HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-208 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 04-208
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CALIFORNIA, DECLARING INTENT TO
PURSUE A CHANGE OF ORGANIZATION AND REQUESTING
THE LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION TO INITIATE
PROCEEDINGS FOR THE ANNEXATION OF PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHERLY END OF
WARDMAN BULLOCK ROAD AT THE INTERSECTION OF
COLONBERO ROAD, AS DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT "A',
DEPICTED IN EXHIBIT"B,"AND OUTLINED IN EXHIBIT"C,"THE
PLAN OF SERVICES.
RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California; that
WHEREAS, a Final EIR has been certified by the City Council byway of Resolution
No. 04-207 as required by the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")in connection with the
City Council's consideration of the proposed annexation described in the title of this Resolution and
that such document has been presented to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the above-described properties are located within and consistent with
the established Sphere of Influence of the City, and contiguous to current City limits; and
WHEREAS, the territory proposed to be annexed is uninhabited (as defined under
LAFCO), and a description of the boundaries of the territory is set forth in Exhibit"A"and depicted in
Exhibit"B" attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS, the annexation of the property will represent a logical extension of the
City's boundaries and urban services; and
WHEREAS, it is the City's intention to provide the usual and necessary urban
services to the area upon annexation, as outlined in the Plan of Services set forth in Exhibit "C"
attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS,the City has determined that the annexation of the properties would be
beneficial to the public purposes of the City, in that the properties will provide for development within
the City in a manner consistent with the City's General Plan and with related development; and
WHEREAS, the City Council as governing body of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
desires to initiate proceedings for a Change of Organization (Annexation)for the subject properties
pursuant to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000, Division 3,
Commencing with Section 56000 of the California Government Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the proposed annexation be
subject to the following terms and conditions:
a. The property owner has requested that the City of Rancho Cucamonga
initiate annexation. The City is, therefore, requesting that the Local
Agency Formation Commission approve the proposal with the waiver of
further conducting authority proceedings as authorized by Govt. Code
Section 56663(c).
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 2 of 72
b. The proposed annexation shall be subject to all standard conditions
required by the Local Agency Formation Commission.
NOW,THEREFORE,the City Council as the governing body of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, California does hereby adopt, approve, resolve, determine and order as follows:
SECTION 1: Based upon the facts and information contained in the record of this
Project, the City Council makes the following findings and
statements, and takes the following actions, pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Public Resources
Code Section 21000 et. seq.):
a. Henderson Creek Properties, LLC (the"Applicant") seeks approval of a
series of actions related to the annexation of land from unincorporated
San Bernardino County into the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the
approval of a General Plan Amendment, Etiwanda North Specific Plan
Amendment, Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324, and associated
Development Agreement. The actions also include the development of
123 single-family housing units on approximately 65.3 acres and
designations of flood control, utility corridor, and open space on
approximately 25.1 acres of land. Another 10 acres is also proposed for
annexation and is currently used for a utility easement and for flood
control purposes. The total area to be annexed is approximately 100.4
acres. The density of the development is approximately 1.9 dwelling
units per gross acre. These series of actions and approvals are
hereinafter defined in this Resolution as the "Project."
b. Applicant has submitted the following applications relating to the Project:
Annexation DRC2003-00753, General Plan Land Use Amendment
DRC2003-00749, Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003-
00750,Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324,and Development Agreement
DRC2003-00751 (collectively the"Project Applications"). These Project
Applications, as well as the appeal of the Planning Commission's
approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16324, constitute the matters
involving the Project,which are submitted to the City Council for decision
and action.
c. The City of Rancho Cucamonga,acting as the lead agency, prepared the
Draft Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the Project, including
certain technical appendices (the "Appendices") to the Draft EIR (State
Clearinghouse No. 2003111057). The Draft EIRwas circulated fora 45-
day public review and comment period from February 20, 2004,through
April 5, 2004. Comments were received during that period and written
responses were prepared and sent to all persons and entities submitting
comments. Those comments and the responses thereto have been
included in the Final EIR, as well as the revisions to the Draft EIR and a
copy of the Draft Development Agreement (Appendix K). Those
documents, together with the Draft EIR and Appendices, comprise the
Final EIR.
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 3 of 72
d. The City Council finds that the Final EIR was completed pursuant to
CEQA, and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, 14
California Code of Regulations, Section 15000, et. seq. ("the
Guidelines"). By Resolution No.04-207,the City Council has certified the
Final EIR as being in compliance with the requirements of CEQA.
e. The City Council finds that the Final EIR was presented to the City
Council and that the City Council reviewed and considered the
information in the Final EIR and has reached its own conclusions with
respect to the Project and as to whether and how to approve the various
components of the project approvals.
f. The City Council finds that the Final EIR represents the independent
judgment of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and
adequately addresses the impacts of the Project and imposes
appropriate mitigation measures for the Project.
g. Public Resources Code Section 21081 provides that no public agency
shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact
report has been completed which identifies one or more significant
environmental effects unless the public agency makes one or more of the
following findings with respect to each significant effect:
I. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into
the project, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental
effects thereof as identified in the completed environmental impact
report.
ii. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of another public agency and such changes have been
adopted by such agency or can and should be adopted by such other
agency.
iii. Specific economic,social or other considerations make infeasible the
mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the
environmental impact report.
h. The City Council finds, based upon the Initial Study,the Final EIR, public
comments, public agency comments, and the entire record before it,that
the Project may create significant impacts in the areas of Land Use and
Planning, Traffic and Circulation, Noise, Geology and Soils, Hydrology
and Water Quality, Public Health and Safety, Biological Resources, Air
Quality, and Public Services. However, changes or alterations have
been required in, or incorporated into the Project,which will mitigate and
in some cases, avoid the significant impacts. The specific changes and
alterations required, and a brief explanation of the rationale for the
findings with regard to each impact, are contained in the "CEQA
Findings" for the Project (Exhibit 7" to the June 16, 2004 City Council
Staff Report)and are incorporated herein by reference. In addition to the
rationale and explanation contained in the "CEQA Findings", the City
Council makes the following additional findings regarding the impacts of
the Project on the resources and services listed in this paragraph:
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 4 of 72
L Land Use and Planning. The Etiwanda North Specific Plan requires
a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet, and the Final EIR indicates
that the Project would be inconsistent with the Etiwanda North
Specific Plan, because some of the proposed residential lots would
be less than 20,000 square feet. With the approval of the proposed
Specific Plan Amendment that will change the land use district from
Very Low Residential (0.1 — 2 dwelling units per acre) to Low
Residential (2 — 4 dwelling units per acre) for the 65.3 acre area
designated for residential development, the Project would then be
consistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. As a result, the
Project site may be developed with lots less than 20,000 square feet.
In addition, in order to address the reduction in lot sizes and the
likely effect of lots averaging 18,000 square feet,with a minimum size
of 14,025 square feet, on the ability of those property owners to own
and maintain horses on those lots, a mitigation measure is being
imposed (Mitigation Measure LU-2) to require the developer to pay
an in-lieu fee to the City for the development of an equestrian center
that would serve residents in the area desiring to own and maintain
horses. The Etiwanda North Specific Plan also requires a particular
design and development theme that is consistent with the character
of Old Etiwanda by having access to trails, provisions for views of the
mountains and complying with certain design requirements for
landscaping,walls,fencing,lighting and the community's entry points.
Mitigation Measure LU-1 is being imposed that requires the project
developer to submit a landscape plan that is consistent with the City's
neighborhood Theme Plan as contained in the Etiwanda North
Specific Plan. Based on these mitigation measures,the City Council
finds that any inconsistency of the Project with the Etiwanda North
Specific Plan will be mitigated to a level of less than significant.
ii. Traffic and Circulation. The Final EIR indicates that the proposed
Project will increase vehicle trips and impact the level of service
along arterial streets and intersections. Specifically, the Final EIR
found that Project traffic, together with other anticipated traffic, will
likely cause traffic flow to be deficient by experiencing a Level of
Service (LOS)of"E" or"F" at the intersections of Wardman-Bullock
Road (NS)at Wilson Avenue (EW)and at Etiwanda Avenue (NS)at
Banyan Street(EW). Mitigation Measures are imposed to require the
developer to construct and widen Wardman-Bullock Road along the
Project frontage (Mitigation Measure TC-3),to install a traffic signal at
Etiwanda Avenue (NS) and Banyan Street intersection (Mitigation
Measure TC-5), to contribute developer fees for other traffic
improvements (Mitigation Measures TC-1 and TC-5), and to modify
signing and stripping of certain roadways and intersections
(Mitigation Measures TC-2 and TC-4). The City's"City-Wide System
Fees for Transportation Development" provides for the payment of
fees at the time building permits are issued based on a formula
adopted by the City Council by resolution. That formula provides for
the payment of a fee per dwelling unit of approximately $1,710.03
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 5 of 72
and a credit against those fees for certain qualifying traffic
improvements that mitigate the traffic impacts of the Project. The
City is required to use traffic impact fees to fund City-wide and
regional roadway and traffic improvements, and as a consequence,
the payment of those fees by the project developer will contribute to
the mitigation of the Project's impacts to traffic and circulation.
Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that
traffic at the study intersections will be reduced so that those
intersections operate at a LOS "D," and that the impacts of the
Project on traffic and circulation will be mitigated to a level of less
than significant.
iii. Noise. The Final EIR identifies the likelihood of short-term impacts
on ambient noise levels during construction of the Project. The
primary source of construction noise is heavy equipment associated
with construction activities, such as trucks, graders, bulldozers,
concrete mixers, cranes and portable generators with high levels of
sound generation. Earthmoving equipment is anticipated to create
noise ranging between 75 to 90 dB(A)at 50 feet from the source. A
mitigation measure has been imposed that will require the
construction contractors to adhere to the City's Development Code
for hours of construction activity— 6:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday
through Saturday, with no construction to take place on Sundays or
holidays (Mitigation Measure N-1). Based on this mitigation
measure, the City Council finds that the shore term noise impacts
from the Project will be reduced to less than significant levels. The
Final EIR also identified that noise levels at the facades of homes
nearest the Project exit at Wardman-Bullock Road would experience
noise near 60 dB CNEL due to vehicular traffic. The Final EIR states
that if the property owners of the homes fronting on Wardman-
Bullock Road can close their windows and still obtain adequate
ventilation, then the goal of reducing the interior noise to a 45 dB(A)
CNEL interior noise level would be achieved. A mitigation measure
will be imposed to require the developer to install air conditioning
units for the residences that front along Wardman-Bullock Road so
as to allow window closure during warm days so as to achieve a less
than significant interior noise level for those homes with the windows
closed (Mitigation Measure N-2). Based on this mitigation measure,
the City Council finds that the potential noise impacts of the Project
on current and future residents will be mitigated to a less than
significant level.
iv. Geology and Soils. The Final EIR identifies that development of the
Project will expose people and structures to risks associated with
seismic ground shaking due to regional and local faults located in the
area. Mitigation measures are imposed which require the developer
to ensure that all grading plans and grading work are done in
compliance with the geotechnical report for the Project so that soil
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 6 of 72
and slopes are properly compacted and grading work achieves all
seismic requirements (Mitigation Measure GS-1),that the developer
shall submit building plans which incorporate the recommendations
of the geotechnical report for preliminary foundation work, utility
trenching, and concrete slabs(Mitigation Measure GS-2),and that all
buildings and structures are built to Uniform Building Code and/or
Structural Engineers Association of California standards for seismic
safety (Mitigation Measure GS-3). Based on these mitigation
measures, the City Council finds that the effects of seismic shaking
on persons and structures will be mitigated to a level that is less than
significant.
v. Hydrology and Water Quality. The Final EIR identifies that during
storm events, construction activities(particularly vegetation removal,
grading and excavation), could affect the amounts of sediments and
suspended solid material leaving the site such that water quality
downstream of the site could be affected to a level that was
potentially significant. Vegetation removal and grading would expose
the soil to erosion by wind and rain, and rainfall could carry more
sediment off the disturbed areas and adversely affect water quality
downstream. In addition, during earthwork and construction
activities, pollutants that may be discharged in stormwater include
vehicle fluids such as oil, grease and coolants, asphaltic emulsions
associated with asphalt-concrete paving, paints and solvents, wood
products, and metal and metal plated products. In accordance with
the State of California's implementation of the National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)permit requirements and the
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) requirements
imposed by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB),the
Project developer will be required to include Best Management
Practices(BMPs)to prevent construction of the Project from polluting
surface waters. Compliance with these permitting requirements will
require the Project developer and construction crews to comply with a
variety of measures, such as limiting clearing and grubbing areas to
the limits of the active construction area, using hay bales and sand
bags to control erosion during the rainy season, using enclosed
storage sheds where possible, utilizing hazardous materials in a
manner that avoids contact with the ground,avoiding the application
of certain materials during periods of rainfall, washing of equipment
or vehicles in a designated place where a sump can be located to
collect wash water for proper disposal, and servicing equipment and
vehicles off-site. A mitigation measure is imposed to require
compliance with these permitting requirements and BMPs(Mitigation
Measure HWQ-1). The City Council finds that with the imposition of
this mitigation measure and after implementation of BMPs set forth in
the SWPPP, potentially significant impacts on water quality from
construction activitywill be mitigated to a level of less than significant.
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 7 of 72
vi. Public Health and Safety. The Final EIR identifies that the
frequency of high winds will expose structures and residents to
potential damage from extreme wind conditions. In addition,wildfires
on adjacent lands, including National Forest land and undeveloped
properties, could threaten residential development on the Project site.
Specifically, the Final EIR indicates that Santa Ana winds along the
front of the mountains can reach hurricane force, with winds in the
area of the Project detected at reaching 80 to 100 miles per hour.
Damage to roofs, fences, windows and landscaping is possible in
these types of conditions. Three mitigation measures are imposed to
mitigate the impacts of wind hazard to a less than significant level.
Those measures include requirements to utilize optimum building
materials and construction techniques as required by the Uniform
Building Code, to require disclosure of the potential for high winds in
sales documents to prospective homebuyers, and to comply with
other mitigation measures for control of particulate matter emissions
during grading and construction (Mitigation Measures HS-1, HS-2,
HS-3). Compliance with the provisions of the Uniform Building Code
has been demonstrated to result in structures that are capable of
withstanding winds projected for the Project area without serious
damage. With respect to the impacts created by wildfires on
adjacent lands,the City Council is particularly familiar with these risks
after the City and surrounding areas recently experienced the Grand
Prix fire in October 2003. The City Council also understands that the
addition of persons into an area of wildland vegetation increases the
number of ignitions (risk), the growth of brush after a fire increases
the intensity of new fires in the area (hazard), and the addition of
homes and amenities into the same area (value) creates an
increased need for fire protection and fuel modification. Design
features have already been incorporated into the Project to ensure
vegetation areas to the north are separated from residential
structures with a trail, a wall and a riprap drainage channel so as to
provide approximately 100 feet of distance between chaparral
vegetation and the homes. All homes will also be constructed with
Class A roofs. Along the western boundary of the site where the
wildfire threat is moderate, a six-foot masonry wall and "firewise"
landscaping between native vegetation and the homes are to be
required. A comprehensive mitigation measure(Mitigation Measure
HS-4) requires a detailed landscape plan/fuel modification plan to
contain requirements for "firewise" vegetation in specific areas,
irrigation plans and specific standards applicable to certain areas of
the Project site. In addition, Mitigation Measure HS-5 requires the
installation of residential fire sprinklers as a component of the
construction. The City Council finds that with the combination of
appropriate landscaping, residential fire sprinklers,the introduction of
certain new paved surfaces where none currently exist, and
implementation of the Fuel Modification Plan will effectively reduce
movement of potential fire into the Project area and thereby mitigate
impacts to a level of less than significant.
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 8 of 72
vii. Biological Resources. The proposed Project would result in
development of a 65.3 acre area of the site, and the Final EIR
indicates that, prior to the Grand Prix fire of October 2003, that area
was previously covered with upland sage scrub, disturbed annual
grassland and a small area of flat-top buckwheat scrub. Specifically,
prior to the Grand Prix fire, the portion of the site proposed for
development had approximately 1.5 acres of disturbed annual
grassland, 4.2 acres of disturbed annual grassland dominated by
deerweed, 53.5 acres of Upland sage scrub dominated by white
sage,and 4.5 acres of flat-top buckwheat scrub. The impacts on the
annual grassland areas is not considered significant because of the
relatively small area impacted (approximately 1/3 of the total
disturbed annual grassland on the site)and because those areas had
experienced substantial disturbance from prior weed control
measures,and the construction of power line maintenance roads and
other roads that cross the property. With respect to upland sage
scrub, most of that area was dominated by white sage, which is not
considered to be sensitive habitat by the resource agencies that
regulate biological resources. However,the City Council recognizes
that the loss of this plant community for wildlife habitat is important
when considering cumulative impacts on this resource. With respect
to the flat-top buckwheat scrub, this is a common species and an
indicator of prior disturbance to the land. The Final EIR indicates that
no sensitive species of flat-top buckwheat scrub were found on the
site and therefore no impacts were expected to occur. The Final EIR
recognizes that much of the vegetation previously found on the site
would likely grow back after the fire if no development took place.
However, the Biological Assessment not only found no substantial
evidence of sensitive plant or wildlife species on the site, but it also
found that due to the area already being disturbed by dirt roads for
power line maintenance, previous construction activity, commercial
harvesting of white sage, and flood control improvements and
activities, development of the site would not have a significant impact
on biological resources. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Project
site is within the boundaries of the North Etiwanda Open Space and
Habitat Preservation Program (NEOSHPP), as adopted by the
County of San Bernardino. To implement the goals and purposes of
that Program,a mitigation measure has been imposed to require the
Project developer to acquire and convey to the County, 58 acres of
land within or near the NEOSHPP area that support alluvial fan sage
scrub and/or upland sage scrub (Mitigation Measure BIO-1). This 58
acre area is intended to accomplish a 'one to one" mitigation in
acreage for the loss of the 53.5 acres of Upland sage scrub and to
mitigate the potential loss of habitat for sensitive plants and animal
species, and the loss of raptor foraging land. As required by the
mitigation measure, the off-site mitigation land shall be equal to or
greater in habitat value than that of the Project site.The City Council
finds that the conveyance into the NEOSHPP of 58 acres of land by
the Project developer would mitigate this impact to a level that is less
than significant.
I
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 9 of 72
viii. Air Quality. The Final EIR identifies that the Project may create
significant and unavoidable impacts to Air Quality. Specifically, the
Final EIR identifies that emissions from construction related
activities are likely to exceed the threshold of significance specified
by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD).
These impacts are considered to be short-term(less than one year)
and temporary and can cause nuisance impacts to adjacent land
uses in the local area by way of fugitive dust. One cause of these
short-term impacts is blowing dust resulting from the grading of the
site. In addition,the use of diesel engine equipment during grading
and construction along with worker trips is anticipated to create
levels of nitrous oxides (NOx) that are also above the SCAQMD's
thresholds of significance. Similarly, construction-related emissions,
particularly from architectural coatings (painting)and off-road diesel
equipment, are anticipated to create significant levels of reactive
organic gases (ROG) and nitrous oxides (NOx) that will exceed
SCAQMD thresholds of significance and result in significant short-
term air pollution impacts. A comprehensive mitigation measure is
imposed on the Project(Mitigation Measure AQ-1)which will require
various dust control measures, emission control measures and off-
site actions. Included in those measures are requirements to limit
the simultaneous disturbance area to as small an area as is
possible, terminate soil disturbance and accelerate dust control
measures when winds exceed 25 miles per hour,stabilize disturbed
areas if construction is delayed,require 90-day low-NOx tune-ups for
off-road equipment, limit idling to 10 minutes for trucks and heavy
equipment,encourage carpooling for construction workers,limit lane
closures to off-peak travel periods, park construction vehicles off
traveled roadways, wet down or cover dirt hauled off-site, wash or
sweep access points daily and encourage receipt of construction
materials during non-peak traffic hours. The City Council finds that
with implementation of the recommended measures, construction
emissions will be reduced, and that the Project's contribution to
regional emission of criteria pollutants will be minimized. However,
the City Council finds that despite the imposition of all these
comprehensive mitigation requirements, construction emissions
(building phase) will exceed SCAQMD's thresholds for ROG and
NOx, and therefore, would remain significant after mitigation.
ix. Cumulative Impacts — Air Quality Noise and Public Services.
The Final EIR provides that this Project, together with the
construction of development projects in the vicinity, would likely
create cumulative short-term impacts to air quality during
construction. This Project would also create a significant cumulative
impact to regional air quality because the Project would add
incremental pollutants to the South Coast Air Basin in the form of
additional vehicle emissions. With respect to noise, the Final EIR
indicates that the Project will create short-term cumulative
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 10 of 72
construction noise impacts and long-term cumulative noise impacts
due to increased vehicle trips. With respect to public services
(schools), state law (Government Code Section 65995(h)) provides
for the payment of developer fees and deems such payment to be full
and complete mitigation of school impacts. Consequently, as a
matter of law, the long-term cumulative impacts to schools from this
and other projects are deemed to be fully mitigated by the payment of
developer fees and the City is precluded, by law, from imposing
additional mitigation to address these potential impacts. The City
Council finds that noise and air quality impacts associated with
increased vehicle trips would remain significant when combined with
existing and anticipated construction projects in the vicinity of the
Project.
I. The City Council finds, based on the Final EIR,that after implementation
of the proposed mitigation measures, the following impacts associated
with the proposed Project would remain significant:air quality(short-term
impacts and short and long-term cumulative impacts) and noise (short-
term and long-term cumulative impacts).
j. The Final EIR describes a range of alternatives to the Project that might
fulfill basic objectives of the Project. These alternatives include the
required "No Project-No Development'alternative,and the"Development
Under the Existing Land Use Designation Alternative."Other alternatives
that were considered and rejected included the alternative location
alternative and the alternative land use alternative. As set forth below,
the alternatives identified in the Final EIR are not feasible because they
would not achieve the basic objectives of the Project or would do so only
to a much smaller degree and, therefore, leave unaddressed the
significant economic, infrastructure, and General Plan goals that the
Project is intended to accomplish, and are thus infeasible due to social
and economic considerations, and/or they are infeasible because they
would not eliminate the adverse environmental impacts of the proposed
Project. Accordingly, each of the alternatives is infeasible. In making
this finding, the City Council determines as follows:
i) The objectives of the Project are:
a) To be consistent with, and implement, the established policies
and goals of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan,
Etiwanda North Specific Plan, City Development Code, and all
other City development guidelines;
b) To annex the 90.4 acre Project site and adjacent 10 acre utility
easement into the City of Rancho Cucamonga;
c) To Integrate the Project with the character of the surrounding
neighborhoods and establish a development that results in
logical, coordinated growth;
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 11 of 72
d) To establish a Project-wide circulation system that meets regional
and local transportation needs and accommodates both vehicles
and pedestrians;
e) To provide a system of public/community facilities, including
trails, open space areas, and landscaping to support the
residents of the Project and surrounding area in an efficient and
timely manner;
f) To provide backbone public infrastructure (i.e., roads, utilities)to
serve Project residents and the surrounding community;
g) To minimize impacts to, and generate revenues in excess of
costs for various public service agencies; and
h) To provide quality housing opportunities compatible with existing
and planned development that responds to market demands.
ii) The "No Project-No Development"Alternative assumes that no new
land uses would be constructed on the Project site and that the site
would remain vacant and undeveloped. Although this alternative is
environmentally superior to the proposed Project, it would not meet
the Project objectives. Specifically, it would not meet the Project's
objective to provide quality housing that would be compatible with
existing and planned development for the area, would not provide a
system of public/community facilities, including trails, open space
areas, and would not provide landscaping for Project residents and
surrounding area residents. Furthermore, as the subject property is
under private ownership,the elimination of future development within
an area previously approved for residential development would not
be legally or financially feasible. Therefore this alternative is rejected.
iii) The "Development Under the Existing Land Use Designation
Alternative"assumes that the Project site would be developed under
the current City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan designation
(Very Low Residential). Under this designation, and assuming that
the area disturbed by grading is equal to that of the proposed Project,
the minimum lot sizes would be 20,000 square feet and the number
of lots that could be developed would be approximately 90 rather
than the 123 as currently proposed. This reduction in development
by approximately 33 dwelling units would result in lower traffic, air
quality, and noise impacts than the proposed Project, but would not
reduce to less than significance the short-term impacts on air quality
from construction-related emissions, cumulative long-term impacts on
air quality from Project emissions and cumulative short and long-term
noise impacts. In addition,this alternative would not meet the Project
objectives to provide quality housing that would be compatible with
existing and planned development for the area, would not provide a
system of public/community facilities, including trails, open space
areas, and would not provide landscaping for Project residents and
surrounding area residents.
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 12 of 72
k. Mitigation measures described in the Mitigation Monitoring Program will
avoid or substantially lessen the potentially significant environmental
effects of the Project. Further, the environmental, physical, social,
economic and other benefits of the Project, as set forth in this section
and in the "CEQA Findings' for the Project (Exhibit "F" to the June 16,
2004 City Council Staff Report), which is incorporated herein by this
reference, outweigh any unavoidable, significant, adverse impacts that
may occur as a result of the Project, including short-term impacts on air
quality from construction-related emissions and cumulative impacts to air
quality and noise. Therefore, due to overriding benefits of the Project
and because the alternatives identified in the Final EIR are not feasible,
as discussed in paragraph j above,the City Council herebyfinds that any
unavoidable impacts of the Project, including the mitigated but
unavoidable impacts from short-term impacts on air quality from
construction-related emissions,and cumulative air quality and noise are
acceptable based on the findings contained herein and in the "CEQA
Findings"for the Project. This determination shall constitute a statement
of overriding considerations within the meaning of CEQA and is based on
any one of the following environmental and other benefits of the Project
identified in the Final EIR and the record of the City Council's
proceedings:
(i) Provision for the use of land consistentwith the established policies
and goals of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan,
Etiwanda North Specific Plan, City Development Code, and all
other City Development guidelines;
(ii) Annexation of the 90.4-acre Project site and adjacent 10.0-acre
utility easement into the City of Rancho Cucamonga;
(iii) Integration of the Project with the character of the surrounding
neighborhoods and establishment of a development that results in
logical, coordinated growth;
(iv) Establishment of a Project-wide circulation system that meets
regional and local transportation needs and accommodates both
vehicles and pedestrians;
(v) Provision of a system of public/community facilities,including trails,
open space areas, and landscaping to support the residents of the
Project and surrounding area in an efficient and timely manner;
(vi) Provision of backbone public infrastructure (i.e., roads, utilities)to
serve Project residents and the surrounding community;
(vii) Minimization of impacts to,and generation of revenues in excess of
costs for, various public service agencies;
(viii) Provision of quality housing opportunities compatible with existing
and planned development that responds to market demands;
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 13 of 72
(ix) The addition of housing units in accomplishment of the City's
Housing Element Goals and fulfillment of regional housing needs;
(x) City control over the developing lands on the City's perimeter; and
(xi) Advancement of the regional trail system by the links to be
completed by the Project.
I. The mitigation measures in the Final EIR that correspond to the
environmental impacts which may result from the Project are hereby
adopted and made a condition of approval of, or incorporated into, the
Project. The City Council also hereby adopts the "Mitigation Monitoring
Plan" attached as Exhibit "H" to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff
Report for this Project. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan will be used to
monitor compliance with the mitigation measures and conditions that
have been adopted or made a condition of Project approval as set forth
in this Section of this Resolution and in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan.
m. Pursuant to provisions of the California Public Resources Code Section
21089(b),the findings contained in this Resolution shall not be operative,
vested or final until all required filing fees assessed pursuant to California
Fish and Game Code Section 711.4,together with any required handling
charges, are paid to the County Clerk of the County of Sari Bernardino.
SECTION 2: Application and proposal is hereby made to the Local Agency
Formation Commission of the County of San Bernardino for Change
of Organization (Annexation) to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for
the property described in Exhibit"A"and as shown in Exhibit"B"and
as outlined in the Plan of Services as shown in Exhibit "C," which
exhibits are attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference, as set forth in accordance to the terms and conditions
stated above and in the manner provided by the Cortese-Knox-
Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000.
SECTION 3: The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified
copy of this Resolution with the Executive Officer of the Local Agency
Formation Commission of the County of San Bernardino.
Please see the following page
for formal adoption,certification and signatures
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 14 of 72
PASSED, APPROVED,AND ADOPTED this 16`h day of June 2004.
AYES: Alexander, Gutierrez, Howdyshell, Kurth, Williams
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None
William J. Alexa e , Mayor
ATTEST:
C
a J. Ada CMC, City Clerk
I, DEBRA J.ADAMS,CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California,do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved and adopted by the City
Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California,at a Regular Meeting of said City Council held
on the 16th day of June 2004.
Executed this 17`h day of June 2004, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
1AALt'; L aiz�-
Debra J. Adam C, City Clerk
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 15 of 72
EXHIBIT"A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LAFCO NO.
THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 21,AND A PORTION OF THE WEST
HALF OF SECTION 22 TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH,RANGE 6 WEST,SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN,IN THE COUNTY
OF SAN BERNARDINO,STATE OF CALIFORNIA,DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 22;
THENCE NORTH 89040'08"EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 22,A DISTANCE OF 1325.05
FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF
SAID SECTION 22;
THENCE SOUTH 00°00'03"WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE
NORTHWEST QUARTER,A DISTANCE OF 1319.87 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID NORTHWEST
QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER;
THENCE SOUTH 00°00'03"WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE
NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 22,A DISTANCE OF 659.93 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 89'34'15"WEST A DISTANCE OF 1325.86 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 22;
THENCE NORTH 00°01'26"EAST ALONG SAID WEST LINE,A DISTANCE OF 660.87 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 21;
THENCE SOUTH 89015'44"WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
NORTHEAST QUARTER,A DISTANCE OF 1324.87 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST
QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER;
THENCE NORTH 00000'53"EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE
NORTHEAST QUARTER,A DISTANCE 1320.82 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST
QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER;
THENCE NORTH 89014'46"EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 21,A DISTANCE OF 1325.09
FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING IN 100.45 ACRES MORE OR LESS
ALL AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT"B"ATTACHED HERETO AND BY THIS REFERENCE MADE A PART HEREOF.
THIS LEGAL DESCRIPTION WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTION.
OVAL LANDS
��4'y �P�M.ADp�Np GPL
a No.3821 WILLIAM H.ADDINGTON,P.L.S.3821 DATE
* EXP. 06130104 * LICENSE EXPIRES 06/30/04
P
9lF0FCpL\FOP
I of I
0%w,,d pocatiogijob relu 0-HmEasou Cmk ftp31901U<GA15LLgFC0.FgNNOERSON CREEKOOC
THE NW CDR., OF THE NE 1/4, SHEET 1 OF 1
OF THE NE 1/4, OF SECTON 21 15
16 P.O.B. WARDMAN
N89'14'46 E 1325.09' N8914'WEB LOCK RD. pD
————————— N69'40'00'E 1}25.04' 1325.05' �0E0
-- �-2rZZ P
WARDMAN BULLOCKTHE HE COR.,
ROAD o OF THE NW 1/4, sem'
A.PN. 0226-061-28 OF THE NW 1/4,
OF SECTION 22 WI SON NUE 3
o
a SUMMIT
________ NR/WCHO
i -�!CUC4MONG4 FONTANA
n �ft WARDMAN BULLOCK ^iGM °"� '
ROAD
P �20'
VICINITY MAP20
A.P.N, 0225-064-04 1S •
w II A.P.N. 0225-061-29
OI39 _ LEGEND
AREA: 100.45 AC. P.O.B. _ PONT OF 8EOINNING
PS'
0
Z I I A9N` COLONBERO ( ) - INDICATES RECORD DATA PER
CC
1 I Py. L / u R.S. 49/61.
THEyyS�ti OF THEENED1/4,R. ROAD 9 ( ) _ INDICATES RECORD DATA PER
`>4
OF THE
SECNE 1 4, If ( S R.S. 110/39-40.
L _--_-_- _-_ \
N8915'46-E 132486' NO-915 44-E 1324,87' �I— y'THESE CON.,
THE SW COR., OF THE NE 1/a, 1 OF THE NW 1/a,
rn WARDMAN BULLOCK of THE NW t/a,
OF THE NE 1/4, OF sECngJ 21 DT m _ ROAD !�lyOF SECTION 22
3 c {I
A.P.N. 0226-081-09
¢n a
LINE DATA TABLE m
BEARING I DISTANCE
I N89'Ja'IS-E 20.00' O
V5 o A .P.N. 022fi-O81-10 -.-I 20'
m WARDMAN BULLOCK GRAPHIC SCALE •
AL ftAASC E 04E1T� ROAD J00 0 150 }00 690
ENGINEERING ANNEXATION 1305.86
_FCC
(1,189'34'15-E) 1325.86'
X
N
O
C_
� O
D) O
(a Z
0) O
) 0
O 1'
-4 N
V O
N 00
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 17 of 72
• EXHIBIT 11X11
DECLIFF ROAD�.oecn cenncc no�o�
PO
O
Project Site �P°P
a�
�O
O°
o �
a p
O
w
Y =
V Q
o >
j N
m Za
Z S
f
Q
3
x
U
z
W
15
a
,�LN w
/��� 210
zz 77=
iHENDERSON CREEK
PLAN FOR SERVICES
RA NCH'CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA
Il ll-HOGLT-IRL',L.ANDINC VICINITY MAP
JANUARY 23'04
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 18 of 72
PLAN FOR SERVICES
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Planning Division
Contact:
Larry Henderson, A1CP,Principal Planner
Tel(909)477-2750
Brad Buller, City Planner
Tel (909)477-2750
Prepared for:
Henderson Creek Properties, LLC
Contact:
Steven Stewart
Tel (714)839-0850
Prepared By:
Hogle-Ireland Inc
Contact:
Pamela Steele,Principal
Sonia Pierce, Senior Associate Project Manager
Chris Stamps,Associate Project Manager
Tel (909)787-9222
Fax (909)781-6014
Revised March 23,2004(accepted all changes)
Revised March 4, 2004
January 2004
Henderson Creek I
CPlan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 19 of 72
Table of Contents
Section Page
I. Introduction 5
A. Introduction 5
B. Background 5
II. Planning and Statutory Considerations 8
A. Planning Consideration 8
B. City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan 8
C. Etiwanda North Specific Plan 8
D. Applicable Laws 9
III. Service Considerations 11
A. Roadways and Transportation Services 11
B. Electricity 11
C. Natural Gas 11
D. Telephone 12
E. Drainage Services 12
F. Water Services 12
G. Sewer Services 13
H. Police Services 14
I. Fire Protection&Ambulance Services 14
J. Libraries 15
K. Street Lighting 15
L. Solid Waste Services 16
M. School Services 16
N. Parks&Recreation Services 16
IV. Fiscal Analysis 17
Henderson Creek 2
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 20 of 72
EXHIBITS
Figure Page
1. Vicinity Map 4
2. Annexation Map 7
Exhibit A Fiscal Analysis
Henderson Creek 3
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 21 of 72
0
FIGURE 1
DEC LIFF ROAD 1FMEsi acnv�ce xa�q
P°
Project Site 0FN0
o?
o�
c
a a
0 ¢
¢ w
Y Z
Oi
O >
J w
j N
0 Zd
i m
a
0
3
,�aJb W2
a
yJ ¢
w
O
z
2
15
a
w
210
HENDERSON CREEK
PLAN FOR SERVICES
Lt�J� RANCHOCUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA HOGL.F IRFLkND INC. VICINITY MAP
JANUARY 23'04
Henderson Creek q
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 22 of 72
I. Introduction
A. Introduction
This document has been prepared to provide the San Bernardino County Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO) and other interested individuals and agencies with
pertinent information relating to governmental functions,facilities, services and costs and
revenues applicable to proposed Annexation No. 04-XX to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga,California.
This annexation proposal has been initiated by the City of Rancho Cucamonga. This
document supports the City's petition by addressing all of the service related
considerations applicable to the property, thereby permitting the LAFCO Staff and Board
Members to fully understand, evaluate and approve the annexation request. This plan of
services addresses the basic level of public services that are required to support the future
development of the Henderson Creek Properties Annexation and the associated
population growth and the manner in which urban and municipal services will be
provided.
The proposed annexation area is located at the northwest comer of Wardman Bullock
Road and Colonbero Road in an unincorporated area of San Bernardino County within
the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Sphere of Influence, and within the Etiwanda North
Specific Plan (ENSP)area. The proposed annexation includes a total of 100.4 acres. The
total development area of annexation consists of 90.4-acres and includes residential,open
space, and the San Bernardino County Flood Channel. The remaining 10.0-acres outside
the development area to be annexed is owned by Southern California Edison easement
and used as a utility corridor.
The proposed project is a residential development of 123 single family residential lots
encompassing approximately 65.3 acres, with a minimum lot size of 14,025 square feet
and a maximum lot size of 45,755 square feet.
B. Project Background
The project site is located in the City's Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP), which was
approved in 1991. The ENSP comprises approximately 6,840 acres and is located within
the City of Rancho Cucamonga and its Sphere of Influence. The project site is located
within the unincorporated portion of San Bernardino County. The project includes the
annexation of 100.4 acres from San Bernardino County into the City of Rancho
Cucamonga. As part of the approval process, the County of San Bernardino prepared a
full scope environmental impact report (EBR)for the project(SCH No. 2003111057).
Henderson Creek 5
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 23 of 72
The majority of the annexation area is vacant. However, the Henderson Creek Channel
transverses the area and overhead power transmission lines (Southern California Edison)
easements are included within the site. It is surrounded by undeveloped land, with the
exception of the area immediate east, which is single-family residential development.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga is in the process of submitting four separate annexations
to the San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). Each of
the proposed annexations is under separate environmental reviews.
Henderson Creek 6
Plan for Services
b sf ?
Rz
TWO-
. �_i as'
a� S fi
fly
f
xp�R �J�E`CTr,�S,,iT«E
so
s s`�
F p
z
\
N'
•
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 25 of 72
0 •
II. Planning and Statutory Consideration
A. Planning Considerations
The proposed annexation area is contained within the City of Rancho Cucamonga's
Sphere of Influence. The City's General Plan current land use designation for the site is
Very Low Residential (0.1-2 dwelling units per acre). The project is also included in the
Etiwanda North Specific Plan, adopted by the City Council on April 1, 1992. The
project, as proposed, would require amendments to both the City of Rancho Cucamonga
General Plan and the Etiwanda North Specific Plan to ensure consistency with adopted
land use designations.
B. City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan
The City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan designation for the 100.4-acre project site
is currently shown as Very Low Residential, (.1-2 Dwelling Units per Acre) Flood
Control, and Utility Corridor. The Very Low land use designation covers 65.3-acres with
the remaining 35.1 acres designated for Flood Control and Utility Corridor. The Very
Low Residential District is intended as an area for single family residential uses with a
minimum lot size of 20,000 (average lot area of 25,000 square feet) and a maximum
density of up to 2 dwelling units per acre. In addition, the project site is within the
Equestrian/Rural Overlay District. The Overlay District extends generally north of
Banyan Street between the western City limits and Milliken Avenue, and then north of 1-
210 Freeway between Milliken Avenue and eastern City limits. The District allows the
keeping of horses and other farm animals.
The project proposes a General Plan Amendment that would change the current
designation of Very Low Residential (.1-2 Dwelling Units per Acre) to Low Residential
(2-4 Dwelling Units per Acre) for 65.3 acres of the 100.4-acre annexation site and Open
Space/Conservation for 5.2 acres. The remainder of the 100.4 acre annexation area will
remain within the existing land use designations of Flood Control and Utility Corridor.
C. Etiwanda North Specific Plan
The Henderson Creek Properties residential development is subject to the policies set
forth in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The Etiwanda North Specific Plan is a specific
area acknowledged in the City's General Plan subject to land use and community design
within the north Etiwanda area. The Etiwanda North Specific Plan was adopted on April
1, 1992 (Ordinance 493) and comprises of a 6,840 acres within the City of Rancho
Cucamonga and the City's Sphere of Influence. The project is located in Sub Area 6 of
the Etiwanda North Specific Plan and permits residential, open space and recreational
land uses.
Henderson Creek g
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 26 of 72
The Etiwanda North Specific Plan designates the site as Very Low Residential, allowing
a maximum of two dwelling units per acre with a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet.
The project proposes a Specific Plan Amendment that would change the current
designation of Very Low Residential (.1-2 Dwelling Unit per Acre) to Low Residential
(2-4 Dwelling Units per Acre) for 65.3-acres of the 100.4 annexation area and Open
Space/Conservation for 5.2 acres. The remainder of the 100.4-acre annexation area will
remain within the existing land use designations of Flood Control and Utility Corridor.
D. Applicable Laws
LAFCO is authorized and mandated by State law as the agency responsible for evaluating
and approving annexations to an incorporated city. Subsequent to the initial consideration
of an annexation request by the City, a public hearing is held before the LAFCO Board
where the annexation proposal is approved, denied, or modified. The following Protest
Procedures for LAFCO proceedings are outlined in California Government Code (within
Section 57000) and summarized in the LAFCO Procedures and Guidelines: 1)Following
a LAFCO Commission action to approve an annexation, a resolution of that action is
forwarded to affected agencies and individuals. Thirty days following the LAFCO
Commission action the Protest Period is announced through a combination of publication
of a legal advertisement in the local newspaper and through mailing of individual notices
to anyone who has previously requested such notices. The protest period can be no less
than 15 days nor more than 60 days, from the date of the announcement. All protests
must follow strict LAFCO requirements, but generally they must be in writing and be
received during the protest period. The protest must also indicate whether the letter is
from a landowner and/or a registered voter from within the annexation area; only those
that are either a landowner and/or a registered voter from within the annexation area are
eligible to submit a valid protest;and 2) At the conclusion of the protest period,
LAFCO staff will make a finding of the results of any protests received for adoption by
the LAFCO Commission. The Commission must take one of the following actions based
on the result of the protest findings:
a. For uninhabited annexations (<12 registered voters within the annexation
area)the Commission must either:
• terminate the annexation if protest is received from 50% or more of the
assessed value of land owners (improvement values are not counted)
within the annexation area;or
• approve the annexation if written protest is submitted by landowners
who own less than 50% of the assessed value of the annexation area.
b. For inhabited annexations (>12 registered voters within the annexation area)
the Commission must either:
terminate the annexation if protest is received from 50% or more of the
registered voters in the annexation area;
Henderson Creek 9
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 27 of 72
• call an election if protest is received from at least 25% and less than
50% of the registered voters, or if 25% to 100% of the number of
landowners —who own at least 25% of the total annexation land value —
submit a written protest [The voters (whether they own land or not)
would then decide the issue by majority vote in a special election];or
• approve the annexation without an election if written protest is received
from less than 25% of the voters and less than 25% of the landowners
(owning less than 25%of the land value).
The above referenced requirements also require the submittal of a plan for services for
areas to be annexed.This document satisfies this statutory requirement.
Henderson Creek 10
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 28 of 72
III. Service Considerations
A. Roadways and Transportation Services
The proposed development is not located within any Transit Service Corridor. Primary
access will be provided via Wardman Bullock Road.The annexation area is located north
of Banyan Avenue, west of Wardman Bullock Road, and northwest of Colonbero Road.
Sheridan Estates(Tract 13564)is located east of the site.
The proposed project includes improvements to the existing intersection at Wardman
Bullock Road and Wilson Avenue to accommodate vehicles traveling to and from the
site. The proposed project will be required to provide street improvements (curb, gutter
and sidewalk) along the street frontage of the site and within the project, as well as
improve the west side of Wardman-Bullock Road from Wilson Avenue to the south
boundary of the project.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga will assume responsibility for street maintenance of
public arterial roadways within the annexation area. The project will be annexed to the
City of Rancho Cucamonga's existing Landscape Maintenance District No. 7.
B. Electricity
The proposed annexation area lies within the service boundaries of the Southern
California Edison Company (SCE). SCE has indicated that the demands associated with
the project are accommodated within their master planning efforts and service can be
extended to the site.
The costs and rate structure to the property owners for these services are controlled by the
Public Utilities Commission. As these services are provided by private companies on a
user-pays-all fees basis, no additional costs to the City would be incurred due to
annexation. Assuming buildout of the 123 lots, electrical consumption for the site, based
on SCE designated criteria,is estimated as follows:
123 dwellings X 7kw/unit=861 kw per month;or 10,332 kw annually.
C. Natural Gas
Natural Gas would be provided by The Gas Company. The Gas Company maintains
natural gas pipelines in Etiwanda Avenue and Wilson Avenue. Natural gas service will
be provided via extensions of these existing transmission pipelines. The Gas Company
anticipates no problems in extending service to the site and has included the project in its
master planning efforts.
Henderson Creek II
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 29 of 72
The costs and rate structure to the property owners for these services are controlled by the
Public Utilities Commission. As these services are provided by private companies on a
user-pays-all fees basis, no additional costs to the City would be incurred due to
annexation. Annual gas consumption upon development of the site is estimated to be
about 85 therms per unit per average month, for a total of 10,455 therms per month or
125,460 therms per year.
D. Telephone Services.
The telephone service to the project site would be provided by Verizon Communications.
The facilities will be extended from Wardman-Bullock Road into the Henderson Creek
project site. Verizon anticipates no problems in providing communication services to the
project site.
E. Drainage Services
The majority of the drainage from the annexation area will be collected into onsite
underground storm drains and then conveyed into a 66-inch storm drain along San
Segundo Drive. All streets will be designed to accommodate storm waters that could
exceed the top of curbs in the event of a 25-year storm as well as the right-of- way for a
100-year storm. All necessary facilities will be localized in nature and will be inspected
and maintained by the City of Rancho Cucamonga Public Works Department.
The County of San Bernardino Flood Control District is responsible for the maintenance
of the Henderson Creek Channel, which traverses the project site. The Henderson Creek
Channel and improvements to the levee have been designed to capture all flows entering
the creek and conveying the flows offsite. These improvements are scheduled to occur
prior to development of the Henderson Creek property. Upon completion of the levee
improvements, the levee will protect the property from these flows and potential
flooding. The project site is currently located within a 100-year hazard area and will be
required to process a Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) based on the
proposed improvements to the levee and a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) following
completion of the improvements. Both actions will be processed through the Federal
Emergency Management Agency(FEMA).
F. Water Services
The Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD) cover approximately 50 square miles,
and provides water treatment, storage, and distribution of domestic water to all of Rancho
Cucamonga, adjacent unincorporated County areas, and portions of the Cities of Ontario,
Fontana and one tract in Upland. CVWD derives water from three sources —
groundwater (43%), surface water (12%) and imported water (45%). Groundwater is
derived primarily from the Cucamonga basin. Groundwater may also be pumped from
Henderson Creek 12
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 30 of 72
the Chino basin, but must be replenished through purchases of State Water Project
(imported) water. Canyon water is derived from surface and subsurface water form
Cucamonga, Deer, Day, and East Etiwanda Canyons. CVWD also purchases water from
northern California via the State Water Project. The current daily usage in the CVWD
service area is approximately 42 million gallons per day.
Residential water use amounts to 60 percent of the total water consumed, followed by
landscaping at 20 percent. CVWD's master plan estimates demand needs through the
year 2030; with residential water demand is expected to continue to be the greatest
sources of water demand. CVWD anticipates growth by ensuring that adequate facilities
are available to meet the water demand as it arises. CVWD is also one of seven member
agencies that operate under the umbrella of the Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA).
The IEUA had adopted a 10-year growth or capital improvement program that is based
upon growth projections provided by the member agencies. CVWD is responsible for
collecting developer fees for the construction and operation of water facilities.
The Cucamonga Valley Water District (CVWD) will supply domestic water to the site.
The site is currently undeveloped and does not consume any domestic water. Water is
currently provided to the area by a 12-inch main located along Wardman-Bullock Road
as a result of the development of the Tract 13564,east of the proposed annexation area.
The proposed project includes the future connection of 123 single-family residential units
to the CVWD domestic water system. Single-family residential units have a daily water
demand of 640 gallons per day(GPD). Thus,the project will result in an increased water
demand of the CVWD system of 78,720 GPD. This represents a 0.2 percent increase in
water currently demanded from existing development within the City.
CVWD is also going to construct a water storage tank (Zone 4) that will be located
northeast of the project site and supply about 2/3 of the project site. In addition, the
developer will be responsible for the water tank (Zone 5) that will be located near the
future CVWD tank to the northwest of the project site. This water tank will supply the
other 1/3 of the project site. The supply of both water tanks will produce up to 250,000
gallons of water which is a sufficient amount needed for the proposed project as well as
to meet other needs planned by CVWD.
G. Sewer Services
The Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA)currently covers over 240 square miles and
operates four wastewater treatment facilities that serve the cities of Rancho Cucamonga,
Fontana, Ontario, Upland, Montclair, Chino, and Chino H lls. An additional treatment
facility is currently planned. Two of the existing treatment plants, Regional Plants 1 and
4, serve development within the City of Rancho Cucamonga. CVWD provides
conveyance facilities to the treatment plants. The project site is within the service area of
treatment plant number 4 (RP-4). RP-4 is located on 6`n Street and Etiwanda Avenue in
the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The plant treats approximately 37.9 million gallons per
Henderson Creek 13
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 31 of 72
day (IvIGD) of wastewater and has a capacity of 44 MGD. The water treatment facilities
cleanse the treated water to a tertiary level which is then used for irrigation proposed.
Development fees are collected by member agencies for wastewater treatment facilities
and passed on to the IFUA to use for new treatment plant construction.
Except for extending pipelines to the project site, there will be no requirement for the
construction of a new water or wastewater treatment facility or expansion of existing
facilities. The project will connect to the existing 8-inch sewer in San Segundo Avenue.
Based on the CCWD Master Plan and IEUA estimates, wastewater generation in the
project area is approximately 270 gallons of wastewater per unit per day. Therefore, the
123 residential units proposed will generate approximately 33,210 gallons of sewage per
day. This represents less than one percent of the current quantity of wastewater treated
by RP-4, and will not exceed the capacity of the plant.
In addition, the proposed project will comply with all regional Water Quality Control
Board wastewater treatment requirements and will obtain required NPDES (National
Pollution Discharge Elimination Systems) and SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan)permits prior to project construction.
H. Police Services
The City of Rancho Cucamonga has contracted with the County of San Bernardino
Sheriffs Department for police service since 1978. Currently the City contract includes
93 uniformed officers — including 11 sergeants, 2 lieutenants and one captain. With a
population of 146,700(January 2003 Department of Finance estimate)the current ratio of
officers to residents is approximately 0.63 officers for every 1,000 residents. The
projected average response time to an emergency call for service within the vicinity of
the project site is at five minutes.
The City's Police Department is temporarily located at 8340 Utica Avenue in the City of
Rancho Cucamonga,the permanent facility at 10510 Civic Center Drive,adjacent to City
Hall,is currently being expanded and remodeled.
Police service calls will incrementally increase as result of the proposed project. The
proposed project will increase population by approximately 385 residents thus creating
the need for approximately 0.25 additional officers if the current officer/resident ratio is
maintained. The funds for additional police officers are provided as part of the City
General Fund. Each year the City's annual budget negotiation with the Sheriffs
department results in additional officers to be added to the Police force.
I. Fire Protection & Ambulance Services
The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) provides fire protection and
emergency medical response to approximately 50 square miles, which includes the City's
Henderson Creek 14
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 32 of 72
Sphere of Influence and the project site. Six fire stations are located within the City; and
the RCFPD currently maintains a personnel ratio of 0.18 firefighter per 1,000 residents.
The goal of RCFPD is to provide a five-minute response time for 90 percent of
emergency calls placed within the City. Currently the City is providing five-minute
service for 85 percent of the emergency calls. Existing fire stations 173, 175 and 176 will
serve the project area.
Station 173— 12158 Base Line Road(3 fire fighters)
Station 175— 11108 Banyan Avenue(6 firefighters)
Station 176—East Avenue at 23r°Street—(3 firefighters)
The proposed project will incrementally increase the population in the vicinity by 385
residents thus creating the need for 0.07 additional firefighter personnel in order to
maintain the current firefighter personnel/resident ratio. With the recent opening of
Station 176,located approximately one-mile from the site,the current response times will
continue to be less than five—minutes to the project site.
The RCFPD also participates in an automatic response agreement, known as West End
Joint Power Authority (West End), with neighboring fire departments to send the closest
fire engine to a reported structure fire without regard to the city boundaries.
The American Medical Response (AMR), a private ambulance service, provides
ambulance service for the residents in the City of Rancho Cucamonga.AMR is located at
7925 Center Avenue in Rancho Cucamonga.
J. Libraries
The Rancho Cucamonga Public Library system will serve the project area upon
annexation. The Rancho Cucamonga Library is located in a 2,200 square foot building in
the City of Rancho Cucamonga on Archibald Avenue,north of Interstate 10 Freeway and
west of Interstate 15 Freeway. The Library contains approximately 115,000 books
(novels, magazines, references, etc,) and serves a population of over 146,000 residents.
In addition, the City has planned a new library within the Victoria Gardens regional
shopping center of approximately 22,000 square feet, which would serve the projected
needs at build-out of the City.
Library funding is derived from a percentage of the property tax allocation and
disbursement with the County of San Bernardino(refer to the Fiscal Impact Analysis).
K. Street Lighting
The project presently does not contain any streetlights, however, will be required to
install streetlights with development. The project will be annexed to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga's existing City-wide Arterial Street lighting District, and the Etiwanda North
Street Light District.
Henderson Creek 15
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 33 of 72
0
L. Solid Waste
Burrtec Waste Industries will collect refuse from the project area under franchise
agreement with the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Bumcc takes all refuse collected to the
Transfer Station on Napa Street, at which point approximately 60% is diverted to the
Mid-Valley Sanitary Landfill in Rialto, the remaining refuse is transported out of the
County landfill system.
The City has implemented recycling programs, as required by state law (AB939), local
Source Reduction and Recycling Element.
M. School Services
The annexation area will be served by the Etiwanda School District(grades K through 8)
and the Chaffey Joint Union High School District (grades 9 through 12). Based on the
generation factors used by the Etiwanda School District, the area will generate
approximately 77 K-8 and 19 high school students from the 123 new homes.
Approximately 52 of these students would be elementary level (K-5) and 25 would be
intermediate level(grades 6-8). The total students generated would be approximately 96.
Historical enrollments in both Chaffey Joint Union High. School District and the
Etiwanda Elementary School District have increased dramatically over the past 10 years.
Historical student generation data from the districts indicate the project could generate an
addition of approximately 96 students at build out, based on a total of 0.78 students per
household.
At present enrollments at all schools serving the project are at or over their capacities.
However, recent changes in school financing laws indicate that payment of state-
mandated developer impact fees represent full and complete mitigation under CEQA,
regardless of the enrollment to capacity conditions of the affected schools.
N. Parks and Recreation Services
The City of Rancho Cucamonga Community Services Department serves the surrounding
parks and recreation facilities. The recreational amenities and programs include -
Community Center at Lions East and Lions West, Senior Center, Family Sports Center,
Epicenter/Sports Complex, and 20 park sites throughout the City. All programs and
facilities are funded through a combination of user fees and City general fund.
Henderson Creek 16
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 34 of 72
IV. Fiscal Analysis
The project will be annexed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga's existing Landscape
Maintenance District No. 7 to fund the maintenance costs of landscaping and other
appurtenant improvements associated with the new roadways. . The project will also be
annexed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga's existing City-wide Arterial Street lighting
District,and the Etiwanda North Street Light District.
A Fiscal Impact Analysis has been prepared on behalf of the City addressing the general
costs and revenue anticipated as a result of the annexation. The report "Henderson Creek
Properties Fiscal Impact Analysis City of Rancho Cucamonga" by Stanley Hoffman
Associates, Inc. forms a part of the Plan of Services as an exhibit. By its inclusion into
Plan of Services, the City certifies to the report's accuracy.
Henderson Creek 17
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 35 of 72
EXHIBIT A
FISCAL ANALYSIS
Henderson Creek 7g
Plan for Services
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 36 of 72
0
SPS Development Services, Inc.
Henderson Creek Estates
Fiscal Impact Analysis
City of Rancho Cucamonga
March 25, 2004
SRHA Job#1033
STANLEY R. OFFMAN 11661 San Vicente Blvd.Suite 306
–. ,—._.
11 � � � � Los Angeles,CA 90049
310-820-2680,310-820-8341,fax
www.slanleyrhoffman.com
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 37 of 72
CONTENTS
Tables.............................................................................................................................. ii
ExecutiveSummary......................................................................................................iii
Chapter1 Introduction..............................................................................................1
1.1 Background................................................................................................1
1.2 Approach....................................................................................................2
1.3 Overview....................................................................................................3
Chapter 2 Project Description .................................................................................4
2.1 Development Description After Buildout ....................................................4
2.2 Public Infrastructure...................................................................................4
Chapter3 Projected Fiscal Impacts.........................................................................8
3.1 Rancho Cucamonga General Fund ...........................................................8
3.2 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District............................................11
3.3 Landscape Maintenance District..............................................................11
Chapter 4 Fiscal Assumptions .............................................. ...13
..............................
4.1 General Information .................................................................................13
4.2 Revenue Assumptions.............................................................................15
4.3 Cost Assumptions....................................................................................22
Appendix A Persons and Agencies Contacted........................................................31
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. i Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 38 of 72
TABLES
A Summary of Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts After Buildout.......................... iv
2-1 Buildout Development Description .......................................................................5
2-2 Housing Valuation.................................................................................................6
2-3 Public Street Lane Miles.......................................................................................7
3-1 City General Fund Fiscal Impacts After Buildout..................................................9
3-2 Ranch Cucamonga Fire Protection District, Fiscal Impacts After Buildout .........12
4-1 General Assumptions .........................................................................................14
4-2 Estimation of Existing City Developed Acres......................................................16
4-3 Summary of Revenue Assumptions....................................................................17
4-4 Estimated Taxable Sales Capture......................................................................19
4-5 Summary of Cost Assumptions ..........................................................................23
4-6 Police Cost Estimation........................................................................................24
4-7 Estimation of Public Works Costs.......................................................................25
4-8 Estimation of Planning and Building and Safety Costs.......................................27
4-9 Estimation of General Government Costs..........................................................29
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. ii Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 39 of 72
0 0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
The following is a summary of the projected fiscal impacts of Henderson Creek Estates at
full buildout assuming annexation to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Annually recurring
fiscal impacts are projected for the City's General Fund and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire
Protection District.
Project Description
The Henderson Creek Estates project area is located in unincorporated San Bernardino
County, northwest of Wardman and Bullock Roads, near Colonbero Road. This area is in
the northeast portion of the City's sphere of influence. Henderson Creek Estates is a
proposed residential development of 123 homes on about 62 gross residential acres. The
population for Henderson Creek Estates is projected at 387, assuming 3.15 persons per
unit. Assessed valuation is projected at $83.5 million based on an average housing
valuation of$679,065 per unit.
Fiscal Impacts
Table A presents the projected recurring fiscal impacts to the City's General Fund and
the projected recurring revenues to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
The City of Rancho Cucamonga provides a full range of public services, including: police
protection; other related emergency/non-emergency services; public works, including
engineering, road maintenance and park maintenance; community services; planning
services; library services and general government.
The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District provides fire protection to the proposed
project as a subsidiary district. In addition, a landscape maintenance district (LMD) is a
separate entity that covers the maintenance of storm drains,slopes,detention basins,trails
or a combination thereof. The LMD has no effect on the revenues and costs presented
under the City General Fund. Fiscal impacts are presented in constant 2004 dollars,with
no adjustment for future inflation.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. iii Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 0.4-208
Page 40 of 72
TABLE A
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
SUMMARY OF PROJECTED RECURRING FISCAL IMPACTS AFTER BUILDOUT
(In Constant 2004 Dollars)
No MVLF Impact Impact of MVLF'
A. City General Fund
Recurring Revenues $160,646 $145,547
Direct Recurring Costs 91,656 91,656
Plus Contingency @ 15%of Direct Costs 13,748 13,748
Total Retuning Costs 105,405 105,405
Net Recurring Surplus 55,243 40,143
Revenue/Cost Ratio 1.52 1.38
B. Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Revenues $104,100 $104,100
Notes: This assumes that revenues fr—MVLF will be reduced by a W ut two-thirds due to SWIe W dget cuts.
source: Stanley R.HoRm Assotlates.Inc.
Property tax rates for the project area are based on information provided by the San
Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission,the County of San Bernardino
Auditor-Controllers office and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Due to uncertainty in the
full impact of the ongoing State of California's budget adjustments overtime,a hypothetical
decrease in the Motor Vehicle License Fee has been used in this analysis to test potential
changes. However, it is recognized that the actual changes may manifest themselves in
different ways.
City General Fund -No MVLF Reduction
An annual recurring surplus of$55.2 thousand is projected for the City General Fund after
full buildout of Henderson Creek Estates. The projected surplus is based on revenues of
$160.6 thousand,and costs of$105.4 thousand, including a 15 percent contingency costs
estimate. The revenue/cost ratio for the City General Fund is estimated 1.52.
The major recurring revenues projected for the City General Fund are property tax;off-site
retail sales and use tax; and motor vehicle license in-lieu revenues. Projected major
recurring costs forthe project are police protection and public works maintenance of public
arterial and local roadways in the annexation area. A landscape maintenance district will
maintain landscaping, slope areas, trails and landscaped parkways and medians.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. iv Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 41 of 72
City General Fund •With MVLF Reduction
Under this scenario it is assumed that revenues from the State for motor vehicle license
fees will be reduced by about two-thirds due to budget cuts at the State level. An annual
recurring surplus of$40.1 thousand is projected forthe City General Fund afterfull buildout
of Henderson Creek Estates. The projected surplus is based on revenues of $145.5
thousand, and costs of $105.4 thousand, including a 15 percent contingency costs
estimate. The revenue/cost ratio for the City General Fund is estimated 1.38.
Potential Impacts of Recent Passage of Proposition 57
According to the March 16, 2004 City Budget Update memorandum from City Manager,
Jack Lam, one outcome of the recent passage of Proposition 57 is that the City will
experience a'/,cent sales tax shift to the State instead of the earlier Y:cent shift proposal.
While this would reduce the sales tax generated by the residents of the project by about
$9.3 thousand, the project would still be estimated to have an annual recurring surplus of
approximately$30.9 thousand to $46.0 thousand.
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District
The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District(RCFPD)service area currently includes
the incorporated City of Rancho Cucamonga and the City's Sphere of Influence;therefore
the proposed Henderson Creek Estates development is currently located within the
RCFPD jurisdictional boundaries. Based on the information provided by the City, the
RCFPD currently has adequate funding to provide fire protection services within its
jurisdictional boundaries. The Henderson Creek Estates development will contribute
annual property tax and earned interest revenues projected at $104.1 thousand to the
RCPFD.
Landscape Maintenance District
The proposed storm drain, landscaped slopes, detention basins and trails are to be
maintained by a landscape maintenance district. At this time it has not been determined if
the project facilities will be included in a new LIVID to be formed or if it will be annexed to an
existing LIVID. Under either scenario the maintenance of the common area landscaping,
slopes, and trails will not impact the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Fund.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. V Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 42 of 72
0
CHAPTER
INTRODUCTION
This report presents the fiscal impact analysis for Henderson Creek Estates assuming
annexation to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The fiscal impact analysis projects
recurring public revenues and costs to the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Fund and
the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District assuming full development of the project.
The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District is a subsidiary district with its own budget
separate from the City's General Fund. Additionally, an LIVID will be used for the
operations and maintenance of common areas, but it has not been determined if
Henderson Creek Estates will annex into an existing LMD or if a new one will be created.
1.1 Background
The property comprising Henderson Creek Estates is located in the northeast portion of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga in the City's Sphere of Influence in the unincorporated area of
San Bernardino County. The project is located at the northeast comer of Wardman,
Bullock and Colonbero Roads. Upon annexation, the entire project would be within the
City limits of Rancho Cucamonga.
Henderson Creek Estates is a community of about 90 gross acres in size, of which some
65.3 acres are proposed for residential development. Proposed development within the
projectwill include 123 residential dwelling units for an overall density of about 1.9 units per
acre. Average lot sizes are estimated at 18,200 square feet and the buildout population of
the area is estimated at 387 based on a factor of 3.15 persons per unit.
The focus of the fiscal analysis is the ongoing operations and maintenance costs of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga as provided through the General Fund revenues plus the Fire
Protection District revenues and costs. General Fund revenues include property,sales and
use taxes and other taxes; franchise fees; fines and forfeitures; licenses and permits;
charges for current services; revenues from other agencies; use of money and property;
and other miscellaneous revenues. The Gas Tax Fund receives revenues primarily from
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 1 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 0.4-208
Page 43 of 72
gasoline taxes collected by the Federal and State governments and are restricted for road
related capital and operations and maintenance costs.
The ongoing range of services that the City of Rancho Cucamonga provides includes:
• Police protection
• Planning
• Public works, including engineering, road maintenance and park maintenance
• Community services
• Library services
• General government
The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District, as a subsidiary district governed by the
City Council,provides fire protection services to the City and the Sphere of Influence area.
1.2 Approach
The fiscal analysis presents the projected recurring impacts of the proposed development
associated with Henderson Creek Estates. Fiscal impacts are projected for the City
General Fund and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District.
The fiscal analysis is based on data and assumptions from the following sources:
• City of Rancho Cucamonga revenue and cost factors are estimated based on the
General Fund Adopted Budget Fiscal Year 2003/2004 and discussions with key City
staff.
• The fiscal methodology is based on the Fiscal Analysis, General Plan Update, City of
Rancho Cucamonga, prepared by Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, October 2, 2000.
• Some project information was obtained from the Plan for the Provision of Municipal
Services, Annexation No. 01-01 to The City of Rancho Cucamonga, prepared by the
City, November 5, 2001.
• Residential valuation estimates are based on sales data provided by the project
proponent.
• Estimated population is based on 3.15 persons per household, as provided by the City
of Rancho Cucamonga.
• Cost and revenue factors are projected in constant 2004 dollars, i.e., not adjusted for
inflation.
• Existing land uses are provided by the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 2 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 44 of 72
• Property tax rates for the project area are based on information provided by the San
Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission, the County of San
Bernardino Auditor-Controller's office and the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
• Also, there is uncertainty in the full impact of the ongoing State of California's budget
adjustments over time. For this analysis, a hypothetical decrease in the Motor Vehicle
License Fee has been used to test potential changes. However, it is recognized that
the actual changes may manifest themselves in different ways.
1.3 Overview
Chapter 2 presents the detailed project description for Henderson Creek Estates assuming
full buildout of the project area. Chapter 3 presents the fiscal analysis for the City's
General Fund and the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District. Chapter presents the
assumptions for the fiscal analysis and Appendix A includes a list of persons and agencies
contacted in the preparation of this report.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 3 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal AnalysiF
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 45 of 72
CHAPTER 2
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This chapter presents the detailed development description for Henderson Creek Estates
assuming full buildout of the area.
2.1 Development Description After Buildout
Acres. Units and Population Henderson Creek Estates is planned as a 90-acre
residential community consisting of 123 single family detached homes on lots averaging
18,200 square feet. As shown in Table 2-1, there are approximately 63 gross acres of
residential uses. Other acreage associated with the development includes 27.6 acres of
open space areas and 10.6 acres of public streets and/or right of ways(ROWs)within the
development area.
Buildout population for the Henderson Creek Estates development is estimated at 387
persons based on an average of 3.15 persons per housing unit. Population per housing
unit is based on information from the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
Proiect Valuation. As shown in Table 2-2, total residential valuation for the Henderson
Creek Estates is estimated at $83.5 million after buildout, based on an average value of
$679,065 per unit.Housing valuation is based on recent sales information as derived from
the project proponent. As presented in Table 2-2, four plan types are proposed with the
base pricing estimated to range from $640,000 to $720,000 per unit. The estimated
square footages range from 3,600 to 4,200 square feet.
2.2 Public Infrastructure
Streets. Primary access to Henderson Creek Estates will be provided via Wardman and
Bullock Road. As shown in Table 2-3, there is an estimated 3.54 street lane miles to be
developed as a part of the project; this includes local streets within the project boundaries
of Henderson Creek Estates. All 3.54 lane miles of streets are assumed to be public
streets maintained by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, once annexed by the City.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 4 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 46 of 72
TABLE 2-1
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BUILDOUT DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION
Acres at Percent
Buildout of Total
A. Land Use Acreage
Gross Residential Acres 51.8 57.6%
Open Space Areas
27.6 30.7%
Public Streets 10.6 11_8%
Total Project Acres 90.0 100.0%
B. Other Project Information
Residential Units-Single-family 123
Population(@ 3.15 persons per unit) 387
Residential Assessed Valuation(@$679,065 per unit)3 $83,525,000
Note: 2. Population is estimated at 3.15 persons per unit,per the City of Rancho Cucamonga
3. Assessed valuation Is projected at an average value of$679,065 per unit based on information
provided by the project proponent.
Sources: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 5 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 47 of 72
I •
TABLE 2-2
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
HOUSING VALUATION
(in Constant 2004 Dollars)
Plan Base Price Total
Plan T pe Square Feet Quantity Per Unit Valuation
1 3,600 30 $640,000 $19,200,000
2 3,800 31 665,000 20,615,000
3 4,000 31 690,000 21,390,000
4 4,200 31 720.000 22.320.000
Total 123 $679,065 $83,525,000
Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc.
Development Planning&Financing Group
O'Donnell/Atkins
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 6 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 48 of 72
TABLE 2-3
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
PUBLIC STREET LANE MILES
Number Length Length Total
Street Type of Lanes in Feet in Miles Lane Miles
Local 2 9,356 1.77 3.54
Total Lane Miles 354
Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 7 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 49 of 72
CHAPTER 3
PROJECTED FISCAL IMPACTS
This chapter presents the fiscal analysis of Henderson Creek Estates to the City of Rancho
Cucamonga. This analysis first focuses on the recurring revenues and costs that impact
the City of Rancho Cucamonga's General Fund,described in Section 3.1. This is followed
by a projection of recurring revenues to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District
presented in Section 3.2. All projections are presented in constant 2004 dollars with no
adjustment for future inflation and assume full buildout.
3.1 Rancho Cucamonga General Fund
The fiscal impacts presented assume that the City of Rancho Cucamonga will receive 7.0
percent of the 1.0 percent basic property tax levy for the General Fund and 1.7 percent of
the basic levy forthe Library Fund. Impacts are also presented assuming: 1)no impact on
MVLF fees; and 2) a two-thirds reduction in MVLF fees due to proposed State budget
adjustments.
No Impact on MVLF
Table 3-1 presents the projected fiscal impacts for the City's General Fund assuming that
there is no reduction in revenues received from the State in the category of motor vehicle
license fees. Recurring revenues are projected at $160.6 thousand. Annual direct
recurring costs are projected at$91.7 thousand. Added to the projected direct costs is a
contingency cost, calculated at 15 percent of direct costs, or$13.7 thousand. Adjusted
total recurring costs, including estimated direct costs and contingency costs,are projected
at $105.4 thousand. A recurring surplus of$55.2 thousand is projected for Henderson
Creek Estates, as shown in Table 3-1. The revenue/cost ratio is calculated at 1.52.
Projected Revenues. Projected recurring revenues to the City of Rancho Cucamonga
General Fund include property tax; property transfer tax;off-site sales and use tax; motor
vehicle license in-lieu revenues; Proposition 172 sales tax; franchise fees; fines and
forfeitures; charges for services; other revenue; library revenue; and state gasoline tax.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 8 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 50 of 72
•
TABLE 3-1
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CITY GENERAL FUND FISCAL IMPACTS AFTER BUILDOUT'
(In Constant 2004 Dollars)
No MVLF Impact Impact on MVLF'
After Percent After Percent
Annual Recurr'na Revenues Buildout of Total Buildout I of Total
Property lax-general fund $58,468 36.4% $58,468 40.2%
Property tax-library fund 14,199 8.8% 14,199 9.8%
Property transfer tax 3.216 2.0% 3,216 2.2%
Off-site sales and use tax 37,002 23.0% 37,002 25.4%
Motor vehicle license in-lieu 22,650 14.1% 7,550 5.2%
Proposition 172 sales tax 758 0.5% 758 0.5%
Franchise fees: utility 4,838 3.0% 4,838 3.3%
Franchise fees: refuse 3,097 1.9% 3,097 2.1%
Franchise fees: cable 7,344 4.6% 7,344 5.0%
Fines and forfeitures 2,111 1.3% 2,111 1.5%
Charges for services reverue 241 0.1% 241 0.2%
Other e 197 0.1% 197 0.1%
Library reven582 0.4% 582 0.4%
Slate gasoline tax' 55%6 3.7% 5946 4.1%
Total Resulting Revenues $160,648 100.0% $145,547 100.0%
Annual Rocurtina Costs
Police protection $29,761 32.5% $29,761 32.5%
Animal control 1,031 1.1% 1,031 1.1%
Engineering 9,330 10.2% 9,330 10.2%
Public works maintenance 19,812 21.6% 19,812 21.6%
Facilities maintenance 1,829 2.0% 1,829 2.0%
Planning 4,322 4.7% 4,322 4.7%
Library 4,993 5.4% 4,993 5.4%
Community services 6,169 6.7% 6,169 6.7%
Conmbution to Fire District 2,270 2.5% 2,270 2.5%
General government 12140 132% 12,140 132%
Direct Recurring Costs $91,656 100.0% $91,656 100.0%
Plus
Estimated Contingency costs(@ 15%of direct recurring costs) $13,748 $13,748
Total Recurring Costs $105,405 $105,405
Net Annual Surplus $55,243 $40,143
Revenue/Cost Ratio 1.52 1.38
Noe: 1. Revenues and no for fire protection services and common area landscaping are cwerd in separate diur cts and are no inducted as a
pan of Ne Gerund Fund anal}5is.
3. Tnu aawmes Iba11M ylecallm d mold rsrbe inJieu fees Iran IM nate Ir lee Imljarsdelbn unit pe rMueed ty txa-IeiMs due ro
manges In sure bud9el agreements.
3. State gasoline tax is earmarked for public works road maintemnce.
source: S0001ey R.Hoffr nAd,ouiatea.lm
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 9 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 51 of 72
The largest projected revenue source is property tax at $58.5 thousand, representing
approximately 36.4 percent of total projected recurring revenues. Off-site sales and use
tax is the second largest projected revenue source at$37.0 thousand and 23.0 percent of
the total revenues. Motor vehicle license in-lieu revenues are projected at$22.7 thousand
and 14.1 percent, the third largest recurring revenue. These three revenue sources
represent approximately 73.5 percent of total projected recurring revenues.
Projected Costs. Table 3-1 also presents projected recurring costs to the City General
Fund for Henderson Creek Estates at buildout. Recurring direct costs to the City of
Rancho Cucamonga General Fund include police protection;animal control,engineering;
public works maintenance; facilities maintenance; planning; library; community services;
contribution to the Fire District; and general government costs.
Police protection costs are projected at about$29.8 thousand and account for 32.5 percent
of the total recurring annual costs. Public works maintenance for public arterial roads is
projected at $19.8 thousand and 21.6 percent of the total recurring costs. General
government costs(administrative functions)are projected as the third largest recurring cost
at$12.1 thousand or 13.2 percent of total projected costs. These three projected costs of
police protection, pubic works maintenance and general government represent
approximately 67.3 percent of total recurring costs.
Impact on MVLF
Table 3-1 also presents the projected fiscal impacts for the City's General Fund assuming it
is impacted with a reduction in revenues received from the State in the category of motor
vehicle license fees. Recurring revenues under this scenario are projected at $145.5
thousand. Adjusted total annual recurring costs, including estimated direct costs and
contingency costs, are projected at $105.4 thousand. A recurring surplus of $40.1
thousand is projected for Henderson Creek Estates under these conditions. The
revenue/cost ratio is calculated at 1.38.
Projected Revenues. The largest projected revenue source is General Fund property tax
at$58.5 thousand, representing approximately 40.2 percent of total projected recurring
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 10 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 52 of 72
revenues. Off-site sales and use tax is the second largest projected revenue source at
$37.0 thousand and 25.4 percent of the total revenues. Library Fund property tax
revenues are projected at$14.2 thousand,the third largest recurring revenue. These three
revenue sources represent approximately 75.4 percent of total projected recurring
revenues.
3.2 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District
The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District(RCFPD)provides fire protection to both
the corporate City and the Sphere of Influence areas. Henderson Creek Estates is located
within the jurisdictional boundaries of the RCFPD.
Table 3-2 presents the projected recurring revenues to the Fire Protection District from the
full buildout of Henderson Creek Estates. Annual recurring property tax revenues are
projected to total $104.1 thousand after buildout.
Annual recurring fire protection costs are not projected for the Henderson Creek Estates
development. Based on the Plan for the Provision of Municipal Services Annexation No.
01-01 to the City of Rancho Cucamonga prepared by the City, the RCFPD currently has
adequate funding to provide fire protection within its jurisdictional boundaries.
3.3 Landscape Maintenance District
For Henderson Creek Estates, an LMD will be used to fund the ongoing operations and
maintenance costs related to any storm drains, slopes and trails within the project area. It
has not been determined at this time whether or not Henderson Creek Estates will be
annexed to an existing LMD of if a new LMD will be created. Under either condition, the
costs related to this function are entirely separate from the City's General Fund and there
will be no fiscal impact on the City's General Fund.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 11 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 53 of 72
TABLE 3-2
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
FISCAL IMPACTS AFTER BUILDOUT
(In Constant 2004 Dollars)
After Percent
Annual Recurring Revenues Buildout of Total
Property tax $104.10 100.0%
Total Recurring Revenues $104,100 100.0%
Annual Recurring Costs n/a1
Note: 1. The proposed development Iles within the jurisdictional boundaries of the Rancho Cucamonga
Fire Protection District(RCFPD). Based on the Plan for the Provision of Municipal Services
Annexation No.01-01 to The City of Rancho Cucamonga prepared by the City,the RCFPD
currently has adequate funding to provide fire protection services within its Jurisdictional boundaries.
Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 12 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 54 of 72
CHAPTER 4
FISCAL ASSUMPTIONS
Chapter 4 presents the recurring revenue and cost assumptions used in preparing the
fiscal analysis for Henderson Creek Estates in the City of Rancho Cucamonga.
4.1 General Information
Table 4-1 presents the general City information used to calculate fiscal factors.
Population.The City population of 146,666 is based on the California State Department of
Finance estimate as of January 1, 2003. The population estimate is used to project per
capita revenue and cost factors.
Housing Units. For calculating per housing unit factors,the City housing unit estimate of
46,870 from the State Department of Finance (DOF)for January 1, 2003 is used.
Employment. Based on information from the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the City's
current employment estimate is 47,205. This estimate is used to calculate revenues and
costs based on employment.
Population/Employment Ratio. New population and employment generate some
revenues and costs,which are calculated based on the split of population and employment
and the ratio of each to the sum of the two. The sum of population and employment is
193,871. Population represents 76 percent of the total and employment represents 24
percent of the total. The projected City revenues or costs are split based on this ratio.
That is, the share of projected revenues or costs allocated to population is divided by the
City population of 146,666 while the employment share of the projected revenues or costs
is divided by the City employment estimate of 47,205.
Estimated Total City Developed Acres Some costs, such as public works and planning,
are projected on a per-developed acre basis. The number of developed acres within the
City is estimated from City's Geographic Information System(GIS)and Costar databases,
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 13 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 55 of 72
TABLE 4-1
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS
Factor Explanation
General Factors
146,666 Rancho Cucamonga total population,January 1,2003, DOF
46,870 Rancho Cucamonga total housing units,January 1,2003, DOF
47,205 Rancho Cucamonga total employment,City Community and Economic Profile
193,871 Population plus employment
76% Population as a share of population plus employment
24% Employment as a share of population plus employment
3.13 Persons per Household,January 1,2003,DOF
3.15 Persons per Household,City of Rancho Cucamonga
12,990 Estimated total City developed acres
Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc.
City of Rancho Cucamonga,Fiscal Year 2003104,Adopted Budget
City of Rancho Cucamonga
State of California,Department of Finance,City/County Population and Housing Estimates,2003
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 14 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis _
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 56 of 72
as shown in Table 4-2. There are an estimated total of 9,544 developed residential acres
in the City; and a total of 3,446 developed non-residential acres within the City. In total,
12,990 developed acres are within the City.
4.2 Revenue Assumptions
The revenue assumptions for the City's General Fund are summarized in Table 4-3. Table
4-3 also summarizes the revenue assumptions for the Fire Protection District. Projected
recurring revenues to the City General Fund include property tax; document transfer tax;
off-site sales and use tax; Proposition 172 sales tax revenue; franchise fees; fines and
forfeitures; motor vehicle license in-lieu revenues; charges for services; other revenues
such as rental/leases/ and sales of fixed assets; library revenues and state gasoline tax
funds. Interest revenues are not projected in this analysis.
Taxes
Property Tax. Property tax revenues are projected by multiplying the tax allocation
percentage for the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Fund, Library Fund and the
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District by the projected assessed value within the tax
rate area(TRA)in which the project is located. As shown in Table 4-3,the City of Rancho
Cucamonga General Fund allocation is shown at 7.0 percent of the basic 1.0 percent levy.
Document Transfer Tax. Real property sales are taxed at a rate of$1.10 per$1,000 of
transferred property value. The property transfer tax is divided equally between the City
and the County, with the City receiving$0.55 per$1,000 of transferred property value. As
presented in Table 4-3, it is assumed that residential development will change ownership at
an average rate of about 7.0 percent per year, or that each home changes hands on the
average of about once every 14 years.
Off-Site Sales Tax. The City receives sales tax revenue from the State Board of
Equalization equal to one percent of all taxable sales generated within the City. The
Henderson Creek Estates development does not include on-site retail uses that would
generate direct taxable sales and use tax to the City upon annexation. However, indirect
sales and use tax revenues will be generated from purchases made by the residents of the
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 15 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 57 of 72
TABLE 4-2
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ESTIMATION OF EXISTING CITY DEVELOPED ACRES'
Residential Acres
Residential-Non RDA 8,261
Residential-RDA 1 263
Subtotal Residential Acres 9,544
Non-Residential Acres
Non-Residential-Non RDA 747
Non-Residential-RDA 2.699
Subtotal Non-Residential Acres 3,446
Estimated Total Developed Acres 12,990
Note: 1. Esitmated City right of way and other public1quasi public acres are not included as developable
acres.
Source: Stanley R.Hagman Assouates,Inc.
Cily of Rancho Cucamonga,Geographic Information System
Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Fiscal Analysis,General Plan Updafe,CityofRancho Cucamonga,October 2,2000
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 16 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 58 of 72
TABLE 4.3
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
SUMMARY OF REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS
(In Constant 2004 Dollars)
Revenues Projectlon Projection Method Annual
Revenue Source FY 20 roes Basis and/or Assumptions Projection Fact ors
CRY GENERAL FUND
Pn Taves $2,261,693 "S.e ml,aluauM Valuacr.sadni's s 70%CITY Ganem Fund all.don
d basic 1%levy
D..Transfer tax ]30,Si0 Assazsedvaluapon PropdxYNm,nxrwdv1mfian 2%raddernal Nmmer 2le
$0.55 per$1,000 of sumrrver gbalbn
$alesand J.Tax 14,626,M Taxable sake glade Wade.ales 10%of laraYk..I.
pNs
0.1015%.f.l.ax
Probbolion 172 Had Cans Sal.Tax 299,500 real..I.ad,use ryrr Per$1.0000 calse ad,use blr $20.Q per$1.CW sales and use lax
Ferre aFees:Gas 6 Eleclrb 2,423,180 TWI pPoUNtlm and empoynenl Par.0.ad,emple,ee $1250 Por cap0a and per emppym
Refuse 1,173,379 Toed Pasoan. PermPsa W 0 per Mesa
1,w"wo Tolalempbymenl Peremgoyee $27.73 par emplate9
Carle 889.200 Trial r.,units Parr unl $1097 per unit
Floes B Fmftllums 11357.IM Trial ebadlem ad,bran nnnl Per rapia ad,ermexee $545 par canis and per ensbyae
Manor VereM License 8,582.310 Tosl pablad. Mcaps 353.52 par glia
caag fire sprx. 120463 Tape poq,shon and empnenmet Per caps and empW a W 62 pe tabs and px ropbyee
Renmibaasas/Sales of Fried Aisne 98,830 Tonal actuation ass employment PK oapla and erepgyee $051 per caped and per anpbYea
Intends Eamin95 50010.0' Pp bdfnndraa L. IMerassram not prepared,
Library FUM
PI.Paty Tax. Na' Assassed,alrsOm Vacation ass,.s 1.7%City LIEmry FuM.11ccaim
of basic f%leeY
olaaryFnes.m F.. 110000 Teed Indication Pa qpm $0W ed,care
Uc2ry Rerrsls5ales 1021000 Total mpasem Pwgpe $0701'vicepie
Intn.l Earn., 15,000 Parma of NM revamea fine. a no lscaued
Gas Tat FUM
We fat Tex:Wean 2105 738,000 real de,culim per caps, $5.03 per cep0a
5.2108 465.770 TWlperyatipt per caps $3.18 par caps
5.2107 1.0ntm TOul lsope0on Per cape $716 per galla
IMaesl Eami,gs p.terfi,Mrwambe Ineem se ml p,,scod
RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE DISTRICT
Passed,Tax 7,W.M M..smxalcemn vwaem asaranpticns 1248%County Fire Fund.11caebn
ae s�1x00
Insra4 Eamon. 9fi0W Pemm olr�nd.
wl6.l masa r.ar zpavw.mfi rewrwa aeon.as roteaslfo,m.em.
a—SbMq R.Ibllmsr Ae.aNib.,fin[.
City of RvrMO c—nonda.HrtY Yen S.SW,gryphy Bulge(
Sale 0 CaXbmo.aepvamm of Fnarce,C9YiLouny PrpoblUn dryl xnnnp Essnae..January f,}MJ
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates,Inc. 17 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City or Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 59 of 72
proposed project estimated to be captured within the City. It is assumed the City of
Rancho Cucamonga will capture 50 percent of the taxable purchases made by the future
residents of Henderson Creek Estates. The 50 percent capture assumption is based on
the access to existing and planned retail within the City boundaries, including the future
Victoria Gardens Regional Mall due to open in 2004.
Residential Sales and Use Tax. Residents of Henderson Creek Estates will generate
sales and use tax to the City of Rancho Cucamonga through retail purchases in the City.
As shown in Table 44, taxable sales from Henderson Creek Estates residents are
projected at$6.68 million. Taxable sales are projected based on the assumption that the
average household income of project residents represents about 25 percent of the total
assessed valuation and that 32 percent of household income is spent on taxable retail
sales. The fiscal analysis assumes the City will capture 50 percent of total taxable retail
sales or about$3.34 million in taxable retail sales.
Based on sales tax of 1 percent, potential sales tax to the City is projected at $33.4
thousand after buildout. At 10.75 percent of sales tax, use tax is projected at $3.6
thousand after buildout. Use tax is non-situs taxable sales allocated back to jurisdictions
by the State. Total sales and use tax is projected at$37.0 thousand after buildout.
According to the March 16, 2004 City Budget Update memorandum from City Manager,
Jack Lam, one outcome of the recent passage of Proposition 57 is that the City will
experience %cent sales tax shift to the State instead of the earlier%cent shift proposal.
While this would reduce the sales tax generated by the project residents by about$9.3
thousand, the project would still be projected to have an annual recurring surplus of
approximately$30.9 thousand to $46.0 thousand.
Use Tax. In addition to sales tax, the City also receives a use tax allocation equal to
approximately 10.75 percent of the one percent sales tax allocation. The use tax factor is
derived from two major sources:
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 18 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 60 of 72
0 •
TABLE 4-4
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ESTIMATED TAXABLE SALES CAPTURE
(in Constant 2004 Dollars)
Description Amount
Residential Assessed Valuation(@$679,065 per unit), $83,525,000
Household Income(@ 25%of valuation) $20,881,250
Retail Taxable Sales(@ 32%of household income) $6,682,000
Projected Off-Site Taxable Sales Captured in Rancho Cucamonga(@ 50%capture) $3,341,000
Projected Sales and UseTax to Rancho Cucamonga:
Sales Tax(@ I%of taxable sales)
$33,410
Use Tax(@ 10.75%of sales tax) 3,592
Total Projected Sales and Use Tax $37,002
Note: 1. Assessed valuation is projected at an average of$679,065 per unit based on information provided by the
project proponent.
Sources: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 19 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 61 of 72
• A use tax rather than a sales taxis paid on construction materials from residential and
non-residential development. This tax is counted in the county in which construction
takes place, not at the point of sale of materials.
• A use tax is levied on purchases from out-of-state sellers of goods for use in California.
The State Board of Equalization assembles the use tax collections into a number of pools.
County pools for each county are based on tax proceeds assigned to a county level. A
statewide pool is developed for tax proceeds, which cannot be assigned to individual
counties. These pools of use tax proceeds are then distributed to individual cities and
counties on a quarterly basis. The distribution percentages to local jurisdictions for the
county pool are calculated on the basis of each city's and county's share of total
countywide non-situs based sales tax as a percentage of total point-of-sale, sales tax. A
similar procedure is used in the allocation of the statewide pool.
Proposition 172 Sales Tax (Public Safety Augmentation). The State's allocation
formula for public safety augmentation revenues from Proposition 172 is generally tied to
each city's sales tax effort. Therefore, based on Proposition 172 revenues of$299,500
and City sales tax revenues of$14,626,000,these revenues are projected at $20.48 per
$1,000 of additional sales tax generated.
Franchise Fees
The City of Rancho Cucamonga receives a franchise fee for the use of exclusive rights-of-
way within the City for gas and electric, refuse and cable television.
Gas and Electric Franchise Fees. As shown in Table 4-3,gas and electric franchise fees
are estimated at $12.50 per capita and per employee based on the City budget fees of
$2,423,180 and the City population plus City employment estimate of 193,871.
Refuse Franchise Fees. Franchise fees for rubbish services are projected at$8.00 per
capita, based on residential refuse costs of$1,173,379 and the population estimate of
146,666. Commercial (non-residential) refuse franchise fees are projected at$27.73 per
employee based on commercial refuse costs of$1,309,000 and employment of 47,205.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 20 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 62 of 72
Cable Television Franchise Fees. Cable television franchise fees are projected at
$18.97 per housing unit based on budget figures of$889,260 for this type of franchise and
estimated housing units of 46,870.
Fines and Forfeitures. These revenues are projected at $5.45 per capita and per
employee, based on total revenues of$1,057,180 and the population plus employment
estimate of 193,871.
Motor Vehicle In-Lieu Fees. These State allocated revenues,as shown in Table 4-3,are
projected at$58.52 per capita based on information from the City of Rancho Cucamonga
budget for fiscal year 2003-2004 and a population of 146,666 as of January 1, 2003.
Charges for Services. Charges for services are shown in Table 4-3 and include revenues
such as printing fees and sale of printed materials. This revenue source is projected at
$0.62 per capita and per employee, based on annual revenues of$120,460 and the City
population plus employment of 193,871.
Other Revenues. These other miscellaneous revenues include rentals,leases and sales
of fixed assets. Other revenues are projected at$0.51 per capita and employee based on
the City preliminary budget revenues of$98,830 and the City population plus employment
estimate of 193,871.
Interest Income. Interest earnings to the General Fund are not projected as a part of this
analysis.
Library Fund. As shown in Table 4-3, the City is projected to receive from property tax
revenues, 1.7 percent of the basic 1.0 percent levy for the Library Fund. In addition,library
revenues of$0.80 per capita are projected based on a total of$118,000 from fines and
fees and a population of 146,666. Library revenues of $0.70 per capita are projected
based on total media rentals and sales of$102,500 and population of 146,666. Interest
earnings are not projected as a significant revenue source.
State Gasoline Tax. State gasoline tax revenues are determined based on data provided
by the City's budget for fiscal year 2003-2004 and the City population of 146,666. These
revenues are projected based on the following:
Henderson Creek Estates
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates,Inc. 21 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
March 25, 2004
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 63 of 72
0
State Gasoline Tax Total Amount Per Capita Amount
Section 2105 $738,000 $5.03
Section 2106 $465,770 $3.18
Section 2107 $1,049,230 $7.15
No interest earnings are projected as a part of this analysis. Gas Tax Fund revenues are
earmarked for public works road related maintenance costs.
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District
The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) receives an estimated 12.46
percent of the basic one percent property tax levy for the Henderson Creek Estates
development. No interest earnings are projected as a part of this analysis.
4.3 Cost Assumptions
The cost assumptions for the City's General Fund are summarized in Table 4-5. Recurring
costs include police protection,animal control,public works, planning, building and safety,
community services, library, fire district and general government activities.
Police Protection. The City of Rancho Cucamonga contracts police protection services
with the County Sheriff. Table 4-6 presents the police cost estimation. Total annual costs
from the City's budget for 2003-2004 are$15,280,650. Based on discussion with the City
Finance Officer during preparation of the fiscal analysis of the General Plan Update, a
County Administrative Fee of $374,600 is subtracted from the total cost. The total net
police cost is $14,906,500, which is allocated to population and employment in their
relative proportions, yielding projected costs of$76.89 per capita and per employee.
Animal Control. Animal control costs are projected at$2.66 per capita,based on total net
costs of$390,490 and a population of 146,666, as shown in Table 4-5.
Public Works
Estimated public works costs are presented in Table 4-7.
Engineering. Based on City budget information, 2003-2004 engineering costs are
estimated to total$3,201,920,while engineering fee revenues are estimated at$1,259,680.
Net engineering costs of$1,942,240 are allocated on a per-developed acre basis.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 22 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 64 of 72
TABLE 4-5
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
SUMMARY OF COST ASSUMPTIONS
(In Constant 2004 Dollars)
Butlget FY 2003104 ProJecUon Projecgon Methotl Annual
Cos[Catagary Budget Net Cosl Basis andlor Assump0ons Pro,,
Fact one
CITY GENERAL FUND
Pd.P.Acam, $15280650$14,906,D50 Teter PopWatlm ant Emplamenl Pa bpila and employee $76.89 on tapila ant employee
Animal Control U52.250 $aW490 Tune PopugOm Percepts $266 per regia
Public Wales: emainreMp $3.201,920 $1.942,240 Total Developed Acres Per onreloped awe $149.52 Per developed ape
Puble Wpks'. Maintenance 54,551,620 $4,124,260 Tgal Wrekped Acres Pa dcvmc dacx Sal 7.49 per developed ape
Public Works: FdOlilie5 $1,903,950 S3W,790 ToGI@Wbped Apes Per developed dove Us.31 on developed a.
Perrin, $1,]49.]00 $999,7W Tolal WvebµV Apes Per davelPoed acre $69.26 per developed ape
Bulging and Salad'. $4,142,290 $0 Tdal Neekped Anes Per developed acre Na
Canmuni services Per develwed ape
lY $2,33],520 $2,J31,520 Trial glpllatlM Per rjpla 515.94 pn adN
Library sandals N,691,6W $11091,680 TM Pop,u n, Percepts $12.90 Per adla
Fire Dist1ict Transer $1.138,P0 $1.136,770T-01 Paceallm and Emplarmml Per gala and anployee S5.68 pn®plb am emplg2e
GenMl Goiemmenl $10,403,06a$10pa3,080 Blared Direct tine Ctna, 50%mipnalraler 15.3%W direct me cosh
canngen, SI18re oiT IG OL %d 15o%of named F
und wea
Note:1.}ae$9Ulalalpo mlmb Milbuigiiq®d saklyttffi breakeven ebb asvtialM lee�eenu45bAe e�gni
2.Maryvnal Nveaaeaq vnlnpanrywn aawmpEme an baeedm P2fyBl meNpbl�y.mllplbeGmersl%m llPdat
sourma SUnhoiRHoflman Assmatet,lnc.
Gryof RaM'no Cu mga.Fists'vei2W3 .AWpfed Budgo
slash,R.Hmhean Aaeppies,Festal A4alI Gmraelcnm las",,CAy d Randa Cucemm9e,Ddober 2,2900
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 23 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 65 of 72
TABLE 4-6
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
POLICE COST ESTIMATION'
(In Constant 2004 Dollars)
1. POLICE COSTS
Total 2003/04 Budget $15,280,650
minus
County Administrative Fee $374,600
equals
Net Police Costs $14,906,050
2. PER CAPITA/EMPLOYEE COSTS
City Population Estimate 146,666
City Employment Estimate 47,205
Population plus Employment 193,871
Per Capita/Per Employee Cost $76.89
Note: 1. Police cost estimation is based on the methodology used in the General Plan fiscal analysis.
Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc.
City of Rancho Cucamonga,Fiscal Year 20OW4,Adopted Budget
Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Fiscal Analysis,General Plan Update,City or Rancho
Cucamonga.October 2,2000
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 24 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 66 of 72
TABLE 4.7
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ESTIMATION OF PUBLIC WORKS COSTS
(In Constant 2004 Dollars)
1. ENGINEERING COSTS PER DEVELOPED ACRE $332,760
Engineering-Administration 825,700
Engineering-Construction Management 1,186,290
Engineering-Development Management 492,720
Engineering-NPDES Program 144,280
Engineering-Project Management 220.170
Engineering-Traffic Management
Total Engineering Costs $3,201,920
minus
Engineering Fees $1,209,680
Engineering Special Services Fees 50,000
Engineering Revenues $1,259,680
equals
Net Engineering Costs $1,942,240
divided by
Estimated Total Developed Acres 12.990
equals
Engineering Costs Per Developed Acre $149.52
2. PUBLIC WORKS MAINTENANCE COSTS PER DEVELOPED ACRE
Vehicle&Equipment Maintenance $854,740
times
Marginal Increase in Maintenance Vehicles 8 Equipment Q
50%
equals
Adjusted Maintenance Vehicles&Equipment plus $427,370
Maintenance Public Works 3,696,890
Total Public Works Maintenance Costs $4,124,260
divided by
Estimated Total Developed Acres 12,990
equals
Public Works Costs Per Developed Acre $317.49
3. FACILITIES MAINTENANCE COSTS PER DEVELOPED ACRE $1,903,950
Facilities Maintenance
times
Marginal Increase in Facilities Maintenance
20%
equals
Adjusted Facilities Maintenance $380,790
divided by
Estimated Total Developed Acres 12,990
equals
Facilities Maintenance Costs per Developed Acre $29.31
Note. i. Marginal increase assumptions are based on the fiscal melhodology used for the General Plan Update.
Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc.
City of Rancho Cucamonga,Fiscal Year 2003/04,Adopted Budget
Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Fiscal Analysis,General Plan Update.City o/Rancho Cucamonga.October 2,2000
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 25 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 67 of 72
Developed acres total 12,990 and net engineering costs are projected at $149.52 per
developed acre, as shown in Table 4-7.
Public Works Maintenance. Public works services include street maintenance and
sweeping, maintenance of parks and trees,city facilities,and storm drains. The City public
works budget totals$4,124,260. Public works costs are projected on a per-developed acre
basis. With an estimated 12,990 developed acres in the City, maintenance costs are
projected at$317.49 per developed acre, as shown in Table 4-7.
Facilities Maintenance.Total facilities maintenance costs in 2003-2004 are$1,903,950.
Based on the fiscal methodology used for the General Plan Update, it is assumed that the
proposed project would incur a marginal increase in facilities maintenance costs of 20
percent, or an increase of$380,790. This marginal increase of$380,790 is divided by the
total 12,990 estimated developed acres, for projected facilities maintenance costs of
$29.31 per developed acre, also shown in Table 4-7.
Planning Department
Table 4-8 presents the estimation of both the Planning Department costs and the Building
and Safety Department costs. These costs are projected on a per-developed acre basis.
Planning. As shown in Table 4-8, Planning Department functions total $1,749,700,
according to the budget for fiscal year 2003-2004. Planning fee and special program fee
revenues for the same period total$850,000,for estimated net planning costs of$899,700.
Using estimated developed acres of 12,990; planning costs are projected at $69.26 per
developed acre.
Building and Safetv. Table 4-8 also presents the estimation of the Building and Safety
Department costs. As shown, Building and Safety costs total$4,142,290, according to the
2003-2004 budget. Building permit and plan check fee revenues for the same period total
$4,316,200,for estimated surplus of$173,910. The fiscal analysis assumes that building
and safety costs breakeven with building permit and plan check fee revenues, thus
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 26 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 68 of 72
TABLE 4.8
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES '.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ESTIMATION OF PLANNING AND BUILDING AND SAFETY COSTS
(In Constant 2004 Dollars)
1. PLANNING COSTS PER DEVELOPED ACRE
Planning $1,749,700
minus
Planning Fees $800,000
Planning- Special Services Fee 50 000
Planning Revenues $850,000
equals
Net Planning Costs $899,700
divided by
Estimated Total Developed Acres 12.990
equals
Net Planning Costs per Developed Acre $69.26
2. BUILDING AND SAFETY COSTS PER DEVELOPED ACRE
Building and Safety $4,142,290
minus
Building Permits $2,676,200
Plan Check Fees 1,640,000
Building and Safety Revenues $4,316,200
equals
Net Building and Safety Costal $173,910
Note: 1. The fiscal analysis assumes that costs for Building and Safety for Henderson Greek Estates will breakeven with
associated fee reVanues.
Source: Stanley R.HoRman Associates,Inc.
City of Rancho Cucamonga,Fiscal Year 2003 1,Adopted Budget
Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Fiscal Analysis,General Plan Update,Chi,of Rancho Cucamonga,October 2.2000
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 27 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analvsis -
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 69 of 72
balancing building and safety costs in the long term. The line item of building and safety
costs is not projected in the fiscal analysis.
Community Services. As shown in Table 4-5, City Community Services costs are
estimated to total$2,337,520 in 2003-2004. On a per capita basis,this cost is projected at
$15.94.
Libra . As shown in Table 4-5, the Rancho Cucamonga library costs are projected at
$12.90 per capita, based on a library annual budget of $1,891,680 and population of
146,666.
Fire District Transfer. Based on the proposed fiscal year 2003-2004 budget the General
Fund is transferring $1,136,770 to the Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District to
supplement the District's other funding sources. Based on the total population and
employment estimate of 193,871, the General Fund transfer cost to the Fire Protection
District is projected at$5.86 per capita and employee.
General Government Costs. Table 4-9 presents the estimation of general government
costs. All City costs are categorized as either general government costs or non-general
government costs. General Government costs are related to City administration and are
generally not associated with direct line department services to City residents or
employees. Non-general government functions provide direct services, such as animal
control, police, or community services.
As shown in Table 4-9, general government costs are estimated at $10,483,060. Non-
general government costs are estimated to total$34,330,390. The general government as
a percent of non-general government costs is equal to 30.5 percent. Due to economies of
scale, it is estimated that the marginal increase in general government costs would be one
half of this amount, or 15.3 percent. The 50 percent marginal increase in general
government costs is based on the fiscal methodology for the General Plan Update.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 28 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Anaivsis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 70 of 72
TABLE 4-9
HENDERSON CREEK ESTATES
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
ESTIMATION OF GENERAL GOVERNMENT COSTS
(In Constant 2004 Dollars)
,11:GENERAL FLIWEXPENDITLIRIES.
General Non-General
Total Government Government
Non-Departmental General $3,278,500 $3.278,500
Non-Departmental Personnel 218,030 218,030
Cry Council 90,850 90,850
City Manager 801,140 801,140
City Clerk 371,430 371,430
Animal Control Services 452.250 452,250
Emergency Preparedness 122,090 122.090
Administrative Services-Administration 377,170 377.170
Business Licensing 209,380 209,380
City Facilities 1,485.860 1,485,860
Finance 604.650 604,650
Geographic Information Systems 3134.890 304,890
Management Information Systems 1,938.140 1.938.140
Personnel 291,270 291,270
Purchasing 340,890 340,890
Risk Management 167,220 167,220
Treasury Management 3,640 3'64H0
Community Development Administration 0 0
Building&Safety 4,142,290 4.142,290
Engineering-Administration 332,760 332,760
Engineering-Construction Management 825,700 825,700
Engineerfing-Development Management 1,186,290 1,186.2%
Engineering-NPDES 492,720 492,720
Engineering-Project Management 144,280 144,280
Engineenrig-Traffic Management 220,710 220.710
Facilities Maintenance 1,903,950 1S03,950
Integrated Waste Management 624,310 624,310
Planning 1,749,700 1,749,700
Planning Commission 9,570 9,570
Street and Park Maintenance 3,648,130 3,648,130
Vehicle&Equipment Maintenance 854,740 854,740
Community Services-Administration 2,337,520 2,337,520
Park and Recreation Commission 2,730 2,730
Fire Administration 0 0
Police Administration 15,280.650 15,280.650
Redevelopment Agency Administration 0 9
GRAND TOTAL GENERAL FUND S41,813,450 $10,483,060 $34,330,390
21'CALCULATION OF GENERAL,GOVERNMENT.COSTS::,
Estimated General Government Expenditures $10,483,060
divided by
Estimated Non-General Government Expenditures $34.330.390
equals
General Govesmoreent as percent of Non-General Government Costs 30.5%
Marginal Increase in General Government Costs @ 50%' 15.3%
Note 1 Marginal Increase assumptions are based on the fiscal methodology used for the General Plan Jiduats
Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc
City of Rancho Cucamonga.Fiscal Year 200N04,Adopted Budget
Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Fiscal Analysis,General Plan update,City of Rancho Gvc..-oga,October 2. 2000
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 29 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 71 of 72
0
Contingency Costs. City General Fund contingency costs of 15 percent are applied to
projected costs to account for budget and economic uncertainties. The contingency cost
factor of 15 percent is based on discussion with City Finance Department staff during
preparation of the fiscal analysis of the General Plan Update.
Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District
Annual recurring fire protection costs are not projected for the Henderson Creek Estates
project. Based on the Plan for the Provision of Municipal Services Annexation No. 01-01 to
the City of Rancho Cucamonga prepared by the City,the RCFPD currently has adequate
funding to provide fire protection within it jurisdictional boundaries.
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 30 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis
Resolution No. 04-208
Page 72 of 72
APPENDIX A
PERSONS AND AGENCIES CONTACTED
City of Rancho Cucamonga
Debra Meier, AICP
909-477-2700
County of San Bernardino
Local Agency Formation Commission
Deputy Executive Officer
909-387-5869
County of San Bernardino
Auditor Controller's Office
909-386-8831
O'Donnell/Atkins
Mackey J. O'Donnell
949-705-5600
SPS Development Services, Inc.
Steven Paul Stewart
714-839-0850
Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 31 Henderson Creek Estates
March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis