and their customers are pdmadly women over the
age of 45 who live within 5 miles of the store. He said they have never been in a situation where
there was an attempt to close any of their stores because of cleanliness, noise, cdme, or for any
other reason. He commented that the Mayor had visited several of their stores and he hoped the
Commissioners had done the same.
Commissioner McPhail asked if their employees are developmentally disabled or economically
disadvantaged.
Mr. Powers stated that last year they helped over 6,000 people. He noted that generally the
employees come from the community. He indicated that if developmentally disabled individuals were
employed, an on-site job coach would supervise them.
Commissioner- McPhail asked how many people in this area have been helped and placed.
Mr. Powers said they do community outreach in some areas by having a community/career canter
within the store to help do job research, wdte resumes, get them online, etc.; however theywould not
have those servicas in this store because of size.
Commissioner Fletcher asked about drop offs in the back.
Mr. Powers said Rancho Cucamonga is a popular location for retail business and he felt the
community would be a good source of donations. He indicated they researched the area and this
was the only site where they could locate their store under the conditional use permit process. He
Planning Commission Minutes -5- September 24, 2003
EXHIBIT 'D"
said they would prefer a store with a wider frontage so they could have a separete entrance for drop
offs at the front of the store. Because of the narrow 60-foot frontage, he felt it would be more
appropriate to collect the goods at the rear of the store. He said they do that in other locations
where there is no second front door. He indicated rear drop-off access would not be a deal breaker,
but it would be preferred by Goodwill.
Commissioner McPhail noted there is a collection site at Arrow and Haven.
Mr. Powers said they have a shipping container there and it is the only one in the City;
Commissioner Fletcher asked if Mr. Powers said it is the only location available.
Mr. Powers confirmed it was the only one they could find that was vacant and available to them.
Vice Chairman McNiel asked if repairs are made to the donated items on site when needed.
Mr. Powers responded that about 25 percent of the total store area would be devoted to sorting
donated goods and anything not suitable (damaged, stained, etc.), is not put on store floor. He
noted they do not sell damaged goods, such as items missing buttons, etc. He explained that only
about 50 percent of the donated goods are placed on the selling floor. He said they daily truck the
excess goods to a Goodwill salvage operation (closest one in San Bemardino), where they recycle
portions of those products for sale prior to disposal. He indicated they use the funds collected to
trein in skills such as truck driving, word processing, etc.
Commissioner Fletcher asked the size of the Fontana store.
Mr. Powers replied the Fontana store is only 8,000 square feet and they plan to expand it or move it
when the lease expires in 2005.
Commissioner Fletcher asked if goods are dropped off after hours on occasion.
Mr. Powers acknowledged that happens and said that is why they have a truck come each morning
to remove any items that are not suitable.
Kevin Kemper, attorney representing Goodwill, 1999 Avenue of the Stars, Los Angeles, thanked staff
for checking with surrounding localities for feedback regarding the Goodwill operation. He noted
there are a lot of other types of second-hand stores. He felt their operation complies with the
findings necessary to obtain a conditional use permit. He thought the use will not be detrimental to
the canter or the surrounding He said that typically shopping centers welcome them; however the
ownership of this center is unusual. He explained that Goodwill proposes to lease the space from
Travis, which subleases from Albertsons, which leases from the center owner. He said because
Albertsons pays for the lease, the center owner gets its money even if the site is not leased. He
noted the space has been vacant for quite a few years and he felt an empty store is more of blight on
a center than a Goodwill store would be.
Cathryn DeYoung, 355 South Bristol Street, Suite C, Costa Mesa, stated she and her father-in-law,
Roger DeYoung, have owned the center for 25 years. She agreed that although they own the
property they are not able to select the tenant of the property. She said that categorically Goodwill
does good work. She felt this is an unusual location for Goodwill. She stated that the back area is a
narrow fire access alley. She said that if two cars are there for a drop off or items are discarded
there, it means the fire area is blocked and it would not help to have the items removed the next day
because it would be blocked in the meantime. She noted that a Senior Plans Examiner in the Fire
and Safety Division indicated there would not be a problem so long as the fire lane remains clear but
she was concamed that he may not have visited the site. She was also concerned that items will be
dropped off in front at night.
Planning Commission Minutes --6- September 24, 2003
Craig Dootson, property manager, 234 East 17th Street, #209, Costa Mesa, expressed concerns
about cleanliness and noted that Goodwill has acknowledged that dumping will occur. Hs observed
the rear of the center is gated at night from 9:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. and he feared people would dump
right outside the gate after those hours, which is adjacent to Archibald Avenue. He said this is a
shopping canter and should not be a drop-off center. He noted that Goodwill admitted this is not
really a good fit, but it is the only site they could find at this time. He felt that even if appropriate
conditions were applied, the donors would not know the restrictions. He said he has managed the
property for 20 years and he felt the other tenants are all opposed as are surrounding residents.
Frederick Chan, 9713 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he is the owner of Econo Drugs
in the shopping canter. He opposed the project and felt the store is incompatible with the center. He
said the operation is not the same as the rest of the center because it accepts donations and the
canter is not designed for that function because there is no direct access to the store from the back.
He stated the alley is not designed for customers to go there, as it is necessary to exit onto Archibald
to enter the back alley. He indicated his store is the closest to Archibald Avenue. He said people
have been dumping goods in the area. He noted that Albertson's trucks can arrive at any time and
he felt the alley is not place for pedestrians. He thought leaving goods by the back door would invite
scavengers and homeless people. He felt Goodwill should find another location that would be more
suited to its operation. He believed a small amount of donations may be easy to handle, but a 9,000
square foot store would attract large donations.
Carol Springstead, Penson Partners, 1840 Tradewinds Lane, Newport Beach, stated she is the
broker marketing the property and she has diligently tried to market the property for the past four
years. She said they finally secured Dollar Tree, a tenant that does well in affluent areas. She
observed that left almost 10,000 square feet to be leased and they located Goodwill, which she
believed would be a good tenant. She felt that when a store is vacant, there are typically dumping
problems. She said there are other centers in the area where Albertsons co-tenants with Goodwill
and there are no problems. She asserted that Goodwill works well with other major tenants.
Chairman Macias arrived.
Nicole Caruso, Slim and Tone, 9795 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, acknowledged that
Goodwill does good things. However, she did not think it would be good for this canter. She noted
that Goodwill has said there will be drop offs at night. She said she has worked at large grocary
stores that removed drop-off containers because of the trash. She felt it should not be put in this
canter because she feared it would hurt her business.
Bianca Corona, 7433 London Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated her home is located just behind
the back wall. She said that if a truck comes daily to pick up, it will not be able to load in 10 minutes
and she felt it would block the fire lane and that would be another noisy truck for them to deal with.
She also believed that trash would fall on the ground when the truck is being loaded and it will gush
onto their street when it rains, as does the trash from Albertsons' trucks. She felt it was a shame
they allowed Dollar Tree to occupy only a portion of the previously vacant space because the area
left looks like it is part of Dollar Tree. She also feared people will park immediately in front of the
store in the drive aisle to drop off goods rather than parking in the lot and carrying items across the
drive aisle to the store. She said she would no longer want to shop at Albertsons. She felt the
parking spacas are already over crowded. She said that around 9 p.m. a lot of teenagers gather in
the parking lot and she feared they would sort through any items left there.
Cathryn DeYoung, thanked the Commission for the time they have put into the matter. She noted
that three other tenants had submitted letters opposing Goodwill: Little Caesars, Nancy's Hallmark,
and the dentist. She said her primary concam is the drop off in the rear. She requested that the
denial be upheld.
Planning Commission Minutes -7- September 24; 2003
Mr. Powers stated that Goodwill appreciated the comments made. He noted the Fire Department
approved access at the rear of the building and the rear alley is locked off at night. He said there is a
truck well that will be used in common with Dollar Tree, so they would not be blocking the fire
access. He noted the property is parked to code and will be occupied by someone and therefore the
parking lot will have additional patrons and the rear alley would be used for truck deliveries of goods.
He felt they had shown that they would not negatively impact the neighborhood because they operate
enough locations without problems.
Vice Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing.
James Markman, City Attorney, stated the state of Califomia recently adopted legislation requiring a
minimum of three votes to pass a resolution. He noted that since Chairman Macias had not been
present during all testimony, he should abstain from voting at this time. He stated that if the
remaining three Commissioners could not agree, the matter should be continued to the next meeting
and the absent Commissioners could review the tape and then vote on the matter.
Vice Chairman McNiel stated he was on the Commission during the time that the residents took
AIbertsons to task for noise and debris because the alley is close to the residences. He felt the back
alley should not be used by Goodwill because of problems. He noted that the front of the building
does not have adjacent parking and he felt most people dropping off goods, will illegally park in the
drive aisle while dropping off. He did not believe Goodwill would have such a negative impact but he
agreed that drop offs could be a problem. He said there are a number of thrift store locations in the
City and articles are dropped off and are a nuisance until removed in the morning. He stated he sells
for a maintenance organization that handles Home Depot stores and many times those parking lots
are used as dump sites. He felt Goodwill was trying to shoehorn a good idea into a facility that is not
totally compatible as he did not believe the facility ~ends itself to the function of drop off.
Commissioner Fletcher appreciated the services of Goodwill and said he likewise utilizes the drop-off
facility at Arrow Highway and Haven Avenue. He stated he visited the Fontana store location as he
had never been in a Goodwill retail store. He also did not feel the location is appropriate for a thrift
store and said he would prefer to see the retail operation enhanced in that location in the future. He
said that when he drops off things, he typically has five to six bags at a time. He agreed that drop
offs in the alley would not be appropriate, and he felt having the collection in the front would lead to
people parking illegally while dropping off items. He also feared they would close the Arrow Avenue
and Haven Avenue collection facility, leading to more drop offs. He felt there would be better
locations in the City and noted there is an abundance of thrift stores in the area.
Commissioner McPhail felt that anything that provides an opportunity for assistance to
developmentally disabled should be made to fit into neighborhoods. She agreed it is not a good site,
but she felt a boarded up store is more of a blight and makes the center appear less vital. She felt
the Goodwill Store would help to bring in people. She agreed the collection is a problem. She was
not sure if it would be feasible to prohibit collection at the store and limiting it to the collection facility
on Arrow Highway. She did not think there would be a problem with dumping off in the back at night
because it is locked at night. She said people would then dump off in the front. She wanted to
encourage a Goodwill Store in Rancho Cucamonga and she hoped others would patronize it
because of what it stands for. She said she understood a conditional use permit could be reviewed
after a certain period of time if it causes problems She wanted to approve the use and see if
collection problems could be addressed, perhaps through keeping collection on Arrow Highway and
see if there would be ways to make it work.
Brad Buller, City Planner, acknowledged that the Mayor told him he had reviewed several existing
sites where Goodwill is a tenant within a shopping center. He said the Mayor indicated that Goodwill
appeared to be good tenants in those locations. Mr. Bullet a~so noted that any conditional use permit
can be brought back before the Commission at any time and could be brought back because of a set
review time or because of complaints from others. He said it could then come back before the
Planning Commission Minutes -8- September 24, 2003
Commission for possible modification or revocation. He noted that public issues with this canter
have been with the City for some time with the previous Commission dealing with noise in the back
alley and other issues around the center in general because it is an older center and is adjacent to
residences.
Vice Chairman McNiel stated that if the use is approved and they go into the center, they may well
have to revisit the process and undoing the process is messier than not allowing the use in the first
place. He felt nobody was denying the good acts of Goodwill and they would stop seeking an
appropriate location if they were permitted to move there. He indicated he voted in favor of the
Mennonite Thrift store closer to his home because it is in the dght location and has appropriate
access. He felt that doing the right thing may well be denying the approval.
Commissioner Fletcher noted the Assistance League of Upland has a facility on An'ow Route and the
felt that is a good location and there are no objections there. He believed there would be better
locations for Goodwill than in this center. He did not feel that store would be an enhancement for
that center.
Mr. Markman stated the public hearing would not need to be reopened in order for the Commission
to continue the discussion only so that the absent Commissioners could listen to a tape of the
testimony and participate in deliberations at the next meeting.
Motion: Moved by McPhail, seconded by Fletcher, to continue the discussion only for Appeal of
Denial of Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00468 to October 8, 2003. Motion carried by the
following vote:
AYES: FLETCHER, McNIEL, McPHAIL
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: STEWART
ABSTAIN: MACIAS - carried
The Planning Commission recessed from 8:50 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Fletcher, approved 3-0-1-1 (Stewart absent, McPhail
abstain), to approve the minutes of August 27, 2003.
Motion: Moved by McPhail, seconded by McNiel, carried 4-0-1 (Stewart absent), to approve the
minutes of August 27, 2003, Adjourned Meeting.
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by McPhail, approved 2-0-1-2 (Stewart absent; Fletcher,
Macias abstain), to approve the minutes of September 10, 2003.
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. VACATION OF A 10-FOOT WIDE EASEMENT FOR STREET TREE MAINTENANCE
PURPOSES (V-194) - KB HOME -A request to vacate a 10-foot wide easement for street tree
maintenance purposes, located on the south side of Terra Vista Parkway, east of Coyote
Canyon Park-APN: 1077-831-32. Related file: Tract Map SUB'I-1'15724.
Planning Commission Minutes -9- September 24, 2003
located northwest of Victoria Park Lane and Church Street-APN: 1089-171-32. This action is
within the scope of the project reviewed in the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State
Clearinghouse No. 98041137) that was certified by the City Council on July 7, 1999, and no
additional environmental review for the discretionary actions mentioned in this notice is required
pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW - DRC2003-00319 - EHR
22, LLC - A design review of detailed site plan and building elevations for nine single-family
homes on 11.83 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (.1 to 2 dwelling units per
acre), located on Sirdsong Place, south of Hidden Farm Road - APN: 1074-071-23 thru 31.
Related Files: Tentative Tract Map SUBTT15914 and Tree Removal Permit DRC2003-00501.
Staff has prepared a Negative Declaration of environmental impacts for consideration.
Motion: Moved by Fletcher, seconded by McNiel, to adopt the Consent Calendar. Motion carded by
the following vote:
AYES: FLETCHER, MACIAS, McNIEL, McPHAIL, STEWART
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE - carried
PUBLIC HEARINGS
D. APPEAL OF DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL
INDUSTRIES - A request to operate a non-profit second-hand store of 9,500 square feet within
an existing shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial District, located at 9749 Base Line
Road - APN: 1077-011-50. (Continued from September 24, 2003)
Chairman Macias and Commissioner Stewart asked that the record show they listened to a tape of
the September 24, 2003, meeting.
Brad Buller, City Planner, explained that two Commissioners had not been present for all or part of
the testimony on this item at the September 24, 2003, meeting. He indicated the commission closed
the public hearing but continued the deliberations and action to this meeting. He reported that the
applicant presented several items of correspondence after the public hearing was closed. He
explained that if the applicant wished to have the Commission consider the new con'espondenca in
its decision, the matter would have to be continued to November 12 in order to re-advertise the
public hearing because the public had not had a chance to review the newly submitted evidence.
Kevin Ennis, Assistant City Attomey, confirmed the public; hearing was closed at the last meeting and
the Commission could not consider any new information without reopening the public hearing. He
said that because the hearing was closed, it would be necessary to re-advertise the item.
Mr. Buller asked that the applicant be permitted to advise whether they wished the new information
to be considered as evidence and if so, would they confirm that they would consent to a continuance.
Tracy Powers, Vice President of Retail Operations, Goodwill Industries Southern California, 342 San
Femando Road, Los Angeles, indicated they would like to hear what the Commission had to say
without reopening the public hearing.
Chairman Macias indicated the Commission would proceed with deliberations and take a vote.
Mr. Powers indicated that was acceptable.
Planning Commission Minutes -2- October 8, 2003
EXHIBIT 'E'
Mr. Buller noted the Commission had two resolutions: one for approval and the other upholding the
City Planner's denial. He explained that the City Planner denied the application but additional
favorable information was presented following the City Planner hearing and that new information was
included in the September 24, 2003, staff report.
Commissioner Stewart asked if she would be allowed to ask some questions of the applicant.
Mr. Ennis confirmed that she could ask questions to clarify existing testimony.
Commissioner Stewart noted that in the testimony, Mr. Powers had admitted that this storefront is
not their ideal size as they would prefer 100 feet of storefront and this is only 60 feet wide. She
noted there was a commentary that there were no other suitable locations in the City.
Mr. Powers responded that the size is 9,500 square feet and their stores typically are between 9,000
to 13,000 square feet, so it is the right size. He indicated they operate a number of stores that are
only 60 feet wide, even though they prefer a wider store frontage so' that they can establish a
donation center door in the front of the store. He said in this case, they would not be able to put in
another door.
Commissioner Stewart asked if they had looked at other sites in the City.
Mr. Powers indicated they looked at every other site that is zoned properly for their use and there is
nothing available that is the appropriate size and configureble for their use.
Commissioner Stewart noted there had been a lot of testimony from the public and comments from
the commission with respect to drop Offs. She asked if they have stores where drop offs are only
during business hours and are brought directly into the store.
Mr. Powers responded they discourage having people donate or drop off items when they are not
open. He said that is why they are open seven days a week and long hours. He acknowledged that
some people do drop off at night and there are no sites that do not occasionally have items dropped
off at night.
Commissioner Stewart asked if the fronts of stores are posted to discourage drop offs.
Mr. Powers responded that typically there are not problems with drop offs in front of the store; it is
usually in the rear area. He felt it would not be a problem in this location because the back alley is
gated and locked at night. He said they typically post "No Dumping" signs and quote the City
regulations so people know it is inappropriate. He reported they videotape the back of one of their
stores in order to record automobile licenses.
Commissioner McPhail stated the issues that seem to be pertinent are that the back area could be
congested with drop offs; however, she thought that would not be an issue because it is locked at
9:00 p.m. at night. She felt the main issue is that the circulation in the parking lot is not ideal. She
noted Goodwill has a distribution drop-off canter at Arrow Highway and Haven Avenue and she felt
puffing a sign on the storefrent indicating drop offs are appropriate at the other location could
discourage any cumbersome drop offs at this location. She acknowledged the actual impact is
unknown until it is tried. She felt this use should be encouraged in the community as it is a service
organization and provides shopping opportunities that people enjoy. She felt their stores seem to be
clean. She believed the center is currently blighted because the store has been closed forso long
and that blight is worse than putting in a store that may have circulation issues. She supported
approving the use because it could be brought back to the Commission for discussion if problems
arise.
Planning Commission Minutes -3- October 8, 2003
Commissioner McNiel agreed that Goodwill Industries do great work. He felt that the location is not
favorable to what they do because of circulation problems with no parking in front of the store. He
believed that people dropping off goods would park in the drive aisle. He supported Goodwill's
presence in the community and noted that he supported the thrift store at the Sunrise Center
because the location does not have the same constraints. He felt that Goodwill would find another
location in the community that is more appropriate even if it may take a month or two. He noted that
Mr. Powers said there is one store with video cameras on the back to record automobile license
numbers and he felt cameras would not be used unless there are problems.
Commissioner Fletcher agreed with Commissioner McNiel. He said he indicated at the last meeting
that this is not an appropriate location even though he supports the efforts of Goodwill. He felt the
division by the prior tenant, leaving a small storefront, caused the problem with the property. He
believed the Commission's job is to enhance the development and businesses that go into a center
and he did not feel the addition of a thrift store would be an enhancement to the center. He
observed the Commission heard opposition testimony from numerous other business owners in the
center and the property owner also spoke in opposition. He thought he should also listen to their
concams as they were in the center first. He noted there is already a Dollar Tree in the center, a 9o~
Store across the street, and a Base Une Bargain Store up the street. He commented there are
already problems with 99¢ shopping carts along the street.
Commissioner Stewart acknowledged the matter is tough. She said she listened to the tape and
read through the staff report to prepare herself, and also visited the site. She said she heard two
primary issues in the tape from citizens and business people; i.e., the potential for drop offs and a
potential fire hazard. She noted the Fire Department has indicated there would not be problems with
utilizing the rear of the store for drop offs. She believed the Commission should make a judgment as
to whether the use will be injurious to the property or the businesses. She did not feel the use would
be injurious. She was concerned about the ability to drop off in the area. She noted one resident
indicated high school students frequent the center and it was felt that they would pilfer through
anything left outside. She was not opposed to the store being located in the center. She said she
was familiar with the Fontana store because she works in Fontana and has not seen any instance of
drop off or other problems in that parking lot, either in the front or rear. She believed the stores are
well maintained and are frequented by college students. She suggested that if the application were
approved, that conditions should be added to require posting of signs prohibiting drop offs or refer
people to the Arrow Highway and Haven Avenue center and she encouraged the use of cameras in
the rear of the store. She thought the cameras should monitor the gate area. Commissioner
Stewart said she would only favor the project if additional conditions were added.
Chairman Macias agreed the application is one of the tougher issues the Commission has had to
deal with recently. He believed there was a consensus of the Commission that the issue was not
regarding the integrity of Goodwill industries. He said the issues were land use, impacts on
businesses, and compatibility. He stated that upon what he heard of the public testimony, it was
clear that regardless of the merits of the project it is not deemed welcome by the residents and the
business community. He said he was initially impressed with the project but after he went to look at
three Goodwill stores, one in Fontana and two in Los Angeles, he did not have a good feeling for the
fit of the project into this center. He supported denial of the project.
Motion: Moved by McNiel, seconded by Fletcher, to adopt the resolution upholding the City
Planner's denial of Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00468. Motion carried by the following vote:
AYES: FLETCHER, MAClAS, McNIEL
NOES: McPHAIL, STEWART
ABSENT: NONE - carried
Planning Commission Minutes -4- October 8, 2003
RESOLUTION NO. 03-15
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY PLANNER OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468, A REQUEST TO OPERATE A
NON-PROFIT SECOND-HAND STORE OF 9,500 SQUARE FEET,
WITHIN AN EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 9749
BASE LINE ROAD -APN: 1077-011-50.
A. Recitals.
1. Goodwill Industries filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit
DRC2003-00468, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as 'the application.'
2. On the July 8, and continued to July 29, 2003, the City Planner of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing
on that date.
3. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Planner of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. The City Planner 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 the City Planner during the above-
referenced public hearing on July 8, and July 29, 2003, including written and oral staff reports,
together with public testimony, the City Planner hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to property zoned Neighborhood Commercial, located at
the southeast comer of Base Line Road and Archibald Avenue, with a street frontage of about 615
feet along Base Line Road and 570 feet along Archibald Avenue. The site is presently improved
with a commemial shopping center of about 8.6 acres, and is comprised of five buildings with a
combined area of 101,000 square feet, and approximately 500 parking spaces on-site. Using a
parking calculation of 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area, the required amount of parking
for the entire site is 455 spaces. There are four tenants (Albertsons, Harv's Cleaners, Slim and
Tone, and Maul Donuts) that are open for business before 9:00 a.m.; and
b. The loading zone at rear of the shopping center is behind gates that are kept
locked during non-business hours; and
c. The properties to the north and west are zoned Neighborhood Commemial and are
improved with commercial centers. A property also to the west is zoned Office Park and is the site
of the Rancho Cucamonga Library. The properties to the south and east are zoned Low Residential
and are improved with single-family residences; and
CITY PLANNER RESOLUTION NO.03-15
DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
July 29, 2003
Page 2
d. The applicant contemplates the establishment of a Goodwill second-hand retail
store within an existing tenant space of 9,500 square feet, located at 9749 Base Line Road between
Albertsons supermarket and the Dollar Tree discount store. The store will sell "second-hand,"
donated clothing and household goods, excluding large appliances. Sales and storage will occur
entirely within the building; however, a donation drop-off area is proposed at the rear of the store.
The drop-off area will be manned by employees for collection and processing the donations as they
arrive during business hours. No outdoor storage containers are proposed. Donation discards,
dumped items, salvage and trash are picked up daily by truck at approximately 6:30 a.m. The
operating hours will be Monday through Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. and Sundays from
10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., with a staff of up to 15 persons. Such use is permitted with a Conditional
Use Permit within the Neighborhood Commercial zone pursuant to the authority of Title 17,
Development Code, Section 17.04.030 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code; and
e. Letters of opposition were submitted to the City Planner for consideration from the
following businesses within the existing shopping center: Albertsons, Econo Drugs, Trinidad C.
Calma, DMD, Splash Pools and Spas, Nancy's Hallmark Shop, and Little Ceasar's; and
f. Two existing tenants within the shopping center gave testimony in opposition to the
proposed use during the July 29, 2003 public hearing. In addition, the shopping center's owner
testified against the proposed use; and
g. No letters of support for the use were received, nor any testimony, other than the
from the applicant, was pre~ented in favor of the use during the public hearings; and
h. The application as proposed would not be compatible with surrounding businesses
for the reasons as follows:
i) The Title 17, Development Code, Section 17.10.020 of the Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code states that the Neighborhood Commercial zone "is intended to provide
areas for immediate day-to-day convenience shopping and services for residents of the immediate
neighborhood. Site development regulations and performance standards are intended to make such
uses compatible to and harmonious with the character of surrounding residential or less intense land
use area.' Further, Section 17.04.030 establishes that the Conditional Use Permit process is
intended for selected uses in each zone to address "their unique site development requirements and
operating characteristics, which require special consideration in order to operate in a manner
compatible with surrounding uses." Numerous tenants within this shopping center site believe that
the operation of the proposed use, particularly the donation drop-off, is not compatible with their
business operation for the reasons indicated in subparagraphs ii) and iii) below.
ii) The site plan submitted in conjunction with the application, proposes a '10-
minute loading zone" for donation drop-off area at the rear of the store during their normal business
hours. The drop-off area is within an area of the shopping center that is behind a Iockable gate to
prohibit public access after hours. The applicant submitted a July 7, 2003 letter stating that "we
recognize that the subject space does not offer the opportunity for the ideal Goodwill store and
donation center layout," particularly, the lack of a 'donation center' at the front of the store. Further,
Tracy Powers, Vice President of Retail Operations for Goodwill Industries testified at the July 8,
2003 public hearing that he recognizes the validity of staff's recommendation to only take donations
through the front entrance of the building. Further, Mr. Powers testified that at their existing 36 store
and donation centers within his region, that there are always a few 'midnight' donors. He testified
CITY PLANNER RESOLUTION NO.03-15
DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
July 29, 2003
Page 3
that some sites are more problematic than others but in any case the pementage is small, perhaps 1
per day, per location. The fact that the applicant does not accept donations of large appliances
could result in such items being discarded after business hours within the "1 O-minute loading zone"
or in other areas of the shopping center. Further, the inaccessibility of the "1 O-minute loading zone'
after the gates are locked could result in such items being discarded elsewhere within the center.
The lack of ability for customers to donate items after hours at the front of the store, is exacerbated
by the inaccessibility of the rear drop-off area, and could result in items being dropped on the
common sidewalk at the front of the store resulting, in unsightly conditions and obstruction of
sidewalk for other businesses, and their customers, which opens before the Goodwill store.
iii) One of the goals of the General Plan is to protect the public health and safety.
The discarding of donated items after hours could be a potential nuisance by attracting people to
rummage through the items. Further, items discarded outside the designated drop-off area could
obstruct the adjoining fire lane that is already of a substandard 12-foot width (26 feet is Fire District
standard for fire lanes).
3. Based upon the substantial evidence p~esented to the City Planner dudng the above-
referenced public hearing, and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2
above, the City Planner hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. The proposed use is not in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the
Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and
b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, will be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity; and
c. The application, which contemplates operation of the proposed use, does not
comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code.
4. The City Planner hereby finds and determines that the project identified in this Resolution
is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as
amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15301 of the State
CEQA Guidelines.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1,2, 3, and 4 above,
the City Planner hereby denies the application.
6. The Secretary shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 29TH DAY OF JULY 2003.
BY:
CITY PLANNER RESOLUTION NO.03-15
DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
July 29, 2003
Page 4
I, Lois J. Schrader, Secretary to the Planning Division for the City of'Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted bythe
City Planner of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the City Planner held on the
29th day of July 2003.
RESOLUTION NO. 03-144
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL OF THE
CITY PLANNER'S DENIAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
DRC2003-00468, A REQUEST TO OPERATE A NON-PROFIT SECOND-
HAND STORE OF 9,500 SQUARE FEET, WITHIN AN EXISTING SHOPPING
CENTER IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, LOCATED
AT 9749 BASE LINE ROAD- APN: 1077-011-50.
A. Recitals.
1. Goodwill Industries filed an application for the issuance of Conditional Use Permit
DRC2003-00468, as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the
subject Conditional Use Permit request is referred to as "the application."
2. On July 8, and continued to July 29, 2003, the City Planner of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing
on that date.
3. At the July 29, 2003 public heating, the City Planner denied the applicant's request to
establish a Goodwill retail store.
4. On the 8th day of August 2003, the applicant filed an appeal of the City Planner's decision
in a timely manner.
5. On the 24th day of September 2003, 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. The Commission commenced deliberations on the application at the September 24
meeting and continued those deliberations to October 8, 2003.
6. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved by th~ Planning Commission
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. The Planning 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 the Planning Commission dudng the
above-referenced public headng on September 24, 2003, including written and oral staff reports,
together with public testimony, the Planning Commission hereby specifically finds as follows:
a. The application applies to property zoned Neighborhood Commercial, located at the
southeast comer of Base Line Road and Archibald Avenue, with a street frontage of about 615 feet
along Base Line Road and 570 feet along Archibald Avenue. The site is presently improved with a
commercial shopping center of about 8.6 acres, and is comprised of five buildings with a combined
area of 101,000 square feet, and approximately 500 parking spaces on-site. Using a parking
calculation of 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area, the required amount of parking for the
entire site is 455 spaces. There are four tenants (Albertsons, Harv's Cleaners, Slim and Tone, and
Maui Donuts) that are open for business before 9:00 a.m.; and
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 03-144
DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
October 8, 2003
Page 2
b. The loading zone at rear of the shopping center is behind gates that are kept locked
dudng non-business hours; and
c. The properties to the north and west are zoned Neighborhood Commercial and are
improved with commercial centers. A property also to the west is zoned Office Park and is the site of
the Rancho Cucamonga Libra~j. The properties to the south and east are zoned Low Residential
and are improved with single-family residences; and
d. The applicant contemplates the establishment of a Goodwill second-hand retail
store within an existing tenant space of 9,500 square feet, located at 9749 Base Line Road between
Albertsons supermarket and the Dollar Tree discount store. The store would sell "second-hand,"
donated clothing and household goods, excluding large appliances. Sales and storage would occur
entirely within the building; however, a donation drop-off area is proposed at the rear of the store.
The drop-off area would be manned by employees for collection and processing the donations as
they arrive during business hours. No outdoor storage containers ara proposed. Donation discards,
dumped items, salvage and trash would be picked up daily by truck at approximately 6:30 a.m. The
operating hours would be Monday through Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. and Sundays from
10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., with a staff of up to 15 persons. Such use is permitted with a Conditional
Use Permit within the Neighborhood Commercial zone pursuant to the authority of Title 17, '
Development Code, Section 17.04.030 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code; and
e. Letters of opposition were submitted to the City for consideration from the following
businesses within the existing shopping center:. Econo Drugs; Trinidad C. Calma, DMD; Splash
Pools and Spas; Nancy's Hallmark Shop; and Little Caesars; and
f. Two existing tenants within the shopping center gave testimony in opposition to the
proposed use during the July 29, 2003, City Planner public hearing. In addition, the shopping
center's owner testified against the proposed use; and
h. The application as proposed would not be compatible with surrounding businesses
for the reasons as follows:
i) The Title 17, Development Code, Section 17.10.020 of the Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code states that the Neighborhood Commercial zone "is intended to provide
areas for immediate day-to-day convenience shopping and services for residents of the immediate
neighborhood. Site development regulations and performance standards are intended to make such
uses compatible to and harmonious with the character of surrounding residential or less intense land
use area." Further, Section 17.04.030 establishes that the Conditional Use Permit process is
intended for selected uses in each zone to address "their unique site development requirements and
operating characteristics, which require special consideration in order to operate in a manner
compatible with surrounding uses." Numerous tenants within this shopping center site believe that
the operation of the proposed use, particularly the donation drop-off, is not compatible with their
business operation for the reasons indicated in subparagraphs ii) and iii) below.
ii) The site plan submitted in conjunction with the application, proposes a "10-
minute loading zone" for donation drop-off area at the rear of the store during their normal business
hours. The drop-off area is within an area of the shopping center that is behind a Iockable gate to
prohibit public access after hours. The applicant submitted a July 7, 2003, letter stating that "we
recognize that the subject space does not offer the opportunity for the ideal Goodwill store and
donation center layout," particularly, the lack of a 'donation center' at the front of the store. Further,
Tracy Powers, Vice President of Retail Operations for Goodwill Industries testified at the July 8,
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 03-144
DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
October 8, 2003
Page 3
2003, public hearing that he recognizes the validity of staff's recommendation to only tal~e donations
through the front entrance of the building. Further, Mr. Powers testified that at their existing 36 store
and donation centers within his region, that there are always a few 'midnight' donors. He testified
that some sites are more problematic than others but in any case the percentage is small, perhaps 1
per day, per location. The fact that the applicant does not accept donations of large appliances
could result in such items being discarded after business hours within the "10-minute loading zone"
or in other areas of the shopping center. Further, the inaccessibility of the "1 O-minute loading zone"
after the gates are locked could result in such items being discarded elsewhere within the center.
The lack of ability for customers to donate items after hours at the front of the store, is exacerbated
by the inaccessibility of the rear drop-off area, and could result in items being dropped on the
common sidewalk at the front of the store resulting in unsightly conditions and obstruction of the
sidewalk for other businesses, and their customers, which open before the Goodwill store.
iii) One of the goals of the General Plan is to protect the public health and safety.
The discarding of donated items after hours could be a potential nuisance by attracting people to
rummage through the items. Further, items discarded outside the designated drop-off area could
obstruct the adjoining fire lane that is already of a substandard 12-foot width (26 feet is the Fire
Distdct standard for fire lanes).
3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to the Planning Commission during the
above-referenced public hearing, and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and
2 above, the Planning Commission hereby finds and concludes as follows:
a. The proposed use is not in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the
Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and
b. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, would be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity; and
c. The application, which contemplates operation of the proposed use, does not
comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code.
4. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that the project identified in this
Resolution is categorically exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental QualityAct
of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines promulgated thereunder, pursuant to Section 15301 of the
State CEQA Guidelines.
5. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, the
Planning Commission hereby denies the application.
6. The Secreta~j shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2003.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Rich Maclas, Chairman
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 03-144
DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
October 8, 2003
Page 4
I, Brad Buller, 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 8th day of October 2003, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: FLETCHER, MAClAS, McNIEL
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: McPHAIL, STEWART
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
RESOLUTION NO. ~)3' J~
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL OF, AND
UPHOLDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION, TO DENY
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT DRC2003-00468 REQUESTING TO
OPERATE A NON-PROFIT SECOND HAND STORE OF 9,500
SQUARE FEET WITHIN AN EXISTING SHOPPING CENTER IN THE
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT LOCATED AT 9749
BASE LINE ROAD AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF,
APN: 1077-011-50.
A. Recitals.
1. Goodwill Industries filed an application for Conditional Use Permit DRC2003-00468, as
described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Conditional Use
Permit request is referred to as the "application."
2. On July 8, 2003, and continued to July 29, 2003, the City Planner of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga conducted duly noticed public hearings on the application and, following the conclusion
of said public hearing, adopted his Resolution No. 03-15, thereby denying said application.
3. The decision represented by said City Planner Resolution No. 03-15 was timely
appealed to the Planning Commission.
4. On September 24, 2003, and continued to October 8, 2003, the Planning Commission
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted duly noticed public hearings on the application and,
following the conclusion of said public hearing, adopted their Resolution No. 03-144, thereby
denying said application.
5. The decision represented by said Planning Commission Resolution No. 03-144 was
timely appealed to this Council.
6. On November 19, 2003, 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.
7. 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 Resolution are true and correct.
2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-
referenced November 19, 2003 hearing, including written staff reports, the minutes of the above-
referenced City Planner and Planning Commission meetings, and the contents of City Planner
Resolution No. 03-15 and Planning Commission Resolution No. 03-144, this Council hereby
specifically finds as follows:
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO.
DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
November 19, 2003
Page 2
a. The application applies to property zoned Neighborhood Commemial, located at
the southeast corner of Base Line Road and Amhibald Avenue, with a street frontage of about 615
feet along Base Line Road and 570 feet along Amhibald Avenue. The site is presently improved
with a commercial shopping center of about 8.6 acres, and is comprised of five buildings with a
combined area of 101,000 square feet, and approximately 500 parking spaces on-site. Using a
parking calculation of 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area, the required amount of parking
for the entire site is 455 spaces. There are four tenants (Albertsons, Harv's Cleaners, Slim and
Tone, and Maul Donuts) that are open for business before 9:00 a.m.; and
b. The loading zone at the rear of the shopping center is in a gated area that is kept
locked during non-business hours; and
c. The properties to the north and west are zoned Neighborhood Commercial and
are improved with commemial centers. A property also to the west is zoned Office Park and is the
site of the Rancho Cucamonga Library. The properties to the south and east are zoned Low
Residential. There are single-family residences currently under construction on the properties
located to the south; and
d. The applicant contemplates the establishment of a Goodwill second-hand retail
store within an existing tenant space of 9,500 square feet, located at 9749 Base Line Road between
Albertsons supermarket and the Dollar Tree discount store. The store would sell "second-hand,"
donated clothing and household goods, excluding large appliances. Sales and storage would occur
entirely within the building; however, a donation drop-off area is proposed at the roar of the store.
The drop-off area would be manned by employees for collection and processing the donations as
they arrive during business hours. No outdoor storage containers are proposed. Donation discards,
dumped items, salvage and trash would be picked up daily by truck at approximately 6:30 a.m. The
operating hours would be Monday through Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. and Sundays from
10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., with a staff of up to 15 persons. Such use is permitted with a Conditional
Use Permit within the Neighborhood Commercial zone pursuant to the authority of Title 17,
Development Code, Section 17.04.030 of the Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code; and
e. Letters of opposition were submitted to the City for consideration from the
following businesses within the existing shopping center: Econo Drugs; Trinidad C. Calma, DMD;
Splash Pools and Spas; Nancy's Hallmark Shop; The Cucamonga Hair Company, Star Nail II,
Harv's Cleaners, Taco Factory, and Little Caesars; and
f. Two existing tenants within the shopping center and one neighboring homeowner
gave testimony in opposition to the proposed use during the October 8, 2003, Planning Commission
public hearing. In addition, the shopping center's owner testified against the proposed use; and
g. The application as proposed would not be compatible with surrounding
businesses for the reasons as follows:
i) The Title 17, Development Code, Section 17.10.020 of the Rancho
Cucamonga Municipal Code states that the Neighborhood Commercial zone "is intended to provide
areas for immediate day-to-day convenience shopping and services for residents of the immediate
neighborhood. Site development regulations and performance standards aro intended to make such
uses compatible to and harmonious with the character of surrounding rosidential or less intense land
use area." Further, Section 17.04.030 establishes that the Conditional Use Permit process is
intended for selected uses in each zone to address "their unique site development requirements and
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO.
DRC2003-00468 - GOODWILL INDUSTRIES
November 19, 2003
Page 3
operating characteristics, which require special consideration in order to operate in a manner
compatible with surrounding uses." Numerous tenants within this shopping center site believe that
the operation of the proposed use, particularly the donation drop-off, is not compatible with their
business operation for the reasons indicated in subparagraphs ii) and iii) below.
ii) The site plan submitted in conjunction with the application, proposes a "10-
minute loading zone" for donation drop-off area at the rear of the store during their normal business
hours. The drop-off area is within an area of the shopping center that is behind a Iockable gate to
prohibit public access after hours. The applicant submitted a July 7, 2003, letter stating that "we
recognize that the subject space does not offer the opportunity for the ideal Goodwill store and
donation center layout," particularly, the lack of a 'donation center' at the front of the store. Further,
Tracy Powers, Vice President of Retail Operations for Goodwill Industries testified at the July 8,
2003, public hearing that he recognizes the validity of staff's recommendation to only take donations
through the front entrance of the building. Further, Mr. Powers testified that at their existing 36 store
and donation centers within his region, that there are always a few 'midnight' donors. He testified
that some sites are more problematic than others but in any case the percentage is small, perhaps 1
per day, per location. The fact that the applicant does not accept donations of large appliances
could result in such items being discarded after business hours within the "1 O-minute loading zone"
or in other areas of the shopping center. Further, the inaccessibility of the "1 O-minute loading zone"
after the gates are locked could result in such items being discarded elsewhere within the center.
The lack of ability for customers to donate items after hours at the front of the store, is exacerbated
by the inaccessibility of the rear drop-off area, and could result in items being dropped on the
common sidewalk at the front of the store resulting in unsightly conditions and obstruction of the
sidewalk for other businesses, and their customers, which open before the Goodwill store.
iii) One of the goals of the General Plan is to protect the public health and safety.
The discarding of donated items after hours could be a potential nuisance by attracting people to
rummage through the items. Further, items discarded outside the designated drop-off area could
obstruct the adjoining fire lane that is already of a substandard 12-foot width (26 feet is the Fire
District standard for fire lanes).
h. The proposed use is not in accord with the General Plan, the objectives of the
Development Code, and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; and
i. The proposed use, together with the conditions applicable thereto, would be
detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare or materially injurious to properties or
improvements in the vicinity; and
j. The application, which contemplates operation of the preposed use, does not
comply with each of the applicable provisions of the Development Code.
3. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby denies the subject appeal
thereby upholding the Planning Commission decision of October 8, 2003, to deny the Conditional
Use Permit DRC2003-00468.
4. The Secretary to this Council shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
Z_/l
T H E C I T Y 0 F
II
]~ANC[IO CUCAMO NGA
Memorandum
DATE: November 18, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager g~...,/)'L~
FROM: Duane A. Baker, Assistant to the City Maria
SUBJECT: CONTINUATION OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A TAXICAB
SERVICE PERMIT FOR AAA INLAND EMPIRE CAB
Advertised for tonight's City Council meeting was a public hearing to consider an
application from AAA Inland Empire Cab for a taxicab service permit. This matter
was originally scheduled for the August 6, 2003 City Council meeting. AAA Inland
Empire Cab asked for a continuance of this matter until November 19, 2003. The
applicant is again requesting a continuance until December 17, 2003. The reason
for the continuance is to prepare more information in support of their application.
This hearing will be rescheduled at the applicant's request. If you have any
questions, please let me know.
T H E C I 'f Y 0 F
RANCHO CUCAMONGA
Staff Report
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: Duane A. Baker, Assistant to the City Manager
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF PUBLIC INTEREST, CONVENIENCE AND
NECESSITY IN GRANTING A TAXICAB SERVICE PERMIT TO AAA
INLAND EMPIRE CAB (J.K.S.O., INC.)
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council deny the application from AAA Inland
Empire Cab for a taxicab service permit. Staff feels that, without compelling
evidence to the contrary, there is already adequate taxicab service to the community
and that the addition of another taxicab company would create financial difficulties
for all providers and would thereby depreciate the level of service provided in
Rancho Cucamonga.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS
The City has an ordinance that requires all companies that wish to provide taxicab
service to receive a permit. As part of that permit process, the applicant must submit
a completed application form. The applicant must also appear before the City
Council for a public hearing to determine if the public interest, convenience and
necessity justify the issuance of a permit.
Staff has reviewed the application submitted by AAA Inland Empire Cab (attached)
and finds it to be complete. The necessary information regarding the owners of the
company, the automobiles to be used and the company's insurance meets the
requirements of the City's ordinance.
The City Council must consider whether the public interest, convenience and
necessity justify the issuance of a permit. The burden is on the applicant to show
Page 2
November '19, 2003
CONSIDERATION OF GRANTING A TAXICAB SERVICE PERMIT
TO AAA INLAND EMPIRE CAB
how they meet the public interest, convenience and necessity. As the City Council
receives testimony, some of the factors to be considered are:
1. The inadequacy of existing taxi services.
2. The population density and socio-economic characteristics in the proposed area
of operation.
3. Type and frequency of transportation service needed in the proposed area of
operation.
4. Existing public transportation patterns, schedules and service levels and the
impact of the application upon such service.
5. Traffic and parking conditions.
6. The probable permanence and quality of the services offered by the applicant.
7. The character of taxi service proposed by the applicant as demonstrated by: the
proposed use, if any, of a radio communications system, the proposed use of
terminals and private and public taxi stands, the time of day and night when
service is to be offered, and the proposed number and character of vehicles.
8. The financial status, character and responsibility of the applicant as
demonstrated by: the applicant's ability to provide, maintain and operate the
number of vehicles proposed to be operated in accordance with the character of
service proposed in the application, the applicant's criminal and driving record, if
any, as well as credit record and evidence of liability and worker's compensation
insurance.
9. The experience of the applicant in taxicab service operations as an owner,
manager, or taxi driver.
Unlike most other businesses in our free enterprise system, the taxicab business is
slightly different. Studies of the taxicab industry have shown that competition does
not necessarily equate to better customer service or lower prices. The demand for
taxicab services is relatively stable and as the number of taxicabs on the street
increase, the number of daily trips per cab decline and so do the cab operator's
revenues. In response to this pressure, cab operators cut costs and cab drivers
begin to target longer, higher fare trips at the expense of shorter trip fares. The
potential for decreased service and longer waits for residential customers increases.
The difficult task is determining at what level does competition create negative
effects. Our ordinance is written to put the burden on the applicant to show that his
entry into our market will not hurt consumers.
Page 3
November 19, 2003
CONSIDERATION OF GRANTING A TAXICAB SERVICE PERMIT
TO AAA INLAND EMPIRE CAB
The issue of taxicab service in Rancho Cucamonga was reviewed by the City
Council in September 1998. At that time the City Council approved a second taxicab
provider for the City. Since granting the second permit, response and waiting times
of our residents have been consistent with a majority of calls being picked-up in less
than 25 minutes. There have been no complaints about taxicab service received in
the last two years and nor requests for additional service. The existing two cab
companies have over 100 cabs serving our region. That number of cabs seems to
be sufficient to provide service to our community. While the City has grown 20% in
the past five years, calls for taxicab service has only increased slightly. This trend
may change as new hotels are developed in the coming years and as the mall and
its entertainment uses are developed.
Unless AAA Inland Empire Cab can show compelling evidence that they would
enhance service or at least not degrade existing service, staff recommends that their
application be denied at this time. Staff feels that the two current taxicab companies
provide an adequate level of service without adding a third company. Also, there is
the possibility that the addition of a third company could hurt existing service levels
by creating financial difficulties for all taxicab companies.
The City Council should consider the evidence presented as well as staff's
recommendation. Based on the City Council's direction, staff and the City Attorney
will prepare the appropriate resolution for adoption.
Res ectfully submitted,
Duane A. Baker
Assistant to the City Manager
Attachment: AAA Inland Empire Cab Taxicab Service Permit Application and
Support Materials
City of Rancho Cucamonga ,
Application for Taxicab Service Permit
Supporting Statement
Many say the Inlanc~ Empire's demographics will continue to make it the hot ticket
Los Angeles Times May 1, 2003
We're as bullish on this area this area as we can be
Hr. Jim Previti, Chairman, Empire Companies (housing developer)
Riverside and San Bernardino counties are projected to create 27,600 jobs in 2003
$ohn Husing, Economist
There is little doubt that the key to our region's continued economic growth is transportation
Congressman Joe Baca, 43r~ District
1..1.K.S.O., Inc. Services
.1.K.S.O., Inc. was formed in 3une 2001, as a ground transportation company focused
exclusively on the Inland Empire and the significant growth opportunities emerging in the
region..I.K.S.O., inc. is a diversified, service-oriented transportation company with the
company operations including 'taxicabs, sedans, wheelchair-accessible vehicles, non-
emergency medical transportation and airport transportation.
It services a wide range of corporate accounts including Inland Empire-based'corporations,
hotels, entertainment complexes, medical clinics and other clients. A particular focus is on
meeting the transportation needs of seniors and the disabled.
The business model is built on the concept of being a competitive service-oriented,
community-based transport company rather than the conventional taxicab model of
revenue derived primarily from vehicle-leasing. This approach, supported by professional
marketing staff plus the extensive taxicab service experience of the owners and
management staff, has been extremely successful with .1.K.S.O., Inc. experiencing rapid
growth and market penetration across the inland Empire.
In this context ~I.K.S.O., Inc, has placed a particular focus on building close working
relationships with community groups and non-profits, notably those involved in providing
services for seniors and the disabled. For example, in Riverside and San Bernardino
counties it operates in close liaison with the Association for Retarded Citizens, Rolling
Start, Inc., ,lanet Goeske Center for Seniors & Disabled Citizens, Inland Empire AiDS
Project, Operation Safehouse, Veterans' Administration, Regional Center - San
Bernardino, Riverside Department of Aging, Riverside Community Hospital, Redlands
Community Hospital, and ADV - Alternative to Domestic Violence.
2. Public Convenience and Necessity
Public convenience and necessity is necessarily a subjective criterion and difficult to clearly
define. Nonetheless the California Courts (California Court of Appeals in the 1971 case
Luxor Cab Co. v. Cahil, et al.) specifically stated that:
Public convenience and necessity has been defined as a public matter, without which the
public is inconvenienced to the extent of being handicapped in the practice of business
wholesome pleasure or both, and without which the people of the community are denied,
to their detriment, that which is enjoyed by others similarly situated.
$.K.S.O., Jnc. dba AAA lnland Ernpire Cab ~j ~
[J~ this context, .].K.S.O., Inc. believes that the public convenience and necessity supports
the issuance of..a taxiCab service permit for an additional 8 vehicles (including 1
wheelchair-accessible'van) in Rancho Cucamonga as a result of the following driving
forces:
· Rancho Cucamonga is,a center of influence: the City has emerged as a significant
economic driver in the two county region (San Bernardino and Riverside Counties). As
a result economic traffic patterns are growing rapidly between Rancho Cucamonga and
other cities in the two county region. These include such indicators as telephone calls;
mail frequency; automobile and truck journeys; and public transportation riders -
including point-to-point taxicab and limousine/sedan passengers. The intensification of
such linkages and the continued growth in influence of Rancho Cucamonga obviously
are interdependent.
· San Bernardino County's center of growth has shifted west toward Rancho Cucamonga
and Fontana around the corridors of the [-10 Freeway, the [-210 Freeway and the [-15
Freeway. Industrial and retail expansion is continuing despite the slowdown in the
national economy. Traffic patterns at Ontario International Airport, while falling since
9/11, have remained at consistently stronger levels than other Southern California
airports. Traffic at Ontario International Airport is expected to grow significantly over
the next decade, the Airport having already emerged as the nation's third-fastest
growir~g cargo airport. In turn this growth pattern will foster continued business and
hotel development in adjacent communities. Such expansion will be dependent on
suppo~tin~ services being in place.
· Concomitant with its 26% growth in population over the past decade, Rancho
Cucamonga now has a significant segment of the population that is;
1. . aged 55 years and older
2. aged over 21 years and classified as disabled.
The 2000 Census data for Rancho Cucamonga indicates that each of these sectors
accounts for 12% of the total population. These sectors of the community have a
disproportionate reliance on public transportation including taxicab, wheelchair-
accessible vans, dial-a-ride programs and public bus services. However, publi~:
transportation services - no matter how well intentioned - inevitably fall short of
serving the needs of these sectors of the community, particularly as the senior
population expands and the impact of ADA results in disabled citizens becoming far
more active in our communities. Accordingly, the market pressure for wheelchair-
accessible taxicabs for point-to-point, on demand transportation is growing steadily.
:I.K.$.O., Inc. believes that the presence of a competitive and service-oriented taxi system
I:o facilitate access to opportunity, leisure activities and essential services is an essential
factor in economic and socially beneficial development (such is particularly the case in
cities such as Rancho Cucamonga which are attracting not only industrial growth but also
growth in convention and sports event attendees together with supporting services such
as hotels~ restaurants, etc). The urban planning concepts of new urbanism and smart
!]rowth explicitly recognize this point with public transportation and, in particular, point-to-
point transportation such as that offered by taxicab service being carefully factored into
the design of both new communities and those undergoing rapid development and
expansion.
As indicated above ~.K.S.O., Inc. is a diversified, service-oriented transportation company
focused exclusively on the Inland Empire. Consequently, AAA Inland Cab is a primary
service contributor and economic growth factor in ensuring that competitive point-to-point
transportation between Inland Empire communities and the City of Rancho Cucamonga is
~vailable to sustain and support "the public convenience and necessity" as the City
~ontinues its development as a vibrant community.
],K,S.O., Inc. dba AAA Inland Empire Cab
3
The public convenience and necessity, in this context, is clearly a public matter, without
which the public is inconvenienced to the extent of being handicapped in the practice of
business or wholesome pleasure or both. ].K.S.O., Inc. is the only taxicab operator in the
Inland Empire with a definitive regional focus - and with a diversified transportation
services structure enabling it to support its taxicab customers with ancillary sedan,
wheelchair-van and non-emergency medical transportation.
3.K.S.O., Inc. wishes to ensure that it has the licensed ability to have a legitimate,
competitive operating presence in the City, linking Rancho Cucamonga to its service in the
surrounding Inland Empire communities.
3. Vehicle Operations & Operating Commitment
3.K.S.O., Inc. proposes to operate Up to 8 vehicles, including 2 wheelchair-accessible v~ns.
It believes that the addition of 8 vehicles will have a nil impact on existing traffic and
parking conditions. The proposed vehicles will be Ford Crown Victoria taxicabs and Dodge
Caravan wheelchair-accessible vans. In order to ensure efficient service and prompt
availability of vehicles, the company is currently working with the Ontario Economic
Development office to identify a suitable property in the vicinity of the I-3.0 and I-3.5
interchange to be used as a satellite staging and maintenance facility to service Rancho
Cucamonga, Ontario and Up[and in particular.
The company was formed with a specific business focus on the Inland Empire. It has made
a significant investment in plant and equipment to support this business plan, indicative of
its long-term commitment to being L'fle pre-eminent provider of diversified, consumer-
oriented point-to-point transportation services in the two county region.
3. Character of Service
The service will be operated as follows:
· Seven days a week, twenty-four hours per day
· Vehicles will stage from a servicing and support base adjacent to the 1-10 and 1-15
interchange
· Vehicles will be dispatched by a Digital Dispatch Systems computerized disl~atching
system, all vehicles will be fitted with a GPS transponder to facilitate rapid response
times
· All vehicles are fitted currently with Motorola UHF TK-880 two-way radios and
Centrodyne 610 meters
4. Financial Status, Character 8, Responsibility
The company has no outstanding or unpaid judgments nor has it ever been involved in
any such proceedings.
The company has not been involved in any bankruptcies.
5. Operating Experience
The two principal owners and company executives of .].K.S.O., Inc have been engaged in
the provision of taxicab services since 3.987 as, respectively, the owner of AAA Yellow Cab
in West Covina (with 30 vehicles) and the leading owner-operator (with 15 vehicles) for
Bell Cab-Yellow Cab, San Bernardino. In addition, key management staff have proven
experience and expertise in taxicab fleet operations. The general manager and road
supervisor has a 19 year backgrounc~ as a taxi driver, owner/operator, paratransit
supervisor, dispatch and operations manager in the San Gabriel Valley and Inland Empire.
The vehicle maintenance manager is a Certified Shop Manager with in excess of 15 years
experience in taxicab fleet maintenance. Full personnel details are set out in the
company's corporate background document.
].K.S.O., Inc. dba AAA Inland Empire Cab L~/~
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
TAXICAB SERVICE
APPLICATION
FEES - NEW, RENEWAL
ESIDENCEADDRESS _
Street ~-.~' City State .~,
BUSINESS NAME o
ADDRESS Street City State Zip
Number o[ Vehicles to be operated under this permit
Prepa~ alt~ched shee* (Vehicle l~orma~ion Sheet) Iisling all vehicles including license numbs', make, model, year,
color, type, passenger capacity, condition and any company vehicle identi, fication numbs. Also, attach a cop), elr
or vehicle registration for each vehide. ~/~ //,~.~a ~' ~
Address anti Method o, Storal~e ca Vekicles ~/~./f."c~ 5
· ' :.._ v ~
,~.:.",~ ~-.:.-.-~r~ ,*r. ~oo c9c.~-'.- s;Z., ~'--'~--x:~_-. ",~'
,~/,.,i-~.'d~.. ~ c .- Z'. ,.s' ce, .fo,..,..-~--~.d
Has your [:~'mit, license or certi/icate been denied, revoc~ted or SUSl:~mded by any Yes ~ No
public agency [or taxicab service or taxicab driving permit
If yes, explain in detaiJ
Have yo~ or any Person having an ownership interest in the proposed taxicab service, Yes r~ No
had any [elony convictions within the previous five (5) years
If yes, explain in detail
arged to the public the term of any permit issued.
I- .,~0 .o" ~....'
application must be signed below by the individual applicant or parmer or an officer if the
)licant is a partnership or corpertion.
~'he.nde~i~edas d-'.,~',c:x-- c"-~c~,,,~,~,~:of' ~X'.x~.,C ,~,'
hereby declares under penalty of pe0ury, that the irdormation contained in this Applic&fion Mr a
permit is true and correct.
Dated ~ g /~'7 ~.. at ,c^
Signature of Applicant
VEHICLE INFORMATION SHEET
Ma~ Model Year --~
-- ~ Passe~ger Cal~d~,
Co]or Scheme of Vehicle lnsig'Ma or oth~ distinguishable
characteristics of taxicab
Does the vehide have an illuminated sign? Yes ~.~ ,~ No ~
If yes, describe . ~'-/,-9 ~ / "' ~z,,~ r<
List any legends on top of vechide
1..icence plate number:.
Make Model Year -
Ior Scheme of Vehicle Insigrfia or oth~' distinguishable
characteristics of taxicab
Does the vehicle have an illuminated sig~? Yes [~' No
If yes. der, o-~e
l~st any legends on top of vechide,
Lice.ce plate number:. ~ ~t 0 c.~>'..~7
Model Year Pascenger~Capadty
Color Scheme of Vehicle Insignia or other distinguishable
Does the vehicle have an illuminated sign~ [~ characteristics of taxicab
,o, ' Yes No
describe ~-/,~ ,,y.. / z,.
t any legends on top of vechide ·
License plate number:, d ~' r~'~' (//~7
.. VEHICLE INFORMATION SHEET
Vehicle .# r=-==j~. ~ Model Year ,.- .P.a.S~n~ gel· Capa~ty
Color Seheme of Vehicle Insignia or other distinguishable
characteristics of taxicab
If yes, describe -- ~_~
List any legends mt top of vechicle
License plate number: ~Z-*~/~"_~'///
Make Model Yea~,
~~ ~ ~ ~ dis~a~e
~ ~eme d V~e ~s~ ~ ~ob
~a~ Si~?
~ ~ v~de have ~
yes, d~ -- ,
List any legends on top of vechide
License plate number:
Vehicle # ~ Mak~ Model Year Passenger' Capacity
Color Scheme of Vehicle Insignia or other distinguishable
characteristics of taxicab
Does the vehicle have an illuminated sign? Yes [~ No [~
Il yes, descn'be ~_
Mt any legends on top ot vechide
License plate number: ~ '~- I
REGISTRATION CARD VALID FROM: 09/30/2002 TO: 09/30/2003
~KE YR MOOEL YR IST SOLD VLF CLASS *YR TYPE VEH TYPE LIC LICENSE NUMBER
FORD 1995 1995 AK 2001 32X 31 6R90612
O00Y TYPE ~DEL MP ~ AX ~ UNL~EN/G/CGW VEHICLE ID N~BER
TX G HW 2 C 03880 2FALP71WSSX125410
TYPE VEHICLE USE , DATE,ISSUED CC/ALCO DT FEE RECVD PIC STICKER ISSUED
COMMERCIAL 09/10/02 33 09/10/02 8 S9548774
PR/HIST: TAXI PR EXP DATE: 09/30/2002
SIST[RED OWNER AMOUNT PAID
JKSO INC $ 72.00
DBA AAA INLAND EMPIRE CAB ~0UNI DUE AMOUNT RE£VD
3000 DATE ST $ 72.00 CASH :
CHCK :
RIVERSIDE CRDT : 72.00
CA 92507
L]EN~LDER
AP. MEN PASHKAM
1872 VIA ENTRADA
ROWLAND HGHTS
CA 91748
H01 545 26 0007200 0081 CS H01 091002 31 6R90612 410
AAA INLAND EMPIRE CAB
3000 DATE ST
RIVERSIDE CA 92507-5525
H0024
RO030
LO002
147061920023,665
VALIDATED REGISTRATION CARD ,, _ - ,- "~ '-.'-~ ",~
READ REVERSE SIDE - IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS
REGISTRATION CARD VALID FROM: 09/30/2002 TO: 09/30/2003
~KE YR MODEL YR IST SOLD VLF DL~S *YR TYPE VEH TYPE tic tIC[NS[ NUMBER
FORD 1997 1997 AM 2001 32X 31 6M53044
BOOY TYPE ~DEL MP ~ AX WC UNL~[N/G/CGW VEHICLE ID NO.ER
TX G HW 2 C 03880 2FALP71W4VX201175
TYPE VEHICLE USE DATE ISSUED CC/ALCO DT FEE RECVD P[C STICKER ISSUED
IAL 09/10/02 19 09/10/02 8 S9548763
PR/HIST: TAXI PR EXP DATE: 09/30/2002
;TERED ~NER A~OUNT PAID
JKSO INC $ 73.00
DBA INLAND EMPIRE CAB AMOUNTDUE AHOUNTRE£VD
359 E FRONT ST $ 73.00 CASH :
CHCK :
COVINA CRDT : 73.00
CA 91723
LIEN~LDER
ALFRED PASHKAM
187 VIA ENTRADA
ROWLAND HGTS
CA 91748
H01 545 26 0007300 0072 CS H01 091002 31 6M53044 175
REGISTRATION CARD VALID FROM: 07/31/2002 TO: 07/31/2003
MAKE YR ~OOEI. ~R 1ST SOLO VLF CLASS *YR TYPE VEH IYPE LIC LICENSE NUMBER
FORD 1995 .1995, AC 2001 32S 31 6G30581
BDUY TYPE ~ODEL HP Fl) AX WC UNLADEN/G/CGW VEHICLE ID NUMBER
SW G HU 2 D 04924 2FALP71W3SXl 89323
lYPE VEHICLE USE DATE ISSUED CC/ALCO DT FEE RECVD PIE STICKER ISSUED
COMMERCIAL 0.7/23/02 33 07/23/02 8 S8855158
PR EXP DATE: 07/31/~
AMOUNT P~IO
,..oISTERED OWNER $ 121. O0
AAA INLAND EMPIRE CAB
AMOUNT DUE AMOUNT REEVD
3000 DATE ST $ 121.00 CASH :
CHCK : 121.00
RIVERSIDE CRDT :
CA 92507
L I ENHOLDER
VAHIK SHAHNAZARIAN
1872 VIA ENTRADA
ROWLAND HGHTS
CA 91748
H05 545 40 0012100 0160 CS H05 072302 31 6G30581 323
REGISTRATION CARD VALID FROM: 08/31/2002 TO: 08/31/20~3
~KE YR HOOEL 'YR IST SOLD VLF CLASS *YR TYPE VEH TYPE LIE LICENSE NU~ER
CHEV 1995 1995 AC 2001 32X 31 6A08559
BODY TYPE ~DEL MP ~ AX W£ UNL~EN/G/~W VEHICLE ID N~BER
TX O .HV 2 D 04030 1GZBL52P3SRZ74532
TYPE YEH1ELE US[ DAT~ ISSUED CC/AL£O DT FEE RECYD P[C STICKER ]SSU[D
COMMERCIAL 08/16/02 33 08/16/02 8 87403585
PR/HIST: PRIOR POLICE PR EXP DATE: 08/31/200:
TERED ~NER AMOUNT PAID
AAA INLAND EMPIRE CAB $ 121.00
3000 DATE ST AMOUNT DUE AMOUNT R£CVD
$ 121.00 CASH :
CHCK :
RIVERSIDE CRDT :
CA 92507
LIEN~LOER
VA.HIK SHi~INAZARIAN
1872 VIA ENTRADA
ROWLAND HGHTS
CA 91748
H05 545 26 0012100 0021 CM H05 081602 31 6A08559 532
THIS VALIDATED REGISTRATION CARD OR A FACSIMILE COPY IS TO BE KEPT WITH THE
VEHICLE FOR WHICH IT IS ISSUED. THIS REQUIREMENT DOES NOT APPLY WHEN THE
VEHICLE IS LEFT UNATTENDED. ET NEED NOT BE DISPLAYED. PRESENT IT TO ~NY PEAC.
OFFICER UPON DEMAND. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE A RENEWAL NOTICE, USE THIS FORM
TO PAY YOUR R~NEWAL FEES OR NOTIFY THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES OF THE
PLANNED NON-OPERATIONAL STATUS (PNO) OF A STORED VEHICLE ($10). RENEWAL FEES'
MUST BE PAleD ON OR BEFORE THE REGISTRATION EXPIRATION DATE OR pENkLTIES WILL
BE DUE PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA VEHICLE CODE SECTIONS 9552 9554.
EVIDENCE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE FROM YOUR INSURANCE CoMpANy MUST BE PROVIDED
TO THE DEP;~TMENT WITH THE PAYMENT OF RENEWAL FEES. EVIDENCE OF LIABILITY
INSURANCE IS NOT REQUIRED WITH REGISTRATION RENEWAL OF OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLES,
TRAILERS, VESSELS, OR IF YOU FILE A PNO ON THE VEHICLE.
WMEN WRITI~G TO DMV, ALWAYS GIVE YOUR FULL Nk~E, PRESENT ADDRESS, AND THE
VEHICLE'S MAKE, LICENSE, AND IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS.
*~*'*~**~**~* DO NOT DETACH - REGISTERED OWNER INFORMATION
REGISTRATION CP~RD VALID FRO~: 10/~1/2002 gO:
FORD 1997 1997 AW 2001 32X 31 6S17910
TX G RX 2 C 03900 2FALP71W9VX196068
TYPE VFt,:C~ JSE BATE ISSdED CC/ALC0 91 FEE RECV2 P~C ST~CKER ISSUED
DR/HIS~: PRIOR ~O~ZC~ ~R ~X~ DA~[: 30/3Z/200
~ INL~D ~PIRE CAB $ 83.00
~000 DATE ST A~T DU~ ~ RECVU
$ 83.00 CASH
CHCK
RIVERSIDE CRDT
CA 92507
~ONG TH~fH VO
558 CHELSA WAY
CA 9287~
REGISTRATION CARD VALID FROM: 03/26/2003 TO: 03/26/2004
MAKE YR MODEL YR 1ST SOLD VLF CL~S *YR TYPE VEH TYPE LIC LICENSE NUMBER
PLYM 1997 0000 AN 2002 17S 11 4WFSlll
~DY TYP£ MOOEL MP · ~ VEHICLE ED NUMBER
SV G JP 2P4GP44RXVR370553
TYPE VEHICLE USE ~TE ISSUED CC/ALCO DT FEE RECVD PIC SLICKER ISSUED
AUTOMOBILE 03/28/03 33 03/28/03 9 U0713972
PR EXP DATE: 03/26/2003
REGISiERED OWNER AMOUNT PAID
JKSO INC DBA AAA INLAND $ 55.00
EMPIRE CAB AMOUNT DUE AMOUNT RECVD
3000 DATE ST $ 55.00 CASH :
CHCK :
VERSIDE CRDT :
CA 92507
LIENH~DER
H00 545 27 0005500 0032 CM H00 032803 11 4WFSlll 553
:REGISTRATION CARD VALID FROM: 04/21/2003 TO: 04/30/2004
MAKE YR MODEL YR IST SOLO VLF CLASS *YR TYPE VEH TYPE LIE LICENSE NUMBER
PLYM 1997 '' 0000 AH 2003 33V 31 7B31310
800Y TYPE MODEL MP ~ AX WC UNL~EN/G/CGW VEHICLE ID N~BER
VN G ~JR 2 C 03860 2P4GP44R3VR~90818
TYPE VEHICLE USE DATE ISSUED CE/ALCO DT FEE RECVD PIE USE TAX SLICKER ISSUED
COMMERCIAL 04/28/03 33 04/28/03 5 78 U5195264
AHOUNT PAID
REGISTERED ~NER
JKSO INC A~OUNT DUE AMOUNT RECVO
3000 DATE ST $ 159.00 CASH :
CHCK :
RIVERSIDE CRDT :
CA 92507
LIEN~LOER
B00 545 24 0015900 0032 CM B00 042803 31 7B31310 818
Page 1 of l
file://A:~tnini van trimmed 5 may 03.jpg 5/8/2003
Page 1 of I
1.888-333.8294
file://A:~LoadingWheelChair 5 may 03.jpg 5/8/2003
2314750
SECRETARY OF STATE
I, £II.L JONF~, Secret~ of State of the S.tate of California,
hereby certi~
That the attached transcript of -__L__ page(s).h;~s
been compared with the record on file in this oifice, of
which it purports to be a copy, and that it is full, true
and correct.
IN WITNESS WHE~OF, i execute this
ce. rtlficate and affix the Great Sea of
the State Of California this day of
JUN 1 9 2001
Secretao' o! State
:. , .". OF"" ' · '
ox zor~,~$ n~ bus'lne~ ' rpontor for th~
· . eoqx~-a~m ~ ~ ursuant , · l~
Cgifomia Co~nfi~ ~e.
~ P~IKOS3~' 2049 ~ P~k ~
Suite 2~70
FO~ ~is co.option is au~odzed m i~uc ~ ~d (20,000) s~m, ~1 orwh ch ~
act ~ deed:
Si~cd on ~c 1~ ~y olive 2~1.
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Application for Taxicab Service Permit
Rancho Cucamonga City Ordinance 8.30.0:30
Applicant: 3.K,S.O., [nc.
A. Name of Applicant: ].K.S.O.,
dba AAA Inland Empire Cab
AAA Limo & Sedan
California Corporation incorporal;ed June, 2002
#C2314760
A.].. Principals: 2~6°/o ]afar (]eft) Navidi Naeini, President
53 S. Ranch Undo Drive
Covina, CA. 91724
Tel. (626) 967-7117.
26% Khachik (Patrick) Pashkam, Chief Executive
1872 Via Entrada
Rowland Heights CA. 91748,
Tel. (909) 717 7726
24% Simon Aelian PaFtner
433 N. 20~ St.
Montebello, CA. 90640
Tel. (909) 787 9662
24% Oganes Khananian, Partner
1411 Via Camille
Montebello, Ca. 90640.
Tel. (909) 787 9662
B. Business Address: 3000 Date Street
Riverside, CA 92507
Tel. (909) 369 3581 Fax. (909) 369 1163
URL www. AAACabOnline.com
B.1. Corporate Details: A detailed corporate background document is attached as
Appendix A.
C. Number of Vehicles: The applicant, ].K.S.O., Inc. seeks a permit to operate up to 8
vehicles including at least I wheelchair-accessible van
O. Vehicle Details: The applicant, 3.K.S.O., lnc., proposes to operate the following
types of vehicles as taxicabs:
Make: Ford
Type: Crown Victoria (car)
Year: 1997 to 1999
Manufacturer: Ford Motor Company
Passengers: 4 (5 including driver)
Make: Dodge
Type: Caravan (wheelchair van)
Year: 1997 to 1999
Manufacturer: Daimler-Chrysler
Passengers: 5 (6 including driver)
2
E. Color Scheme: Vehicle photographs are attached as Appendix B,. Vehicle color
,, schemes are as follows:
Car:
Crown Victoria: Blue with white roof
White lettering & insignia on blue
background
"TAX[" top light in white with black lettering
Wheelchair Van;
Dodge Caravan: White
Blue lettering & insignia on white background
~TAXI# top light in white with black ~ettering
F. Evidence of Insurance: ].K.S.O., Inc. currently has in place the following liability
insurance policy:
Broker: Transit Professionals Insurance Brokerage
1426 W. 6th Street #2106
Corona, CA 92882
Carrier: First Financial insurance Company
Policy Number: 154F000085 - Commercial General Liability
Liability Limits & Deductibles: General Aggregate $2,000,000
Products Aggregate $1,000,000
Personal Injury $1,000,000
Each Occurrence $1,000,000
Fire Damage $ 50,000
Medical Expense $ 5,000
Deductible Nil
Expiration Date: 1:1-01-03
Carrier: Insurance Corporation of New York
Policy Number: R04011316 - Automobile Liability
Liability Limits & Deductibles: Combined Single Limit $350,000
Deductible Nil
On securing a taxicab operator's permit with the City of Rancho Cucamonga, ].K.S.O.,
inc. will lodge with the City a Certificate of Endorsement naming the City as an
additional insured and stipulating that "all such insurance shall not be materially
changed, terminated or expire, except on 60 days prior written notice to the City".
G. Vehicle ownership: All vehicles are registered to .I.K.S.O., Inc. (dba AAA Inland
Empire Cab) as the legally registered owner.
H. Prior Experience: The two principal owners and company executives of .1.K.$.O.,
[nc (AAA inland Empire Cab) have been engaged in the provision of taxicab services since
1987 as, respectively, the owner of AAA Yellow Cab in West Covina (with 30 vehicles) and the
leading owner-operator (with 15 vehicles) for Bell Cab-Yellow Cab, San Bernardino. in
addition, key management staff have proven experience and expertise in taxicab fleet
operations. The general manager has a 19 year background as a taxi driver, owner/operator,
· paratransit supervisor, dispatch and operations manager in the San Gabriel Valley and Tntand
Empire. The vehicle maintenance manager is a Certified Shop Hanager with in excess of 15
years experience in taxicab fleet maintenance. Full personnel details are set out in Apper~dix A.
].K.$,0., lnc. dba AAA Inland Empi~-e Cab
3
The company oper-~tes c~rrently from a central office and maintenance facility in the city of
Riverside together with a vehicle staging and dispatch facility in Bloomington adjacent to the
Interstate 10 freeway. With the current market gi'owth of the company in both the eastern
and western regions of the Inland Empire, it is now adding a satellite staging and maintenance
facility in Hefnet and is actively engaged in seeking a similar satellite location in the Ontario /
Fontana area.
.].K.S.O., ]nc. was formed in .lune 2001, as a ground transportation company focused
exclusively on the Inland Empire and the significant growth opportunities emerging in the
region. The business model is built on the concept of being a competitive service-oriented,
community-based transport company rather than the conventional taxicab model of revenue
derived primarily from vehicle-leasing. This approach, supported by professional marketing
staff plus the taxicab service experience of the owners and management staff, has been
extremely successful with .~.K.S.O., Inc. experiencing rapid growth and market penetration
across the Inland Empire.
In this context J.K.SiO., Inc. has placed a particular focus on building close working
relationships with community groups and non-profits, notably those involved in providing
services for seniors and the disabled. For example, in Riverside and San Bemardino counties it
operates in'close liaison with the Association for Retarded Citizens, Rolling Start, Inc., Janet
Goeske Center for Seniors & Disabled Citizens, Inland Empire AIDS Project, Operation
Safehouse, Veterans"Administration, Regional Center - San Bernardino, Riverside Department
of Aging, Riverside Community Hospital, Redlands Commu.nity Hospital, and ADV - Alternative
to Domestic Violence.
As a result of tl~is community involvement .~.K.S.O., Inc. has been invited by the Riverside City
Council to join a working group on public transportation in the city - and is currently working
with both the Riverside County Transportation Commission and the Riverside Transit Agency
to provide support and supplementary services for the Riverside County Dial-a-Ride program.
Further, at the express request of the City of Riverside and a number of community
organizations, .].K.S.O., Inc. is currently expanding its operations to include non-emergency
medical transportation in order to meet local demand for such services.
As at April 15, 2003 .].K.S.O., Inc. is operating a fleet of 90 vehicles including taxicabs,
wheelchair-accessible vehicles and sedans (operating as AAA Limo & Sedan, LLC under a
Public Utilities Commission charter party carrier license). It has an average of 70 vehicles on
the road daily and is continuing to add late-model vehicles on a monthly basis in response to
market demand. In addition it works closely with its sister company, AAA Yellow Cab, the
combined group having 120 vehicles available from West Covina eastward across the Inland
Empire.
As at April 15, 2003 AAA Inland Empire Cab is licensed for full-service taxicab operations in
the following cities:
Riverside Lake Elsinore
Redlands Murrietta
Upland Corona
Noreno Valley Norco
Hemet Colton
Perris Bloomington
Loma Linda Rialto
Highland Riverside County (unincorporated
Banning commu, nities)
Grand Terrace San Bernardino County (unincorporated
San ]acinto commu:nities)
Yucaipa
Temecula
Canyon Lake
]~K.S.O., Inc. dba AAA Inland Enlpire Cab
In addition to the current bid submission for the City of Rancho Cucamonga, taxicab license
applications are in process for the cities of Ontario, Fontana, iVlontclair, Claremont and San
Bem~,rdino. In addition, a non-emergency medical transportation license application is
currelltly before the Riverside City Council.
.1.K.S.O., [nc. has had no prior denial, revocation, or suspension by any public agency of any
taxicab service or taxicab ~triving permit, license or certificate. The company has been involved
in a lengthy application process with the City of San Bernardino wherein it established, in a
vote I:>y the San Bemardino City Council, the "public necessity and convenience" case for an
additional 25 taxicabs in the City but the vehicles were then awarded to the existing monopoly
oper~,tor by the City's Bureau of Franchise for a six month tr a period under specified
conditions.
The ~roup's sedan cars are licensed by the Public Utilities Commission to bperate througho"ut
Southern California under charter party carrier license number TCP-14928. In this capacity
they .currently serve a wide range of hotels and corporate clients, primarily in Riverside and '
along the ]nterstate 10 corridor from Redlands to Claremont.
The sister company, AAA Yellow Cab, is licensed currently for full-service taxicab operations in
the following cities:
West Covina El Monte
Alhambra
Azusa
Baldwin Park Walnut
Covina La Verne
GlencIora Chino Hills
Baldwin Park Monrovia
Glendora Duarte
Walnut Arcadia
I. Felony Convictions: Neither the applicant nor the owners have any felony
convictions.
,1. Rates: The proposed rate charges are:
Flag drop $1.90
[vlileage$1.80 per mile
Waiting time $20.00 per hour
K. Workers' Compensation: The applicant has the following Workers' Compensation policy
in place:
Carrier: /SLate Compensation Insurance Fund
Policy Number: 1703990 - 02
Liability Limit: $1,000,000 per occurrence
Expiration Date: 8-1-03
J.K.S.O., INC.
Z. Company Background
3.K.S.O., ~nc. is a diversified, se~ice-odented transpo~ation company
focused on the ~nland Empire ~nd ~dj~cent communities. The company
operations include taxicabs, sedans, wheelchair-accessible vehicles, non-
emergency medical tr~nspo~ation and airpo~ tr~nspo~ation.
It se~ices a wide r~nge of corporate accounts including ~nland Empire-based
corporations, hotels, ente~in~ent complexes, medical clinics and other
clients. A pa~icular focus is on meeting the transpo~ation needs o[ seniors
~nd the disabled.
2. Company
].K.S.O., Inc.
3000 Date Street
Riverside, CA 92507
Teh (888) 333 8294
(909) 369 358]
Fax: (909) 369 ~]63
URL: www. A~CabOnline.com
TCP~: 14928 P
dba AAA Inland Empire Cab
~ lnl~nd Empire Toxi
~ Limousine & Sedan
The owners of ].K.S.O., Inc. now have established a fu~her company - ~
Limo & Sedan, LLC - as an independent operating enti~ for the company's
rapidly expanding limousine and sedan business.
3. Corporate Status
.1.K.S.O., Inc. is a California corporation, incorporated on .lune 18, 2001.
AAA Limo & Sedan, LLC is a California LLC, registered on March 12, 2003.
2
4. Principal'Shareholders
26% ]afar (]eft) Navidi,
1997! E. Lorencita Drive
Covina, CA, 9!724
Tel. (626) 967-7!17.
26%Khachik (Patrick) Pashkam,
!872 Via Entrada
Rowland Heights CA. 9!748,
Tel. (909) 7!7 7726
24% Simon Aelian
433 N. 20th St.
Montebello, CA. 90640
'Tel. (909) 787 9662
24% ' Ogan~s Khananian,
!4!! Via Camille
Nontebello, Ca. 90640.
Tel. (909) 787 9662
5. Management: Operating Experience
3afar (Jeff) Navidi
President
hlr. Navidi has !6 years of experience in the taxicab industry, having started
as a taxi driver in !987. In 1993 Mr. Navidi purchased AAA Yellow Cab
Company, an established taxicab company that had been serving the eastern
part of the San Gabriel Valley, and has continued to operate the company
with great success to the present day. AAA Yellow Cab Company is licensed
to provide taxicab service in the cities of:
West Covina Alhambra
Azusa Walnut
Baldwin Park La Verne
Covina Chino Hills
Glendora Monrovia
Hacienda Heights Duarte
Glendora Arcadia
Walnut Diamond Bar
El Monte
The company has a fleet of 30 taxicabs, which are used to service these
areas.
The established corporate clients of AAA Yellow Cab Company include: San
Gabriel Victorville Regional Center; International institute of Los Angeles;
Huntington East Valley Hospital; Mattel Corporation; Miller Brewing
Company; and Specialty Hospital.
As President of ].K.S.O., inc. Mr. Navidi has extensive experience in all
phases of the taxicab industry. Mr. Navidi has hired and 'trained drivers and
other personnel, dispatched taxicabs, supervised drivers and dispatchers,
kept company b~oks and records, kept and maintained trip sheets, waybills
and other required regulatory documents, handled customer service issues
and served as marketing director.
Khachik (Patrick) Pashkam
Chief Executive
Mr. Pashkam has been an owner-operator of taxicabs for fifteen years. Prior
to the incorporation of 3.K.S.O., Inc. he owned 4 taxicabs at AAA Yellow Cab
Co. of the San Gabriel Valley, and 15 taxicabs at Bell Cab Co. (Network
Paratransit System, inc.) servicing the inland Empire. Jn this capacity Mr.
Pashkam has been responsible for the purchasing, licensing and maintenance
of taxicab fleets; the hiring, licensing, training and supervision of drivers; the '
negotiation and administration of corporate contracts for taxicab services; the
administrative and regulatory management of taxicab fleet operations; and
the marketing of taxicab services in the Inland Empire - the County of
Riverside and the County of San Bernardino.
6, Management Personnel
PeAr ~/~hers
Vice President & Corporate Advisor; Business & Comrnunib/ Relations .
Mr. Withers has an extensive background as a small business advisor and
graduate management professor. He currently teaches as an adjunct
professor at the University of La Verne School of Business and Global Studies
and has been closely involved with the development of Latino small business
in Southern California. His international experience with small to medium
sized business includes work in New Zealand, Eastern Europe, Finland,
Greece, Turkey, Singapore, the United States and Latin America.
George PlcFadden
Operations filanager
Mr. McFadden began as a taxicab driver in 1984. From :~985 to 1994 he
operated 6 taxicabs as an independent owner and driver with Bell Cab
Company and Yellow Cab Company of the San Gabriel Valley. During this
time he also provided a range of administrative services for Bell Cab Company
and Yellow Cab Company of San Gabriel Valley including marketing, accident
investigations, public relations, dispatch management, driver training -
including the use of computerized dispatch systems - and acting as a road
supervisor, in 1995 he assumed a full-time position responsible for these
activities with specific responsibility for providing sensitivity and other training
to drivers in providing transportation service to people with disabilities.
,99/
In 1997 Mr. McFadden was charged with opening and managing the Inland
Empire taxicab bperations for Bell and Yellow Cab Company Of San Gabriel
Valley. Subseqdently, he was employed as General Manager by .1.K.S.O., Inc.
in June, 2001 in order to facilitate the establishment a.nd operation of the
company'~ taxicab and paratransit serVices in the Inland Empire.
F. 3ames Rawls
Sales & hlarketing hlanagement
Mr. Rawls' career in sales and marketing management spans more than 30
years. As a professional sales manager he has been involved in a diverse
range of industries including entertainment, computer technology,
amusement park equipment, non-profits and transportation. A well-kn'own
sales figure in the Inland Empire, Mr. Rawls~ most recent position was as sales
and marketing representative for the Greater Riverside Chambers of
Commerce.
He is responsible for developing sales, establishment and maintenance of
corporate accounts, and the direct oversight of customer relations.
Bernard Benson
Vehicle filaintenance Manager
Mr. Benson is a Certified Shop Manager with 15 years experience in taxicab
fleet maintenance. In this capacity he is licensed by the State of California
Department of Weights & Measures and is certified in Computerized Taxicab
Dispatch, Networking and Systems Installation.
He is a highly qualified automotive technician and currently holds automotive
technical certification in SMOG (ODB-4); Computerized Fuel Management;
Anti-Lock Brake Systems; Engine Management; Front End Repairs and Air
Conditioning.
Ii. Jurisdictions Currently Served
The company's Public Utilities Commission-licensed sedan fleet (TCP#14928)
is currently serving corporate accounts and hotel accounts throughout the
Inland Empire and is permitted to serVice both Ontario International Airport
and Los Angeles International Airport
The company's rapidly growing taxicab fleet currently serves more than 40
Inland Empire jurisdictions (incorporated and unincorporated communities) in
the County of Riverside and the County of San Bernardino including operating
franchises awarded by the cities of Riverside and Redlands.
In addition, a taxicab franchise application for the City of San Bernardino
remains under consideration with permit applications to be lodged in the cities
of Fontana, Ontario and Rancho Cucamonga.
The company is now applying' for non-emergency medical transportation
licenses in response to marketplace demand and requests from its existing
account customers.
7. Operatin~ Permit ,Status
.].K.S.O., inc. has never had an operating permit, franchise, license or other
authorization to operate a charter party carrier or taxicab business revoked,
suspended or canceled.
8. SerVice Operation
The corporate objective is to become established as a service-orieflted
company contributing to the communities .it serves. The company's service
structure is supported in the following manner;
Staffing
As outlined above, the company is fully staffed with both management and
trained employees who have significant experience in both the taxicab
industry and diversified vehicle fleet operations.
Insurance C~verage
The company meets all State of California and local jurisdiction requirements
for mandated levels of public and personal liability.
Vehicle Operation
The company operates its vehicles 24 hours a day, 365 days per year. The
company currently operates 90 vehicles dedicated to serving the County of
Riverside and the County of San Bernarclino. The company is able to adjust
the number of vehicles being operated to insure that it has an adeqqate fleet
at all times to quickly respond to requests for service, and continues to add
additional vehicles as its business increases.
Vehicle Inspection
To insure that all of its vehicles are safe, clean and well maintained, all
vehicles are subject to a mandatory two-weekly inspection and vehicle
servicing schedule. In addition drivers are required to immediately report
any problems with the vehicles. The company maintains a computerized
maintenance record of all service to its vehicles.
Driver Selection & Training
The company strives to ensure that its drivers are courteous, professional and
well trained. Prospective drivers are given a personal interview with the
General Manager, and required to provide proof of a clean driving record.
They are also given a general aptitude test. Training consists of instruction in
the rules and regulations for drivers, vehicle operation and safety, accident
prevention, procedure to be followed in the event of an accident, sedan or
taxicab operation dispatch and procedure, and map book use.
Compla/nts
All complaints against drivers are given immediate and careful investigation.
Drivers are interviewed, and if found to have been in violation of any relevant
rules and regulations, company rule, or guilty of insensitivity or discourtesy
towards customers, are specifically advised of the inappropriate nature of
6
their conduct. Drivers will be and are dismissed in the event of serious and
substantiated complaints.
Substance Testing
All drivers are required to undergo pre-employment/lease/permitting driver
drug and alcohol testing prior to licensing. A random'testing pool is in
operation for all company drivers.
On Road Supervision
The company maintains field supervision on a constant basis monitoring the
performance of its drivers, and assisting in the event of breakdowns or
accidents.
hfarketing
The company employs an active marketing team. Advertising is placed in local
cable television, publications and yellow pages. Rate cards are widely
distributed to hotels, restaurants and corporate clients. Fliers and napkins are
placed in bars, taverns and clubs reminding people not to drive and drink.
Equal Opportunity Employer
The company provides equal opportunity employment, leasing and other
contracting to all individuals without regard to race, creed, color, ancestry,
national origin, religion, sex, age, sexual preference, marital status, medical
condition, Acquired ]mmune Deficiency Syndrome (acquired or perceived) or
disability. The company pledges that it will at all times refrain from
discrimination against any employee, lease driver or other contractor on the
basis of race, creed, color, ancestry, national origin, religion, sex, age, sexual
preference, marital status, medical condition, Acquired ~'mmune Deficiency
Syndrome (acquired or perceived) or disability.
Quality Assurance
The company constantly monitors and reviews driver's waybills and dispatch
records to insure that it has adequate staff and vehicles available and that it
maintains quick response rates.
9. Fleet Details
The company currently has a total of 90 vehicles including Ford Crown
Victoria and Chevrolet Caprice vehicles fitted as State of California TCP
licensed sedans or as taxicabs together with Dodge Caravan mini-vans which
have been equipped for use as wheel chair accessible vehicles, in addition,
the company has .two 12 passenger Ford buses specially equipped for disabled
passengers with electric wheelchair lift and tie downs. The company plans to
add further late model Crown Victoria automobiles and wheelchair accessible
vehicles as demand grows.
Ford Crown Victoria 4 passenger 1996 to 1998
Chevrolet Caprice 4 passenger 1994 to ~.996
Dodge Caravan 7 passenger 1997 to 1998
Dodge Caravan Wheelchair van 1995 to :~998
lO.Fleet Color Scheme
Sedans: Black
No insignia or lettering apart from "TCP # 14928P" on rear
bumper
Taxicabs: BlUe with white top
White insignia & lettering
Illuminated "taxi" top light
Vans: White with blue insignia & lettering
11.Vehicle Service & Maintenance Base
To facilitate logistics and management the vehicles are dispatche~J and
serviced at the company's 5,000 square foot maintenance complex positioned
centrally (adjacent to the intersection of the 60 and 91 Freeways) in the
Inland Empire at:
3000 Date Street
Riverside, CA 92507.
In addition a driver service and vehicle staging office is operated at:
19059 Valley Boulevard
Bloomington, CA 92316.
12.Dispatch and Operations
The company maintains toll free telephone lines, as well as numerous local
telephone lines, for customers to call in. All calls for service are time-
stamped in and out. Vehicles can also be ordered online.
The company's dispatch, operations management and maintenance facility
center is located at 3000 Date Street in Riverside. As the dispatch center is
on premises, management is constantly and immediately accessible to handle
any problems that may arise. The dispatch room is fully equipped with all
necessary telecommunications and mapping equipment.
A two-way radio dispatch system is currently in use. The company is now
preparing to install a computerized dispatch system, which will match a trip
with an available and eligible car very quickly and is based on information
stored in the computer's databases.
13.Current Fare Structure
Sedan fares are on a pre-arranged flat rate basis.
For taxicabs the company has a $1.90 flag drop, then charges $1.80 a mile.
Waiting time is charged at $20.00 per hour. Since commencing operations in
August 2001 the company has never requested a fare increase.
8
:~.4.Credit Card Policy
The company ai:cepts credit card payment for sedan and taxicab services. The
following cards are accepted: VISA, MasterCard, Discover and American
Express."
:].5.Disc'ounts & Special Fares
The company does offer discounts and special fares where allowed by the
applicable licensing jurisdiction. ]n particular, discounts are offered to senior
citizens and physically challenged individuals who must rely heavily on public
transportation.
16.Services for the Handicapped and the Elderly
The company makes a special effort to serve the handicapped and elderly.
The company is aware that many of those who utilize taxicab transportation
in the Inland Empire are senior citizens or disabled who rely on taxicabs for
shopping and access to medical facilities.
Further, the company has initiated close contacts with senior centers,
disability advocates and other community agencies in both the County of
Riverside and the County of San Bernardino in order to be responsive to
transportation needs and concerns.
17.Cab Meters
All taxicabs operated by the company are fitted with Centrodyne 6:10 taxicab
meters. These meters are inspected by the appropriate Weights & Measures
authorities in the licensed jurisdictions.
18.Telephone Access for Customers
The company provides both toll free nurnbers and numerous prefix local
numbers which patrons may call without incurring any toll charges.
::19.Additional Information
Additional information or clarification of the above material can be sought
from the following contact:
Mr, Peter Withers For New Accounts:
Vice President Mr. Frank McFadden
3.K.S.O., Inc ].K.S.O., Inc.
3000 Date Street 3000 Date Street
Riverside, CA 92507 Riverside, CA 92507
Tel: (909) 369 358:1 Tel: (909) 787 9662
Fax: (909) 369 1:163 Fax: (909) 369 1163
THE CITY OF
I~AN CIi 0 ClICAMONGA
$ ffRepo
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO:. Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
Brad Buller, City Planner
BY: Thomas Grahn, AICP, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE 2000-2004
CONSOLIDATED PLAN AND 2003-2004 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN - A proposed
amendment to establish a new job center activity to be funded through the
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council conduct a public hearing and take public testimony regarding the
proposed amendment and direct staff to schedule the amendment for final review at the
January 7, 2004, City Council meeting.
BACKGROUND:
The current Consolidated Plan was adopted to cover the period from July 1, 2000, to
June 30, 2005. The City then adopts a yearly Annual Action Plan to guide the City's
implementation of the objectives identified in the Consolidated Plan. The current Annual Action
Plan covers the period from July 1, 2003, to June 30, 2004. The Consolidated Plan Citizen
Participation Plan establishes criteria for when an action meets the characteristic of a
"substantial change," thus requiring an amendment to the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action
Plan. The request to fund an activity not currently included in either the Consolidated Plan or
the Annual Action Plan meets one of the identified "substantial change" criteria.
AMENDMENT TO THE CONSOLIDATED PLAN AND ANNUAL ACTION PLAN:
The proposed amendment will affect both the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan and
will be established under Objective 10 of the documents Non-Housing Community Development
Needs Strategic Plan. Objective 10 addresses "improvements to public areas and public
facilities to enhance living environments, improve the quality of life in Iow- and moderate-income
neighborhoods, and for lower income individuals, seniors, and the handicapped." Program 10.6
will be created to implement the proposed job center. Program 10.6 will be stated as "Evaluate
the development of a job center located in the southwest Cucamonga area and provide funding
to assist in its implementation."
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
2000-2004 CONSOLIDATED PLAN & 2003 2004 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN AMENDMENT
November 19, 2003
Page 2
The proposed job center would assist Iow-income individuals by providing a safe and central
place to seek day work and provide services such as English as a Second Language. The
request would provide funds for the leasing of the office trailer and preparation of the project site
located near the southeast corner of Vineyard Avenue and Arrow Highway. In addition, the
requested funds would provide for utilities and bathroom rental costs. The job center will be
operated in cooperation with the non-profit agency Somebody Cares-Southland.
The request seeks $30,000 in CDBG funding to complete the proposed job center
improvements. Each year all available CDBG funds are allocated to proposed activities and no
funds are held as a contingency. To fund the proposed job center, funds allocated to another
activity must therefore be reallocated. During the last budget cycle, a portion of funds
previously allocated to the Old Town Park improvement project were reallocated, leaving a
balance of $98,190. Because these funds are not adequate to complete the Old Town Park
project during the 2003-2004 program year, and it was anticipated that Old Town Park would be
refunded during the 2004-2005 program year, staff recommends that the City Council
reallocated $30,000 from the Old town Park project to the proposed job center.
CORRESPONDENCE:
Notice of a public hearing to amend the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan was
published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin on October 21, 2003. The City is required to
provide public notice and allow a 30-day public review period before the amendment's
consideration. The 30-day review period will begin on Tuesday, November 18, 2003, and end
on Wednesday, December 17, 2003.
Respectfully submitted,
Brad Buller
City Planner
BB:TG:Is
2004
971 ~2000
R A N C H O C u c a M 0 N G a
CO~II, Iu NIT¥ ~ I~l~ VI C I~&
staff
DATE: November 19, 2003
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager
FROM: Kevin McArdle, Community Services Director
Joe O'Neil, City Engineer
BY: Paula Pachon, Management Analyst III
Karen McGuire-Emery, Senior Park Planner
SUBJECT: PARKS, RECREATION FACILITIES AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
UPDATE
BACKGROUND
In accordance with the City Council's request to become more informed of park and recreation
facility issues, programs, projects and events, this report is provided to highlight pertinent
issues, projects and programs occurring in both the Community Services Department and the
Park Design/Development and Maintenance Sections of Engineering.
A. PARKS AND FACILITIES UPDATE
Central Park:
· The official start date of the project was October 23, 2003.
· Contractor has been clearing and grubbing the site and anticipates starting the grading
operation by November 10t~.
Rancho Cucamonga Cultural Center Project:
· Staff has completed the pro-qualification process.
· A mandatory pre-bid walk will be held on November 20th at the site.
· The bid opening is scheduled for December 2.
B. COMMUNITY SERVICES UPDATE
Senior Services:
· Senior Advisory Committee will hold their next regular scheduled meeting on Monday,
November 24, at 9:00 a.m. During the past month the Committee has worked tirelessly on
projects relating to fundraising for vadous aspects of the new Senior Center.
City Council
Parks, Recreation Facilities and Community Services Update
November 19, 2003
· The Senior Center will offer a free full Thanksqivin.q Dinner and Proqram on Thanksgiving
Day, Thursday, November 27, at noon for seniors on a reservation basis only. Seating will
be limited to 75.
Human Services:
· 55 Alive Drivin.q Class - Classes are offered every first Tuesday and Wednesday of the
month. Times alternate. Drivers retraining course developed by AARP offers discount
insurance certificates upon completion. Cost is: $10.00 per person and appointments are
necessary.
· Senior Transportation Proqram - Free transportation service for Rancho Cucamonga
Senior residents. Available Monday through Friday from 9:00 to 11:30 a.m. to transport
seniors to the senior center and back home for lunch. To make reservations or for more
information please cell 987-0777.
· Senior Help Line - The Help Line (909) 596-1111 is a free service which will guide one
through the maze of Iocel senior services, with quick and easy information about hundreds
of agencies.
· Inland Fair Housin.q Mediation Board - The Inland Fair Housing Mediation Board cen
assist in providing information and mediation for such services as applying for ADA
certificetion, problems with the Iocel transit system, counseling for reverse mortgages and
many other housing issues. For assistance please cell (909) 984-2254 or (800) 321-0911.
· Bereavement Support Group - The Rancho Cucamonga Senior Center has a
Bereavement Support Group every Tuesday, from 1:00 p.m. - 2:30 p.m. This is to assist
people of all ages looking for guidance in coping with their grief. To sign-up please see the
front desk or call 477-2780.
· Safe Return Program - The Alzheimer's Association Safe Return Program assists in the
safe and timely return of individuals with AIzheimer's disease and related dementias. This
service is provided for those individuals who tend to leave their residence and become lost.
The Senior Center is a registration site and can provide the following benefits: Identificetion
products, national information and photo database, 24 hour toll-free crisis line, fax alert
notificetion system, Iocel Alzheimer's association chapter support and wandering behavior
information and training.
Volunteer Services:
VOLUNTEER SERVICES
· The table on the next page summarizes the Department's volunteer usage for the month of
September 2003 and year-to-date:
City Council
Parks, Recreation Facilities and Community Services Update
November 19, 2003
Month: September 2003 YEAR TO DATE
~of ~of
Volunteers # of Hours ; Value Volunteers # of Hours $ Value
Admin 5 15 70 44 190 2,520
Sports 88 976 1,232 1,069 8,798 110,740
Sr & Human 72 410 1,008 493 3,360 42,487
Services
Special 17 66 238 179 1,426 19,054
Events
Youth 72 89 1,008 975 5,026 66,575
Programs
I 254 I 4,783 3,556 I 2,832 I 14,610 I 241,376 I
*Based on $14 per hour
Teens:
* The table below summarizes teen proqram participation for the month of October 2003:
Program Attendance/Participation - October 2003
Teen Center 701
Homework Room 12 participants; 14 hours of operation
TRAC Babysitting 55 participants; 17 volunteer hours
TRAC Monthly Activities 31 participants; 1 hour
Spruce Skate Facility 800 users
Teen Connection Halloween Fun Fest - 3 volunteers
Teen Center - 12 volunteers
· Our annual Colle.qe Fair that was held on Thursday, October 16th from 6:30 p.m. until 8:30
p.m. at the R.C. Family Sports Center drew more than 3,700 participants and 68
colleges/universities. This event was the perfect opportunity for students and their parents
to talk with a college representative and to receive important information on admissions,
academic programs, financial aid and support programs.
· TRAC participated in our annual Founders Day Parade again this year. Eight TRAC
members carried the parade banner at the start of the parade. Two other members were
wearing the recycle mascot costumes in the parade and 17 other members helped out with
the TRAC snack bar at the awards ceremony at Red Hill Park following the parade.
· The Teen Recreation Activity Club (TRAC~) bi-monthly babysitting service Night on the Town
is generally at capacity. On December 4'" TRAC will provide an all day babysitting service
from 9:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. to assist parents with their holiday shopping. The day will be
filled with themed games, activities and crafts.
¥5/
City Council
Parks, Recreation Facilities and Community Services Update
November 19, 2003
The monthly TRAC socials are also in full swing. At the November social teens will be
preparing gift baskets for local families in need that reside in our community.
· The Spruce Park Skate Facility - Staff is making regular weekly visits to the skate park to
promote safe skating by handing out donated chips and beverages free to the youth weadng
their proper gear. With the start of daylight savings time participants have begun to
decrease. The weekends however, still draw a crowd 'of all different age youngsters. Skate
safety assemblies will once again be offered to select elementary schools in the community.
The targeted age group for these assemblies will be the 4t~ grade, as suggested by our
Police Department.
Youth Activities:
· Our first annual Halloween Family Feat was held on October 31st from 5:00 p.m. until 10:00
p.m. at the Epicenter Special Event Area. The event included: carnival rides, pumpkin
carving, entertainment, games and contests, pony rides, a petting zoo, craft stations, craft
vendors, food concessions. There are an estimated 900 participants who attended this
year's event despite the light rain. This event was co-sponsored by Lewis Apartment
Communities.
· Playschool classes started up again in September with our fall session. Currently there are
669 students, ages 1-5, enrolled in our 42 Playschool classes.
· The Mobile Recreation Program "Fun on the Run" is becoming a fun neighborhood event.
This past month, 756 children were served through the program at 5 park sites. The current
program schedule shown below will continue through December 19th, Monday through
Friday from 2:30 p.m. until 5:00 p.m.
Weekday Park Location
..~lt]~[~,3~.~_~ ~ Monday Bear Gulch Park
Tuesday Old Town Park
- Wednesday Hermosa Park
~'"~'-~"~-~- Thursday Mountain View Park
Friday Elena Park
Youth Sports:
· The Sports Advisory Committee met on November 12th to review the 2004 Spring/Summer
field allocation proposal that covers the period of February 1, 2004 through - July 31,2004.
· The table below summarizes youth sports activities for the reporting period:
Activity # of Participants Age/Gender # Teams
Pea Wee Basketball 256 3-5/boys & girls 24
Youth Flag Football 220 6-14/boys & girls 20
Youth Roller Hockey 117 6-16 boys & girls 16
Youth Volleyball 65 8-14 boys & girls 8
¥53.
City Council
Parks, Recreation Facilities and Community Services Update
November 19, 2003
RC Family Sports Center:
· The table below provides drop-in/open play participation at the Center for the reporting
pedod:
Activity # of Participants
Adult Basketball 373
Youth Basketball 676
Adult Racquetball 329
Youth Racquetball 23
Adult Volleyball 33
Youth Volleyball 434
Jazzercise 1,242
· The table below summarizes organized adult activity at the Sports Center during the
reporting pedod:
Activity # of Participants Age/Gender I # Teams
Racquetball 15 Adult/Males[ N/A
Basketball (full court) 90 Adult/Males 9
Basketball (3-on-3) 45 Adult/Males 8
Adult Sports:
· Three (3) adult softball tournaments are scheduled to place at the Epicenter and Adult
Sports Complex during the month of November 2003.
· Forty (40) adults are participating in our tennis leaques.
· The table below summarizes adult sports activities at the Epicenter for the reporting period:
Activity # of Participants # Teams Gender
Softball 2,720 170 Males/Females
Soccer Fields down for renovation
Flag Football Fields down for renovation
Non-Profit Sports Organizations:
· Bi-annually, the Community Services Department, through the Sports Advisory Committee
allocates sport fields for non-profit or.qanized youth sport leaques. For the reporting period,
10 non-profit sport groups utilized 18 City parks and had 71,624 participants and 118,583
spectators enjoying our parks during both practices and game times.
Community Wide Special Events:
· Founders Ni.qht Gala - The Community Foundation's signature fundraising event celebrating
our heritage and the future of the arts took place on Saturday, November 1, 2003, at
Etiwanda Gardens. This year's event closed out the City's yearlong celebration of our Silver
Anniversary and celebrated our heritage and the future of the arts in our community.
Proceeds from this event will benefit the Victoria Gardens Cultural Center.
City Council
Parks, Recreation Facilities and Community Services Update
November 19, 2003
· Our 26t~ annual Founders Day Parade took place on Saturday, November 8th. This year's
theme was Dreams of Excellence and our Honorary Grand Marshal was the Vineyard Little
League Major All Stars. Although not an official count it is estimated that approximately
3,000 community members viewed our parade along its route on Base Line Road from
Archibald to Vineyard. An awards ceremony took place at Red Hill Community Park
following the parade where approximately 1,000 youngsters awaited the announcement of a
series of trophy awards. The top band Sweepstake Award went to Martin Luther King High
School from Riverside and the top float honor went to the City of Rancho Cucamonga
Community Services Department for the Dreams of Excellence float that carded our
Honorary Grand Marshals, the 11 and 12 year olds, Vineyard Little League Major All Stars.
· The Community Services Department in collaboration with Lewis Retail Centers will host a
Tree Liqhtinq and Holiday Celebration for the community on Thursday, November 20, 2003.
This event will start at 5:30 p.m. in the Terra Vista Towne Center-food court area and will
include an evening full of entertainment, holiday excitement and a visit from Santa and Mrs.
Clause.
Performing and Cultural Arts:
· The 2003-2004 Performance Troupe was thrilled to kick of this year's sedes of
performances at the elegant and prestigious Founder's Gala on November 1st at Etiwanda
Gardens. Welcoming Gala guests with their delightful presentation of "Be Our Guest" from
the Broadway production of Beauty and the Beast, along with two other numbers
highlighting Broadway musicals, the 18-member Troupe had the honor to perform for such
seasoned theatre professionals as Shidey Jones, Robert Guillome and Morgan Fairchild. It
was a great thrill for them and will certainly be a highlight of the Troupe's performances this
year.
· The next community theatre production will be "Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor
Dreamcoat," one of the first of many Broadway hits for the musical theatre team of Andrew
Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice. The City's production will be directed by Keely Milliken (Stage
and Voice Direction) and Alison Hooper (Choreography) and will be performed in March
2004. The show in intended to focus on local teen and adult talent who will comprise the
cast of characters, and will also include a youth choir. Auditions will be held in January.
This show will mark the City's 6th Community Theatre production since its first show in 2001.
Audition notices will go out in December and more information can be found on the
Department's website www. Rcpark.com.
Parks and Facilities:
· The table on the following page provides information on park/special use facility reservations
for the month of October 2003. Due to the Grand Prix fires a number of park/special use
facility reservations were cancelled and rescheduled to a later date.
City Council
Parks, Recreation Facilities and Community Services Update
November 19, 2003
Location/Facility Attendance Number of Number Hours of Use
Applications Processed of
Rentals
Red Hill 2,255 32 41 162
Community Park Picnic
Shelters
Heritage Community 580 13 13 57
Park Picnic Shelters
Hermosa Park Picnic 215 8 10 34
Shelter
Milliken Park Picnic 425 16 17 69
Shelter
Coyote Canyon Park 260 7 11 30
Picnic Shelter
Civic Center Courtyard* 0 0 0 0
Amphitheater 150 2 2 16
Equestrian Center 50 1 1 1
Total 3,915 79 95 369
* Not available due to Civic Center construction project.
Heritage Park Equestrian Center:
· Equestrian Center usaqe for the month of October 2003 is shown in the table below:
I Group Date Event/Time Frame
Equestrian Patrol November 2~ RC Equestrian Patrol Meeting/8:30a.m.-3:00p.m.
Civic Use November 4~ Election Polling Site/7:00a.m.-9:00p.m.
Alta Loma Riding Club November 6~ Board Meeting/7:30p.m.-9:00p.m.
Alta Loma Riding Club November 16t~ Show/9:00a.m.-3:00p.m.
4-H Club November 17th General Meeting/7:00p.m.-9:00p.m.
--Alta Loma Riding Club November 18~ General Meeting/7:30p.m.-9:00p.m.
4-H Club November 22nd Horse Show/8:00a.m.-5:00p.m.
Facilities:
· The table on the next page illustrates hours of service, number of bookings and attendance
at Lions East and West Community Centers during the month of October 2003.
FacilityService Hours of Rentals Number of Attendance
Lions East Community Center 473 126 5,800
Lions West Community Center 864 210 9,485
· Staff is continuing to meet quarterly with users of the equestrian center to address
maintenance needs and programming. Our local groups are very cooperative and
supportive of the City's efforts.
· Park monitors keep daily reports of activities in our parks, often helping out residents in
need of assistance.
City Council
Parks, Recreation Facilities and Community Services Update
November 19, 2003
Departmental / City Marketing:
· The following is a list of tasks that were completed during the month of October 2003:
> Marketing efforts for Central Park Groundbreaking event.
~' Two presentations were conducted to community groups during the month of
October regarding the Victoda Gardens Cultural Center.
Marketing efforts and preparations for the Community Foundation Founders
Night Gala.
> Completion of a multi-media presentation regarding the Victoria Gardens Cultural
Center and a PowerPoint presentation for the Promoting Arts and Literacy (PAL)
Campaign to be debuted at the Gala, November 1, 2003 and then utilized in
fundraising presentations and efforts.
> Final scripting and editing continues on the seven-minute City video that is part of
The Golf Channel commemial spot production project.
Epicenter Marketing:
· Marketing efforts for Epicenter rentals will be slowed down during the months of October
November, December and January 2004, due to the Stadium grounds being re-seeded in
preparation for the 2004 Quakes Season. This down time will be used for planning of
upcoming marketing strategies.
Park and Recreation Commission:
· The Park and Recreation Commission will meet next on October 16~h. At this meeting the
following items will be discussed/acted upon by the Commission:
· Update on Senior Advisory Committee.
· Update on Sports Advisory Committee.
· Update on Central Park Project.
· Consideration of Spring/Summer 2004 Field Allocations for Youth Sports Groups.
· Update on Victoria Gardens Cultural Center Project.
· Review and status of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Funding
Requests.
· Consideration of a Resolution Regarding the Formation of the Central Park/Park and
Recreation Commission Sub-Committee.
· Update on RC Park.corn Website.
· Review of Park Site Concept Plans Associated with the Development of Tentative
Track 14749-Traigh Pacific/Tracy Development Company.
Rancho Cucamonga Community Foundation:
· The following items are scheduled to be discussed at the Community Foundation's
November 13, 2003 meetinq:
City Council
Parks, Recreation Facilities and Community Services Update
November 19, 2003
· Update on the Cultural Center Project.
· Foundation Members Update on Solicitation Efforts for the PAL Campaign for the
Cultural Center Project.
· Review and Evaluation of the 2003 Founder's Gala Held November 1, 2003.
· Consideration Of Approving Foundation Affiliate Status For The Rancho Cucamonga
Fire Protection District And Establishing A Wildland Interface Fund.
Rancho Cucamonga Epicenter:
· The following activity took place at the Epicenter dudng the reporting period:
· Community Services Department/Lewis Apartment Communities - Halloween Fun
Fest - October 31, 2003 - Epicenter Special Event Area.
· Staff is in the process of working with the following applicants for future activities at the
Epicenter:
· Okoye Foundation/Quakes - Holiday Youth Event- December 13, 2003 - Epicenter
and Adult Sports Complex (soccer fields and parking lots).
· AutoMatdx - Tentative Car Sale - January 29, 2004 - February 2, 2004 - Epicenter
Special Event Area.
· Beginning in October the Epicenter Stadium fields will be down for their annual renovation.
This will impact the availability of the venue for rentals from October through January 2004.
Resp~fully submitted,
I~e~i~ acArdle /Y/'-
Community Services Director ~Ci~y OE'nl~i~nleer
I:~COMMSERV~Council&BoardstCityCouncil~StaffReportst2OO3~update 11.19. 03. doc