Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-241 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 04-241 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 NORTH OF THE LOWER SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON (SCE) CORRIDOR BETWEEN ETIWANDA AVENUE AND EAST AVENUE,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 by way of Resolution No. 04-240 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. 04-241 Page 2 of 71 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. Traigh Pacific (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 SUBTT14749,and associated Development Agreement. The actions also include the development 107.28 acres of the 168.77-acre site with 269 single-family housing units (99.26 acres), park area (3.1 acres), equestrian park (2.7 acres), equestrian trail (0.44 acres), and drainage channel (1.77 acres). The development would have a gross density of 1.59 dwelling units per acre, and a net density of 2.5 dwelling units per acre. The remaining 61.49 acres will continue to be used for flood control purposes. The proposed annexation action encompasses a total of 240 acres and includes the development site plus adjacent parcels owned by Southern California Edison and San Bernardino County Flood Control District. These series of actions and approvals are hereinafter defined in this Ordinance as the "Project." b. Applicant has submitted the following applications relating to the Project: Annexation DRC2003-01051, General Plan Land Use Amendment DRC2003-00410, Etiwanda North Specific Plan Amendment DRC2003- 00409,Tentative Tract Map SUBTT14749,and Development Agreement DRC2003-00411 (collectively the"Project Applications"). These Project Applications, as well as the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT14749, 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. 2003081085). The Draft EIR was circulated fora 45- day public review and comment period from December 5, 2003,through January 28, 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. Those documents,togetherwith the Draft EIR and Appendices,comprise the Final EIR. Resolution No. 04-241 Page 3 of 71 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. 04-240, 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: L 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 Final EIR, public comments, public agency comments, and the entire record before it,that the Project may create significant impacts in the areas of: Earth Resources, Water Resources,Transportation/Circulation,Air Quality, Biological Resources, Hazards, Noise, Public Services, Utilities, Aesthetics, and Cultural Resources. 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 Resolution No. 04-241 Page 4 of 71 Project (Exhibit "F" to the July 21, 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: I. Earth Resources. The Final EIR finds that development of the Project would expose people and structures to risks associated with seismic ground shaking produced by numerous regional faults. Additionally, development of the project would require removal of vegetation to prepare for grading; this would create a short-term increased potential for topsoil erosion. Potential erosion in the long- term would result from increased surface runoff rates due to road paving and construction of impermeable structures. Mitigation measures are imposed which require a detailed geologic and geotechnical investigation for each lot prior to the grading of the Project site. Specifically,the developer must:demonstrate that each lot is buildable and complies with recommendations and specifications found in the geotechnical investigation report included in Appendix C of the Final EIR (Mitigation Measure 3-1); identify potential geologic and soil limitations and recommend appropriate engineering and design measures to adequately protect structures and inhabitants (Mitigation Measure 3-2); and identify these construction measures on applicable grading plans, and implement them to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Further, mitigation measures are imposed on the project that require preparation and approval of a Dust Control Plan and a Landscape and Irrigation Plan to reduce the likelihood of erosion (Mitigation Measures 3-4 and 3-5). Based on these mitigation measures, and the additional ones contained in the Final EIR, the City Council finds that the effects of seismic shaking on persons and structures and the possibility of erosion will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. ii. Water Resources. The Final EIR identifies that conversion of the Project site to urban uses would increase the amount of sediment, suspended debris, landscape maintenance or associated chemicals (e.g.,fertilizers, herbicides,etc.), and materials related to automotive wear(e.g., tire rubber, oil, antifreeze, etc.)that would reach the local drainage system due to run-off caused by grading or by being washed off streets during storm events or street-sweeping activities. Mitigation measures imposed on the applicant would require the Project developer to apply for and receive a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and, if necessary, to obtain Clean Water Act Section 401 and 404 permits (for water quality certification for dredge and fill operations); additionally, the developer will be required to implement all applicable Best Management Practices (BMPs)to prevent construction of the Project from polluting surface and ground waters. The City Council finds that Resolution No. 04-241 Page 5 of 71 implementation of this mitigation measure will mitigate impacts on water quality to a level of less than insignificant. Additionally, the Final EIR identifies that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has identified the Project site as within a flood zone designated "Flood Zone D." Mitigation measures will require the developer to install a revetment along the East Etiwanda Channel adjacent to the Project site, and implement on-and off-site drainage system improvements outlined in the Project Drainage Study (Appendix D of the draft EIR). The City Council finds that the revetment and drainage improvements will reduce flood impacts associated with the Project to a level of less than significant. iii. Transportation and Circulation. The Final EIR indicates that the proposed Project would increase vehicle trips and impact the level of service along arterial streets and intersections; specifically, the Project is anticipated to generate a total of 2,956 daily vehicle trips at build-out. Further, it is assumed that at build-out 68 percent of the Project traffic would enter/exit the site along Etiwanda Avenue,while 32 percent would use East Avenue; this distribution would cause some roads to be more intensely affected than others. Additionally, the Final EIR found that the level of service at the intersection of Etiwanda and Highland Avenues could be reduced to a "D" level during the morning peak hour at full build-out. Mitigation Measures are imposed to require the developer to contribute a fair share to the traffic signal mitigation program of the County of San Bernardino and/or the City of Rancho Cucamonga to help fund the construction of traffic signals at the intersections of: Day Creek Boulevard/Banyan Avenue; Day Creek Boulevard/SR-210 West-bound ramp; Day Creek Boulevard/SR 210 East-bound ramp; Etiwanda Avenue/Banyan Avenue; Etiwanda Avenue/Wilson Avenue;and East Avenue/Banyan Avenue. Further, the developer will be required to pay a "fair share" contribution towards off-site impacts to linked roadways and intersections as outlined in the Project traffic report; this "fair share" amount is approximately $63,818 as of the date of the traffic study. The City Council finds that based on these mitigation measures, traffic at the study intersections will be reduced to operate at a level of service of D or better (with all but one intersection operating at level of service C or better) and that the impacts of the Project on Traffic and Circulation will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. Iv. Air Quality. The Final EIR identifies that the Project may create significant and unavoidable impacts on 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 short-term and can cause nuisance impacts to adjacent land uses in the local area by way of fugitive dust produced by Resolution No. 04-241 Page 6 of 71 grading of the site. In addition, construction-related emissions, particularly from architectural coatings (painting)and off-road diesel equipment, are anticipated to produce significant levels of reactive organic compounds (ROC) and nitrogen oxides (NO,) that would exceed SCAQMD thresholds of significance and result in significant short-term air pollution impacts. Comprehensive mitigation measures (Mitigation Measures 6-1 - 6-10) are imposed on the Project which will require various dust control measures, emission control measures, and off-site actions. Included in those measures are requirements to ensure that all construction equipment is properly serviced and maintained and that trucks are not left idling for prolonged periods(i.e., in excess of 10 minutes), reestablishment of ground cover through seeding and watering, phased grading to prevent the susceptibility of large areas to erosion over extended periods of time, suspension of grading operations during periods of high wind (i.e.,wind speeds exceeding 25 mph),and regular washing and sweeping of the site. The Final EIR also indicates that the Project would produce long-term impacts on Air Quality as a result of the additional external vehicle trips that will be generated, and their attendant production of NO, and PM10 in excess of SCAQMD standards. Further, secondary impact potential would derive from energy consumption by on-site residential heaters, stoves, water heaters, and similar consumptive appliances. Mitigation measures imposed on the Project to reduce long-term impacts include requiring the developer to demonstrate that all residential structures have incorporated high-efficiency/low-polluting heating, air conditioning, appliances,and water heaters(Mitigation Measure 6-11),and that all residential structures have incorporated thermal pane windows and weather-stripping (Mitigation Measure 6-12). Further, the developer will be required to make a fair share contribution to a "park and ride" facility along the 1-15 or 1-10 freeways, as well as construct a bus stop/shelter at the trailhead park, if directed by OmniTrans. The City Council finds that with the implementation of the recommended mitigation measures directed at both short- and long-term impacts, emissions will be reduced and the Project's contribution to regional emission of criterial pollutants will be minimized. However, the City Council finds that despite the imposition of all of these comprehensive mitigation requirements, the Project will produce significant short- and long-term impacts on Air Quality due to emissions, and that these impacts will remain significant after mitigation. v. Biological Resources. The Final EIR indicates that, prior to the Grand Prix fire in October 2003, the Project site contained approximately 109 acres of sage scrub (including white sage),along with California buckwheat,California filago,valley Iessingia, popcorn flower, and common phacelia; the Project will eliminate this vegetation through development of the area. Further, the Project will Resolution No. 04-241 Page 7 of 71 impact sensitive plant species present on the site (as determined before the 2003 wildfire) including Plummer's mariposa lily, Pious daisy, and four separate types of spineflowers (Ramona, prostrate, California, and Parry's). Development of the site will also impact wildlife corridors and will remove habitat that supports a number of sensitive species that were either observed onsite or have a moderate to high potential to occur onsite, including the sharp- shinned hawk, Southern California rufous-crowned sparrow, red- shouldered hawk,white-tailed kite, northern harrier, Cooper's hawk, San Diego horned lizard, and orange-throated whiptail. The Final EIR indicated that the California gnatcatcher (a federally listed threatened species) has not been observed on-site and has a low probability of occurring on the site due to the type of vegetation present. Also, the Final EIR found that while a portion of the Project site (the Etiwanda Creek channel)is within the historical range fo the endangered San Bernardino Kangaroo Rat(SBKR), since the creek channel is not proposed for development, the Project will not cause direct impacts to the SBKR. The Final EIR further found that development of the site will remove 0.48 acres of land in four small drainages that are under Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) jurisdiction, but that none of these areas is considered a wetland. The Final EIR found that the Project is not consistent with the goals of the North Etiwanda Open Space and Habitat Preservation Program (NEOSHPP) since it does not include any on-site preservation of open space lands. Mitigation measures have been imposed on the project to require the Project developer to acquire and convey to the County approximately 164 acres of land as off-site mitigation land. This 164-acre area is intended to accomplish a 1:5 to 1 ratio to mitigate for the loss of the approximately 109 acres of sage scrub and to mitigate the potential loss of habitat for sensitive plants and animal species. The City finds that the recommended mitigation measures will help reduce potentially significant impacts regarding the loss of habitat, but that the impacts will remain significant after mitigation. vi. Hazards. The Final EIR identifies that the Project would expose people and structures to potential hazards due to the possibility of hazardous materials spills on nearby state highways, and due to the minor use of chemicals and other materials typical of suburban uses. Additionally,the Project would expose more people and structures to potential wildfire hazards, and would expose more people to potentially dangerous wildlife/human encounters. Mitigation measures imposed will require submission of a plan detailing proper clean-up efforts for any hazardous or toxic substance that is discovered or released during construction (Mitigation Measure 9-1); development of fuel modification zones, and the requirement of "firewise"landscaping and the use of fire-resistant building materials Resolution No. 04-241 Page 8 of 71 to reduce fire hazards (Mitigation Measures 9-2 - 9-4); and the posting of signs warning of the potential risk of wildlife/human interactions on the site (Mitigation Measure 9-8). The City Council finds that after implementation of these measures, potentially significant impacts relating to Hazards will be reduced to a level of less than significant. vii. 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;earth-moving equipment is anticipated to create noise up to 90-dB. 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 10-2). Based on this mitigation measure, the City Council finds that the short term noise impacts from the Project will be reduced to less than significant levels. The Final EIR also identified that noise levels would increase in the long-term due to additional motor vehicle noise and from general human activity. In the opening year (2005), noise levels at fifty feet from the centerline of area roadways would range from a low of 58.1 CNEL along Wilson Avenue east of Etiwanda Avenue to a high of 78.3 CNEL along Highland Avenue east of Etiwanda Avenue. A mitigation measure will be imposed to require the developer to document that exterior residential areas will have exterior noise levels of less than 65 dB CNEL (Mitigation Measure 10-5), and that interior living area noise levels are less than 45 dB CNEL (Mitigation Measure 10-6). Further,the developer will be required to incorporate site designs and measures to help reduce proposed noise levels over the long-term. The City Council finds that based on these mitigation measures, the potential noise impacts of the Project on current and future residents will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. viii. Public Services. The Final EIR identifies that due to population increases associated with the Project, the proposed Project would incrementally increase the need for public services in the areas of fire protection, police protection, schools, libraries, medical services,and roads. A mitigation measure is imposed to require the developer to pay all legally established public service fees, including police, fire, schools, parks, and library fees (Mitigation Measure 11-1). Additionally, in order to reduce the number of fire incidents requiring response by the City's Fire Department,the project developer would be required to obtain approval from the Fire Department with regard to adequate fire flow and installation of acceptable fire-resistant structural materials in project buildings (Mitigation Measure 11-3). Additionally, the developer will be required to post a bond in an amount sufficient to ensure installation and maintenance of public Resolution No. 04-241 Page 9 of 71 and private roads, and drainage facilities necessary for each phase of the project (Mitigation Measure 11-5). The City Council finds that the imposition and implementation of these mitigation measures will mitigate the Project's impacts on Public Services to a level of less than significant. ix. Utilities. The Final EIR identifies that the Project would create potentially significant impacts as a result of new residential water requirements of approximately 602,819 gallons of water per day;this water would be provided from an existing two million gallon water reservoir via an existing water main, however,as growth continues in the Project area, additional offsite water storage facilities would be required. Further, the Final EIR indicates that based on an estimate of 270 gallons of wastewater per unit per day being produced, the Project would require construction of a sewer main to transport the wastewater to an existing sewage treatment plant. Additionally, the Project would generate the need for increased electricity, natural gas, and telephone and television cables,and would increase the amount of solid waste produced.A mitigation measure imposed requires the contribution of funds for sewer service (Mitigation Measure 12-1). Further mitigation measures require submission of development plans to Southern California Edison,the Gas Company,and Verizon in order to facilitate engineering design and construction of improvements necessary to provide electrical, natural gas, and telephone service to the Project;these companies must also provide "will-serve" letters in order for building permits to issue. The City Council finds that imposition of these mitigation measures will reduce the impacts of the Project on Utilities to a level of less than significant. x. Aesthetics. The Final EIR identifies that the Project may create significant and unavoidable impacts on Aesthetics. In the short-term, the landscape would be altered by grading and clearing,and views of the Project site would include the heavy construction equipment and machinery used to prepare the Project site for construction of new homes. Long-term impacts would occur due to a fundamental change in the visual and aesthetic character of the area, and would transform the existing natural terrain into a developed and planned community. Additionally, the presence of homes would mean more lighting at night, as well as increased glare due to additional windows in the community. Mitigation measures will require that outdoor lighting comply with the requirements of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan design guidelines and the City's General Plan (Mitigation Measure 13-1), and that a detailed landscaping and wall treatment plan be prepared (Mitigation Measure 13-5). Even with the imposition and implementation of these and other mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the impact of the Project on Aesthetics will remain significant after mitigation. Resolution No. 04-241 Page 10 of 71 xi. Cultural Resources. The Final EIR identifies that while the existence of paleontological resources is unlikely on the Project site, such resources may be discovered during construction of the Project. Also, one historic archeological site was previously recorded on the property, CA-SBR-3131 H. This prior survey found what appeared to be the remains of a construction camp used by the Etiwanda Water Company in the 1880s; the structure consisted of rock walls, hand- forged metal barrel hoops and nails, barbed wire, and glass fragments. Mitigation measures imposed require that a qualified paleontologist conduct a preconstruction Feld survey of the Project site and submit a report of findings and specific recommendations for further mitigation measures (Mitigation Measure 14-1). Should any prehistoric archaeological resources be found before or during grading, a qualified archaeologist would be retained to monitor construction activities, and take appropriate measures to protect or preserve the resources. The City Council finds that with the implementation of these mitigation measures,the Project will have a less than significant impact on paleontological, archaeological, and historical resources. xii. Cumulative Impacts — Air Quality, Biological Resources, and Aesthetics. The Final EIR provides that this Project, together with the construction of other development projects in the vicinity, would create cumulative short-term impacts to air quality during construction. This Project would also create a significant cumulative impact to regional air quality due to additional vehicle emissions adding incremental pollutants within the South Coast Air Basin. With respect to biological resources, the Final EIR concluded that the Project would contribute to cumulatively considerable biological impacts with loss of habitat and restriction of wildlife movement in the fan area due to encroachment of human structures and activities. With respect to aesthetics, the proposed project will contribute incrementally to cumulatively considerable aesthetic impacts related to the visual character of the area going from largely vacant, rural terrain to low density suburban development. L 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), biological resources related to the loss of habitat, and aesthetics related to short- term views (i.e. construction activities and dust) and long-term views related to transforming the existing natural terrain into a residential community. 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 'Rural Density Alterative,"development under the existing land use designation. Other alternatives that were considered and rejected included the alternative location alternative and the alternative land use alternative. Resolution No. 04-241 Page 11 of 71 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) Annexation of approximately 240 acres, including the 168.77 Project site and adjacent utility easements and corridors, 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; 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) Under the "No Project-No Development Alternative"the project site would remain vacant which would avoid all significant project specific impacts, although cumulative impacts including traffic, noise,and air quality would eventually occur, but not to the same degree as if the proposed Project were built. This alternative would eliminate essentially all of the adverse impacts of the proposed Project and is, therefore, an environmentally superior alternative. This alternative does not meet the Project's basic objectives of developing a residential project consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the site. Resolution No. 04-241 Page 12 of 71 iii) Under the "No Project — Open Space Alternative" the site would remain vacant but be acquired, fenced, and maintained for open space and biological habitat as part of the NEOSHPP plan. This alternative would avoid all the significant impacts of developing the property, however,cumulative impacts including traffic,noise,and air quality, will eventually occur regardless of whether the site is developed or preserved,although perhaps not to the same degree as with the proposed Project. This is an environmentally superior alternative but does not meet the Project's basic objectives, and indeed all other objectives, of developing a project consistent with the General Plan land use designation for the site. iv) Under the"Reduced Intensity Alternative"almost all of the significant or potentially significant impacts associated with the proposed project would be eliminated. The remaining significant impact (i.e., construction emissions) could probably not be eliminated or significantly reduced by the implementation of any feasible alternative or mitigation measures at this time, unless the project were to support all custom lots of one acre or more where only building pads are graded when needed. However, the Project fiscal report indicates that fewer, larger residential lots/units would not generate sufficient public revenues to offset costs to provide services. While this alternative is environmentally superior to the proposed Project,it does not meet the Project's economic objectives of developing a residential project that has a positive cost/benefit ratio for the City and generates a reasonable return on investment. Also, since this alternative does not fully implement the City's goal of providing adequate park facilities for City residents. v) The "Modified Site Plan Alternative" would create a 300-foot wide buffer along the west bank of the East Etiwanda Creek to better buffer wildlife movement and create more open space. It would cluster the residential development in the southwestern portion of the site and would have 200 units with a minimum lot size of 6,000 square feet and a height limit of one story. It would eliminate the significant impacts of the proposed project-related long-term air quality (NOx and ROG emissions). However, potentially significant impacts related to short-term air pollutant emissions (ROG)and loss of biological resources would remain. Also, this alternative does not meet the Project's economic objectives of developing a residential project that has a positive cost/benefit ratio for the City and generates a reasonable return on investment. This alternative is marginally superior to the proposed Project in terms of environmental impacts, but it does not meet the Project objectives. vi) The"Rural Density Alterative"would development the site under the City's currently designated of Very Low density residential (VL)which allows a maximum of 2 units per acre of developable land with Resolution No. 04-241 Page 13 of 71 minimum 20,000 square foot lots. This alternative would locate approximately 75 units on 37 acres in the southern portion of the site, while the remaining 70 acres would be set aside as open space and biological habitat. This alternative would eliminate the significant impacts of the proposed Project related to biological resources related to loss of alluvial fan habitat and long-term air quality from NOx and ROG emissions. This alternative still has significant impacts related to short-term air pollutant emissions(ROG)and does not provide the benefits of two parks. Also, this alternative does not meet the Project's economic objectives of developing a residential project that has a positive cost/benefit ratio for the City and generates a reasonable return on investment. As such, it does not meet the Project's goals. This alternative is environmentally superior to the proposed Project, but it does not meet the Project objectives 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 July 21, 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 related to vehicle emissions; impacts to biological resources related to removal of habitat; and short-term impacts to aesthetics (i.e. construction dust obscuring views) and long-term impacts to aesthetics (changes to the natural terrain). 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 hereby finds that any unavoidable impacts of the Project, including the mitigated but unavoidable impacts to short-term and long-term impacts on air quality and aesthetics, and project related and cumulative impacts to biological resources, 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 consistent with 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 approximately 240 acres including the 168.77-acre Project site and adjacent utility easements and corridors into the City of Rancho Cucamonga; Resolution No. 04-241 Page 14 of 71 (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; (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 July 21, 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 San Bernardino. Resolution No. 04-241 Page 15 of 71 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 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. 04-241 Page 16 of 71 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 21" day of July 2004. AYES: Alexander, Gutierrez, Howdyshell, Kurth, Williams NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAINED: None illiam J. Aly. can r, Mayo" ATTEST: A��'; Debra J. Ada MC, 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 21't day of July 2004. Executed this 22nd day of July 2004, at Rancho Cucamonga, California. De ra J. Adams, C, City Clerk Resolution No. 04-241 Page 17 of 71 CITE'OF RANCHO CUCAMONGF JUN p �" 200; RECEIVED- PLANNING Exhibit "A" Annexation to the City of Rancho Cucamonga LAFCO No. That parcel of land in an unincorporated area of Rancho Cucamonga,being all of the NW Quarter, and the West Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 21,Townshipl North,Range 6 West,San Bernardino Meridian,in the County of San Bernardino,State of California,more particularly describes as follows: BEGINNING at a northeast comer of the existing boundary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, as established on"LAFCO No.2879",said point also being the Northwest Comer of said Section 21; Thence leaving said existing city boundary line and continuing easterly along the northerly line of said Section 21 the following courses: 1. North 89°14'16"East, 1325.26 feet; 2. North 890 14'56"East, 1325.25 feet; 3. North 89° 14' 48"West, 1324.89 feet to the northeast comer of the West Half of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 21; 4. Thence southerly along the east line of said west half, South 00°00'55"West, 2641.71 feet to the Southeast comer of said west half; Thence continuing westerly along the southerly line of the North Half of said Section 21 the following courses: 5. South 89° 16'39"West, 1324.88 feet; 6. South 890 17'08"West, 1325.19 feet; 7. South 89° 14'13"West, 1324.98 feet to a point on the west line of said Section 21,being also a point on the existing boundary of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as established by said LAFCO No. 2879; 8. Thence continuing northerly along the existing city boundary line and said section line,North 000 00'30"East, 2640.16 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. Page 1 of 2 Resolution No. 04-241 Page 18 of 71 This proposed annexation contains 240.97 acres, more or less. This legal description was prepared by me or under my direction. By: Robert D. Vasquez, L.S. 7300 Date Deputy County Surveyor Job No. Prepared by RDV Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT ' B ' NW 1/4, AND W 1/2, NE 1/4 OF SECTION 21 T 1 N, R 6 W, S.B.M. cox. SEC zl c xE cpl x f'cq1 x urco i'zelo' m-ol U69ONI@®R®®WAT90 ?(Smug O8mW9 xi /x stc YI N 'LY L3NE M b£1. 21. TIN. N6R s&, X08'1<'16'E IE5.26' N09'II'S6'f 1325.25' MW']4'40"E 1321.09' 6xIGHm scLLE r•soo' 2zso23-a aoN o eoo IzSo lE9 1MC11111 W' 22]-001-01 0 t Et as-OB}m 225-404-03 - a m ® % 2P-Oe3-ze BM g j z WA d ry Q H ® ® z P7'w 1I Ile w pem W O < ty ea = ® b a ode as o a ��$ N f9 A w. BBo g b LEGEND: 14�L EXISTING CITY OF RANCHO,CUCAMONGA ® < £ -oe3-as iY.<M3-02 zz}Me}� a6-Bel oz BOUNDARY LINE Q S 22Sbe1-OS -PROPOSED ANNEXATION BOUNDARY b � W 415-003-05 THIS ANNEXATION PROPOSAL CONTAINS ECJ cEx12VI 240.91 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. �' MEC 2I1 Mvx, N /2. a3-00}% 22YI00]-il © fl/1 SE[21 25TH STREE ao-0e]-z xv'm']s-N 13zl.ea' -- - 6ev."W. fssl.ve' uv'n've0 I..Iv PROPOSED �' I /ZRN. 6'LY LINE W VM N 1/2 MEC. 21. 11N, x6M, seM ANNE%. AREA 4EL9 i 2510 ' na' 4D GIOmS®WP®WATR® Tamm OT®mtl CITY OF RANCHO CVCANOMIA MIN SM M SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY SURVEYOR VAN AFFECTED AGENCIES w.^25 E mTOnrtl Street Sen BernerOlno, CA 92415-0!135 CRY OF RANCHO CUCAMONG4 ] A 15 �wE.Im.AxD RDv .0.M aN ANNEXATION TO THE CITY DANIEL C. MDYE OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DO O .$kxN" �x1wmN5 L4FC0 NO. C LOCATED EAST OF EDWANDA/NORTH WILSON SON AVE. d � VICINI-um�se — a•- soo Nxi.o. �L m• ((DD O CO O O A V-4 N A Resolution No. 04-241 Page 20 of 71 PLAN FOR SERVICES City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division Contact: Brad Buller, City Planner Debra Meier, AICP, Associate Planner Prepared for: Annexation of 240 Acres to the City of Rancho Cucamonga - Tentative Tract 14749 and adjacent lands Prepared By: City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga CA 91721 909-477-2750 March 9, 2004 I r lI 1 l� Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 21 of 71 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 10 A. Roadways and Transportation Services 10 B. Electricity 10 C. Natural Gas 10 D. Telephone 10 E. Drainage Services 11 F. Water Services 11 G. Sewer Services 12 H. Police Services 12 I. Fire Protection &Ambulance Services 12 J. Libraries 13 K. Street Lighting 13 L. Solid Waste Services 13 M. School Services 14 N. Parks & Recreation Services 14 IV. Fiscal Analysis 15 2 Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 22 of 71 EXHIBITS Figure Page 1. Vicinity Map 4 2. Annexation Map 7 3 Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 23 of 71 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 between Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue north of the lower SCE power line corridor, in an unincorporated area of San Bernardino County within the City of Rancho Cucamonga's Sphere of Influence. The area has been pre-zoned by virtue of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan (ENSP), which was approved by the City Council in 1992. The proposed annexation includes a total of 240-acres. Within the 240-acres, 107 acres is proposed for residential development (Tract 14749), 93-acres is owned and controlled by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District for the Etiwanda Creek basin and drainage system, and approximately 40-acres are within two SCE powerline corridors. The proposed project is a residential development of 269 single family residential lots encompassing approximately 107 acres of the total annexation area, with a minimum lot size of 8,400 square feet and a maximum lot size of 28,251 square feet. B. Project Background The Etiwanda North Specific Plan comprises approximately 6,840 acres 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 240-acres from San Bernardino County into the City of Rancho Cucamonga. As part of the approval process, the City of Rancho Cucamonga prepared a full scope environmental impact report (EIR) for the project (SCH No. 2003081085). 4 Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 24 of 71 The existing land uses within the annexation are presently comprised of Flood Control facilities (the Etiwanda Creek basin and drainage system), powerline corridors, and vacant land. The surrounding area is a combination of Flood Control lands, and vacant land (much of which is being entitled for single-family residential development). The existing land uses and land use designations are summarized in Table 1. Table 1 Surrounding Land Uses Current Land Use General Plan Land Use Etiwanda North Specific Plan Land Use ON-SITE Vacant land,Etiwanda Very Low Residential,Open Very Low Residential, Creek drainage system Space/Conservation,and Flood Control/Resource (SBCFCD), SCE corridors Utility Corridor Conservation,Utility Corridor NORTH LADWP powerline corridor Utility Corridor and Open Utility Corridor S ace/Conservation SOUTH Vacant land/proposed Very Low Residential Very Low Residential T716072-Richland EAST Etiwanda Creek drainage Open Space/Conservation Flood Controt/Resource azea(SBCFCD) Conservation WEST Vacant land/approved Low Residential Low Residential M6226 and Tr16227- Rancho Etiwanda Estates Source: City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan,and Etiwanda North Specific Plan The-City of Rancho Cucamonga is in the process of submitting four separate annexations to the San Bernardino County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO totaling approximately 800 acres. Each of the proposed annexations is under separate environmental reviews. 5 Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 25 of 71 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 designations within the proposed annexation area is Very Low Residential (0.1-2 dwelling units per acre), Utility Corridor and Open Space/Conservation. The project is also included in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, adopted by the City Council on April 1, 1992. The residential 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. R. City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan The City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan designation for the 240-acre annexation_ area is Very Low Residential, Utility Corridor and Open Space/Conservation. The Very Low land use designation covers approximately 107- acres, along with 40-acres designated Utility Corridor and 93-acres designated Flood Control and Open Space Conservation. The Very Low Residential District is intended as an area for single family residential uses with 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 I-210 Freeway between Milliken Avenue and eastern City limits. The District allows the keeping of horses and other farm animals. The proposed Tentative Tract 14749 includes 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 approximately 107 acres of the 240-acre annexation area. The remainder of the annexation area will remain within the existing land use designations of Flood Control and Utility Corridor. C. Etiwanda North Specific Plan The proposed Tentative Tract 14749 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 3.3 of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan, the Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood. 6 Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 26 of 71 The Etiwanda North Specific Plan designates the site as Very Low Residential. Very Low Residential permits a maximum of 2 dwelling units per acre with a minimum lot size of 20,000 square feet, and an average lot size of 25,000 square feet. The proposed Tentative Tract Map includes 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 107-acres of the 240-acre annexation area. The remainder of the 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 though a combination of publication of a legal advertisement in the local newspaper and through mailing of individual notices to anyone who has previously request 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 form within the annexation area are eligible to submit a valid protest. 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 7 Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 27 of 71 • 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 N2 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; • 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. 8 Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 28 of 71 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 Etiwanda and East Avenues, which will be connected by development of the Upper Crest Collector Road, which is essentially an easterly extension of Day Creek Boulevard. The annexation area is located between Etiwanda Avenue on the west and East Avenue on the east, the site lies north of the lower SCE powerline corridor. The proposed project includes improvements to Etiwanda Avenue, East Avenue and the Lower Crest Collector Road 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. The City of Rancho Cucamonga will assume responsibility for street maintenance of public arterial roadways within the annexation area. 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 269 lots, electrical consumption for the site, based on SCE designated criteria, is estimated as follows: 269 dwellings X 7 kw/unit = 1,883 kw per month; or 22,596 kw annually. C. Natural Gas Natural Gas is provided by The Gas Company. The Gas Company maintains natural gas pipelines in Etiwanda Avenue and East 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. 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 9 Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 29 of 71 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 22,865 therms per month or 274,380 therms per year. D. Telephone Services. The telephone service to the project site is provided by Verizon Communications. The facilities will be extended from either Etiwanda Avenue and/or East Avenue into the 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 stone drains and then conveyed to Etiwanda Creek. All streets will be designed to accommodate storm waters that could exceed the top of curbs in the event of a 25-year stone 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 Engineering Division. The County of San Bernardino Flood Control District is responsible for the construction and maintenance of the Etiwanda Creek channel, which lies east of the project site. The improvements to the Creek have been designed to capture all flows entering the creek and convey the flows southerly toward the Santa Ana River. These improvements are scheduled to occur prior to or concurrently with the development of the project. 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 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 CV WD service area is approximately 42 million gallons per day. 10 Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 30 of 71 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 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 Etiwanda Avenue, located along the western edge of the proposed annexation area. The proposed project includes the future connection of 269 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 172,160 GPD. This represents a less than one percent increase of the CVWD service area. The CVWD has constructed Reservoir 5C, which is located to the northwest of the project site and will meet 100% of the project water needs. Reservoir 6C, located northwest of Reservoir 5C, will be constructed concurrently with the project. Additional service pressure enhancement for the northwester portion of the project will be provided by Reservoir 6C. 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 Hills. An additional treatment facility is currently planned. Two of the exisisitng 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 with the service area of treatment plant number 4 (RP-4). RP-4 is located on 6`h Street and Etiwanda Avenue in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The plant treats approximately 37.9 million gallons per day(MGD) of wastewater and has a capacity of 44 MGD. The water treatment facilities cleanse the treated water to a - tertiary level and is then used for irrigation proposed. Development fees are collected by member agencies for wastewater treatment facilities and passed on to the IEUA to use for new treatment plant construction. With the exception of extending pipelines to the project site, there will be no requirement for the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or 11 Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 31 of 71 expansion of existing facilities. The project will connect to the existing 10"-15" sewer from East Avenue. Based on the CVWD Master Plan and IEUA estimates, wastewater generation in the project area is approximately 270 gallons of wastewater per unit per day. Therefore, the 269 residential units proposed will generate approximately 72,630 gallons of sewage per day. This represents less than one percent of current wastewater treated at RP-4, and will not exceed 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 San Bernardino County 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 serviced 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 845 residents thus creating the need for approximately 0.53 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 & Emergency Medical Response The Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District (RCFPD) provides fire protection and emergency medical response to approximately 50 square miles, which includes the City 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 12 Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 32 of 71 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 23rd Street—(3 firefighters) The proposed project will incrementally increase the population in the vicinity by 845 residents thus creating the need for 0.15 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 7425 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 full-time 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 serve the projected need at build-out of the City. Library funding is derived form 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. 13 Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 33 of 71 L. Solid Waste Burrtec Waste Industries will collect refuse from the project area under franchise agreement with the City of Rancho Cucamonga. Burrtec takes all refuse collected to the Transfer Station of Napa Street, at which point approximately 60% to diverted to the Mid-Valley land fill in Rialto, the remaining refuse is transported out of the county landfill system. The City has implemented recycling programs, as required by state law, local Source Reduction and Recycling Element. M. School Services The anriexation 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 169 K-8 students and 40 high school students from the 269 new homes. Approximately 113 of these students would be would be elementary level (K-5) and 56 would be intermediate level (grades 6-8). The total students generated would be approximately 209. 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 209 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. 14 Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 34 of 71 IV. Fiscal Analysis The project will be annexed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga's existing Landscape Maintenance District No. 7 for perimeter street landscape maintence, the 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 "Tentative Tract 14749/Tract Development - 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. 15 Plan for Services Resolution No. 04-241 Page 35 of 71 Etiwanda Heights Fiscal Impact Analysis City of Rancho Cucamonga March 25, 2004 SRHA Job#1039 TANLEY R. IjOFFMAN 11661 San Vicente Blvd.Suite 306 111—E— Los Angeles,CA 90049 310-820-2680, 310-820-8341,fax www.stanleyrhoffman.com Resolution No. 04-241 Page 36 of 71 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 Chapter 3 Projected Fiscal Impacts .........................................................................9 3.1 Rancho Cucamonga General Fund............................................................g 3.2 Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District ............................................12 3.3 Landscape Maintenance District..............................................................12 Chapter 4 Fiscal Assumptions................................................................................14 4.1 General Information .................................................................................14 4.2 Revenue Assumptions .............................................................................15 4.3 Cost Assumptions ....................................................................................22 Appendix A Persons and Agencies Contacted ........................................................31 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 TABLES Page 37 of 71 A Summary of Projected Recurring Fiscal Impacts After Buildout........................... iv 2-1 Buildout Development Description .......................................................................5 2-2 Housing Valuation.................................................................................................6 2-3 Street Lane Miles..................................................................................................7 3-1 City General Fund Fiscal Impacts After Buildout ................................................10 3-2 Ranch Cucamonga Fire Protection District, Fiscal Impacts After Buildout..........13 4-1 General Assumptions..........................................................................................15 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.......................................................................26 4-8 Estimation of Planning and Building and Safety Costs .......................................28 4-9 Estimation of General Government Costs...........................................................30 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. ii Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page 38 of 71 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS The following is a summary of the projected fiscal impacts of Etiwanda Heights 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 Etiwanda Heights project area is located in unincorporated San Bernardino County, north of 24`h Street and the Southern California Edison (SCE) easement, generally between Etiwanda and East Avenues. This area is in the northeast portion of the City's sphere of influence. Etiwanda Heights is a proposed residential development of 269 homes on about 62 gross residential acres. The population for Etiwanda Heights is projected at 847, assuming 3.15 persons per unit. Assessed valuation is projected at $156.5 million based on an average housing valuation of$581,933 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. in Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 39 of 71 TABLE A ETIWANDA HEIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SUMMARY OF PROJECTED RECURRING FISCAL IMPACTS AFTER BUILDOUT (In Constant 2004 Dollars) No MVLF Impact I Impact of MVLF' A. City General Fund Recurring Revenues $315,786 $282,761 Direct Recurring Costs 181,762 181,762 Plus Contingency @ 15%of Direct Costs 27,264 27,264 Total Recurring Costs 209,026 209,026 Net Recurring Surplus 106,760 73,736 Revenue/Cost Ratio 1.51 1.35 B. Rancho Cucamonga Fire Protection District Revenues $195,101 $195,101 Notes: 1. This assumes that revenues from MVLF will be reduced by about two-thirds due to State budget cuts. Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,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-Controller's 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$106.8 thousand is projected forthe City General Fund after full buildout of Etiwanda Heights. The projected surplus is based on revenues of$315.8 thousand, and. costs of $209.0 thousand, including a 15 percent contingency costs estimate. The revenue/cost ratio for the City General Fund is estimated 1.51. 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 for the 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 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 City General Fund - With MVLF Reduction Page 40 of 71 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$73.7 thousand is projected forthe City General Fund afterfull buildout of Etiwanda Heights. The projected surplus is based on revenues of$282.8 thousand, and costs of $209.0 thousand, including a 15 percent contingency costs estimate. The revenue/cost ratio for the City General Fund is estimated 1.35. 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%:cent shift proposal. While this would reduce the sales tax generated by the residents of the project by about $17.3 thousand, the project would still be estimated to have an annual recurring surplus of approximately $56.4 thousand to $89.4 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 Etiwanda Heights 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 Etiwanda Heights development will contribute annual property tax and earned interest revenues projected at $195.1 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 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 41 of 71 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION This report presents the fiscal impact analysis for Etiwanda Heights 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 LMD will be used for the operations and maintenance of common areas, but it has not been determined if Etiwanda Heights will annex into an existing LMD or if a new one will be created. 1.1 Background The property comprising Etiwanda Heights 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 north of 24'" Street and the SCE easement, between Etiwanda Avenue and East Avenue. Upon annexation, the entire project would be within the City limits of Rancho Cucamonga. Etiwanda Heights is a community of about 168.8 gross acres in size, of which some 107.8 acres are proposed for residential development. Proposed development within the project will include 269 residential dwelling units for an overall density of about 2.5 units per residential acre. Home sizes are estimated to range from 3,000 to 3,900 square feet and the buildout population of the area is estimated at 847 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; Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 1 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 42 of 71 and other miscellaneous revenues. The Gas Tax Fund receives revenues primarily from 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 Etiwanda Heights. 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 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 43 of 71 • 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 Etiwanda Heights 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 4 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 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 44 of 71 CHAPTER 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION This chapter presents the detailed development description for Etiwanda Heights assuming full buildout of the area. 2.1 Development Description After Buildout Acres. Units and Population. Etiwanda Heights is planned as a 168.8 acre residential community consisting of 269 single family detached homes ranging from 3,000 to 3,900 square feet. As shown in Table 2-1, there are approximately 102.0 gross acres of residential uses. Other acreage associated with the development includes 5.8 acres of equestrian related facilities and 61.0 acres of open space areas including flood control facilities. Buildout population for the Etiwanda Heights development is estimated at 847 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 Etiwanda Heights is estimated at $156.5 million after buildout, based on an average value of $581,933 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 $520,000 to $620,000 per unit. The estimated square footages range from 3,000 to 3,900 square feet. 2.2 Public Infrastructure Streets. Primary access to Etiwanda Heights will be provided via Wardman and Bullock Road. As shown in Table 2-3, there is an estimated 7.18 local street lane miles to be developed as a part of the project; including some 1.5 lane miles of public local streets and 5.68 lane miles of private local streets. The 1.5 lane miles of public streets are assumed to be maintained by the City of Rancho Cucamonga, once annexed by the City. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 4 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fisca}Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 45 of 71 TABLE 2-1 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BUILDOUT DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION (in Constant 2004 Dollars) Acres at Percent Buildout t of Total A. Land Use Acreage Residential Acreage 102.0 60.4% Equestrian Acreage (Lots E and F) 5.8 3.4% Flood Control/Open Space Acreage 61.0 36.1% Total Project Acres 168.8 100.0% B: Other Project Information Residential Units-Single-family 269 Population (@ 3.15 persons per unit)Z 847 Residential Assessed Valuation (@ $581,933 per unit)3 $156,540,000 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$581,933 per unit based on information provided by the project proponent. Sources: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 5 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 46 of 71 TABLE 2-2 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA HOUSING VALUATION (in Constant 2004 Dollars) Plan I I Base Price Total Plan Type 1§_quare Feet Quantity Per Unit Valuation 1 3,000 54 $520,000 $28,080,000 2 3,300 54 560,000 30,240,000 3 3,600 80 600,000 48,000,000 4 3,900 81 620,000 50,220,000 Total 269 $581,933 $156,540,000 Source: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. C.A. Page Company Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 6 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 47 of 71 TABLE 2-3 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STREET LANE MILES Number Length Length Total Street Type of Lanes in Feet in Miles Lane Miles Public local 2 3,950 0.75 1.50 Private local 2 15,000 2.84 5.68 Total Lane Miles 7.18 Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc. C.A.Page Company Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 7 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 48 of 71 Equestrian Facilities. An estimated 5.8 acres of the proposed development are allocated for equestrian uses. This includes Lot F with some 3.1 acres which will include a trail head and bathroom. Lot E is some 2.71 acres and is to include an equestrian building. Maintenance of the trail head and bathroom are to become the responsibility of the City Public Works department. The equestrian building is to be leased by the City to an equestrian operator who will perform the maintenance. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 8 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 49 of 71 CHAPTER PROJECTED FISCAL IMPACTS This chapter presents the fiscal analysis of Etiwanda Heights 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 for the 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 $315.8 thousand. Annual direct recurring costs are projected at$181.8 thousand. Added to the projected direct costs is a contingency cost, calculated at 15 percent of direct costs, or $27.3 thousand. Adjusted total recurring costs, including estimated direct costs and contingency costs, are projected at $209.0 thousand. A recurring surplus of $106.8 thousand is projected for Etiwanda Heights, as shown in Table 3-1. The revenue/cost ratio is calculated at 1.51. Projected Revenues. Projected recurring revenues to the City of Rancho Cucamonga General Fund in 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. 9 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 50 of 71 TABLE 3-1 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY GENERAL FUND FISCAL IMPACTS AFTER BUILDOUT' (In Constant 2004 Dollars) No MVLF Impact Impact on F' After Percent After MVLPercent Buildout of Total Buildout of Total Annual Recurring Revenues Property tax-general fund $109,578 34.7% $109,578 38.8% Property tax-library fund 26,612 8.4% 26.612 9.4% Property transfer tax 6,027 1.9% 6,027 2.1% Off-site sales and use tax 69,347 22.0% 69,347 24.5% Motor vehicle license in4ieu 49,536 15.7% 16,512 5.8% Proposition 172 sales tax 1,420 0.4% 1,420 0.5% Franchise fees: utility 10,581 3.4% 10,581 3.7% Franchise fees: refuse 6,773 2.1% 6,773 2.4% Franchise fees: cable 16,061 5.1% 16,061 5.7% Fines and forfeitures 4,616 1.5% 4,616 1.6% Charges for services 526 0.2% 526 0.2% Other revenue 432 0.1% 432 0.2% Library revenue 1,273 0.4% 1,273 0.5% State gasoline tax' 13 004 4.101. 13004 44 Total Recurring Revenues $315,786 100.0% $282,761 100.0% Annual Recurring Costs Police protection 565,088 35.8% $65,088 35.8% Animal control 2,254 1.2% 2,254 1.2% Engineering 16,118 8.9% 16,118 8.9% Public works maintenance 34,226 18.8% 34,226 18.8% Facilities maintenance 3,160 1.7% 3,160 1.7% Planning 7,466 4.1% 7,466 4.1% Library 10,919 6.0% 10,919 6.0% Community services 13,492 7.4% 13,492 7.4% Contribution to Fire District 4,964 2.7% 4,964 2.7% General government 24075 13.2% 24.075 13.2° Direct Recurring Costs $181,762 100.0% $181,762 100.0% Plus Estimated Contingency costs(@ 15%of direct recurring costs) $27,264 $27,264 Total Recurring Costs $209,026 $209,026 Net Annual Surplus $106,760 $73,736 Revenue/Cost Ratio 1.51 _ 1.35 Note: 1. Revenues and costs for fire protection services and common area landscaping are coverd in separate districts and are not included as a pan W Ne General Fund analyate. 2. This assumes that the anoca4on of minor vehicle in-lieu fees from the state to the local junsdickon will be reduced by two-thirds due to changes in State budget agreements. 3. State gasoline tax is earmarked for public works road maintenance. Source: Swdey R.Hoffman Associates,Inc. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 10 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 51 of 71 The largest projected revenue source is property tax at $109.6 thousand, representing approximately 34.7 percent of total projected recurring revenues. Off-site sales and use tax is the second largest projected revenue source at $69.3 thousand and 22.0 percent of the total revenues. Motor vehicle license in-lieu revenues are projected at$49.5 thousand and 15.7 percent, the third largest recurring revenue. These three revenue sources represent approximately 72.4 percent of total projected recurring revenues. Projected Costs. Table 3-1 also presents projected recurring costs to the City General Fund for Etiwanda Heights 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$65.1 thousand and account for 35.8 percent of the total recurring annual costs. Public works maintenance for public roads is projected at$34.2 thousand and 18.8 percent of the total recurring costs. General government costs (administrative functions)are projected as the third largest recurring cost at$24.1 thousand or 13.2 percent of total projected costs. These three projected costs of police protection, pubic works maintenance and general government represent approximately 67.8 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 $282.8 thousand. Adjusted total annual recurring costs, including estimated direct costs and contingency costs, are projected at $209.0 thousand. A recurring surplus of $73.7 thousand is projected for Etiwanda Heights underthese conditions. The revenue/cost ratio is calculated at 1 .35. a Proiected Revenues. The largest projected revenue source is property tax at $109.6 thousand, representing approximately 38.8 percent of total projected recurring revenues. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 11 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 52 of 71 Off-site sales and use tax is the second largest projected revenue source at $69.3 thousand and 24.5 percent of the total revenues. Library fund property tax revenues are projected at $26.6 thousand, the third largest recurring revenue. These three revenue sources represent approximately 72.7 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. Etiwanda Heights 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 Etiwanda Heights. Annual recurring property tax revenues are projected to total $195.1 thousand after buildout. Annual recurring fire protection costs are not projected for the Etiwanda Heights 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 Etiwanda Heights, 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 Etiwanda Heights wilt 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. r. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 12 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis I Resolution No. 04-241 Page 53 of 71 TABLE 3-2 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT FISCAL IMPACTS AFTER BUILDOUT (In Constant 2004 Dollars) After Percent Buildout of Total Annual Recurring Revenues Property tax $195,101 100.0% Total Recurring Revenues $195,101 100.0% Annual Recurring Costs n/a1 Note: 1. The proposed development lies 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. 13 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 54 of 71 CHAPTER 4 FISCAL ASSUMPTIONS Chapter 4 presents the recurring revenue and cost assumptions used in preparing the fiscal analysis for Etiwanda Heights 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 Citypopulation 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. 14 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 55 of 71 TABLE 4-1 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS 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 2003/04,Adopted Budget City of Rancho Cucamonga State of California,Department of Finance,City/County Population and Housing Estimates,2003 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 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 15 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 56 of 71 TABLE 4-2 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTIMATION OF EXISTING CITY DEVELOPED ACRES' Residential Acres Residential- Non RDA 8,261 Residential- RDA 1,283 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 publiclquasi public acres are not included as developable acres. Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc. City of Rancho Cucamonga,Geographic Information System Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Fiscal Analysis,General Plan Update,City of Rancho Cucamonga,October 2,2000 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 16 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 57 of 71 TABLE 4-3 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SUMMARY OF REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS (In Constant 2004 Dollars) Revenues ProjectionPro than Method Annual Revenue Source FY 2003-04 Basis anIffor Assump0ond Projection factors CITY GENERAL FUND Progeny Taxes $2.261,690 Assessed valuation Valuation assumptions 7.0%City General Fund allocation of basic 1%levy Document Tmnsfe Tax 730,540 Assessed valuation Propeaytumoharandvalua0on 7%residential tumoverrate $0.55 per$1,000 of lumowr valuation Sales and Use Tax 14,626.000 Taxable sales off-site Usablo sales 1.0%d taxable sales plus 0.1075%of sales tax Proposition 172-Had Carl Sales Tax 299,500 Total sales and use an Per$1,000 of sales and use lax $20.46 per$1,001)sat"and use tax Franchise Fees: Gas 8 Elecuic 2,423,180 Total papulation and employment Per rapla and employee $12.50 per wpta and per employee Refuse 1,173,379 Total population Par capla 38.00 per wpta 1,309." Total employment Peramployse $2T"per employee Cade 889,260 TOUT housing units Per unit $18.97 per unit Fines If ForfeiUres 1,057,180 Total population and employment Per capita antl employee $5.45 per capita and per employee Motor Vehicle Ucense 8,582,310 Total population Per capda $58.52 per capita Charges for Services 120,460 Total population and employment Per Capt and employee $0.62 pe capita and per employee RentalteaseslSales of Fixed Asset 98,830 Total population and employment Per capita antl employee $0.51 par capita alta per employee Interest Famings Sold 0 Percent of fund revenues Imam[him not projected Library Fund Property Taxes Na' Assessed vdlwaon Values.assumptions 1.7%City Ubi Fund allocation of basic 1%levy UOrary Fines and Fees 118.000 Total population Pecapa s0.80 per capita Uprary Rentalsl5ales _ 102.500 Total population Par caps $0.70 per capita Intarasl Earnings 15,000 Percent of fund revenues Interest rata not projected Gas Tex Fund State Cas Tax: Secum2105 738,000 Total population Percapila $5.03 per capita Sectiori 465,770 Total population Per capita $3.18 per capita Section21N 1,049,230 Total population Par Capita $7.15 par capita Interest Famings Percent of fund revers as Interest rate not projected RANCHO CUCAMONGA FIRE DISTRICT Fyoperry Tax 7,552,820 Assessed valuation Valuation assumptions 12.46%Carry Fire Fund allocation of basic 1%levy Interest Eamin9s 96 NO Percent of fund revenues Interest rate not protected Nome: 1. In 6stal year Mo3rW,me revenue source did Trot exat ler the City. Sou.: Seine,R.Hoffman Associates.Inc. Cay 0 Rancho Cucsnoiga,Fiscal Year 30030x.Adopted Budden Stale of Cealamb.Department of Finance.Cay, orgy Poprxafbn and Nousmlg Estmahs, uinvary 1,203 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 17 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 58 of 71 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 Etiwanda Heights 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 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 Etiwanda Heights. 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 Etiwanda Heights will generate sales and use tax to the City of Rancho Cucamonga through retail purchases in the City. As shown in Table 4-4, taxable sales from Etiwanda Heights residents are projected at$12.52 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$6.26 million in taxable retail sales. Based on sales tax of 1 percent, potential sales tax to the City is projected at $62.6 thousand after buildout. At 10.75 percent of sales tax, use tax is projected at $6.7 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 18 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 59 of 71 TABLE 4-4 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTIMATED TAXABLE SALES CAPTURE (in Constant 2004 Dollars) Description Amount Residential Assessed Valuation (@$581,933 per unit)' $156,540,000 Household Income(@ 25% of valuation) $39,135,000 Retail Taxable Sales (@ 32% of household income) $12,523,200 Projected Off-Site Taxable Sales Captured in Rancho Cucamonga (@ 50% capture) $6,261,600 Projected Sales and UseTax to Rancho Cucamonga: Sales Tax(@ 1% of taxable sales) $62,616 Use Tax(@ 10.75% of sales tax) 6.731 Total Projected Sales and Use Tax $69,347 Note: 1. Assessed-valuation is projected at an average of$581,933 per unit based on information provided by the project proponent. Sources: Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 19 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 60 of 71 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 $69.3 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 a '/<cent sales tax shift to the State instead of the earlier'/z cent shift proposal. While this would reduce the sales tax generated by the project residents by about $17.3 thousand, the project would still be projected to have an annual recurring surplus of approximately $56.4 thousand to $89.4 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: • 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 taxis 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. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 20 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 61 of 71 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. 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. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 21 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 62 of 71 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: 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 Etiwanda Heights 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 su mmarized 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 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 22 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 63 of 71 TABLE 4-5 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SUMMARY OF COST ASSUMPTIONS (In Constant 2004 Dollars) Budget FY 2003/04 Projection Projection Method Annual Cost Category Budget Net Cost Basls andfor Assumptions Projection Factors CITY GENERAL FUND Police Protection $15,280.650$14,906,050 Total Population and Employment Per capita and employee $76.89 par capita and employee Animal Control $452,250 $390,490 Total Population Par capita $2.66 per capita Public Works: Engineering $3,201,920 $1,942140 Total Developed Anes Per developed are 5149.52 per demlWed are Public Works: Maintenance $4,551,630 54,124,260 Total Developed Acres Per developed acre $317.49 par developed am Public Warks: Facilities $1,903,950 $380,790 Total Developed Acres Par devMoped acre $29.31 per developed acre Planning $1,749,700 3899,700 Total Developed Ares Par developed are $69.26 per developed acre Building and Safely $4,142,290 $0 Total Developed Ares Par developed acre Na'par developed are CommunitySennces $2,337,520 $2,337,520 Total Population Perwpila 31594 per capita Ubmry Services $1,891,680 $1,891,680 Total Population Par capAz $12.90 per capita Fire Oisaict Transfer $1,136,770 St,136,770 Total Population and Employment Per capita and employee $5.86 per capita and employee General Govemraent $10,483,060$10,463,060 Share of Direct line Costs 50%marginal rate' 15.3%of direct line costs Canlinnenry Share of Total General Fund Costs %of costs' 150%of General FUM costs Note: 1. The fiscal ataysis assumes that buildup and safety costs breakeven wiN associated fee revenues for Me pgect. 2. Ma nal increase and mnticgency cwt assumptions are based on Me fiscal methodology used M Me General Plan tlpdaw. Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc. City of Rancho Cucamonga.Fiscal Year 2003N4,Adopted Budget Stanley R Hoffman Associates,Fiscal Analysis,General Plan Update.Cdy of Rancho Cucemdnga,October 2,2000 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 23 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 64 of 71 TABLE 4-6 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA POLICE COST ESTIMATION' (In Constant 2003 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 CAPITAIEMPLOYEE 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 2003/04,Adopted Budget Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Fiscal Analysis, General Plan Update, City of Rancho Cucamonga,October 2,2000 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 24 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 65 of 71 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. Enaineerina. 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. 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. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 25 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 66 of 71 TABLE 4-7 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTIMATION OF PUBLIC WORKS COSTS (In Constant 2004 Dollars) 1. ENGINEERING COSTS PER DEVELOPED ACRE Engineering-Administration $332,760 Engineering-Construction Management 825,700 Engineering-Development Management 1,186,290 Engineering-NPDES Program 492,720 Engineering-Project Management 144,280 Engineering-Traffic Management 220,170 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& Equipment @t 50% equals Adjusted Maintenance Vehicles&Equipment $427,370 plus 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 Facilities Maintenance $1,903,950 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: 1. Marginal increase assumptions are based on the fiscal methodology used for the General Plan Update. Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc. City of Rancho Cucamonga,Fiscal Year 2003104,Adopted Budget Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Fiscal Analysis, General Plan Update,City of Rancho Cucamonga,October 2,2000 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 26 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 67 of 71 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 Safety. 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 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. Library. 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. Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 27 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 68 of 71 TABLE 4-8 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS 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 Costs' -$173,910 Note: 1. The fiscal analysis assumes that costs for Building and Safety_for Henderson Creek Estates will breakeven with associated fee revenues. Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc. City of Rancho Cucamonga,Fiscal Year 2003/04,Adopted Budget Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Fiscal Analysis,Geneml Plan Update,City of Rancho Cucamonga,October 2,2000 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 28 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 69 of 71 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. 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 Etiwanda Heights project. Based on the Plan forthe 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. 29 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 70 of 71 TABLE 4-9 ETIWANDA HEIGHTS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTIMATION OF GENERAL GOVERNMENT COSTS (In Constant 2004 Dollars) 1 GENERAL FUND:EXPENDITURES General Non-General Total Government Govemment Non-Departmental General $3,278,500 $3,278,500 Non-Departmental Personnel 218,030 218,030 City 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 122.080 122.090 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 304,890 304,890 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 3,640 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 Engineering-Development Management 1,186,290 1,186,290 Engineering-NPDES 492,720 492,720 Engineenng-Project Management 144,280 144,280 Engineering-Traffic Management 220,710 220.710 Facilities Maintenance 1,903,950 1,903,950 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 0 GRAND TOTAL GENERAL FUND $44,813,450 $10,483,060 $34,330,390 2, CALCULATION OF GENERAL GOYERNMENT:CQSTS Estimated General Government Expenditures. $10,483,060 divided by Estimated Non-General Government Expenditures $34,330,390 equals General Government 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 Update. Source: Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Inc. City of Rancho Cucamonga,Fiscal Year 2003/04,Adapted Budget Stanley R.Hoffman Associates,Fiscal Analysis,General Plan Update,City of Rancho Cucamonga,October 2, 2000 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 30 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis Resolution No. 04-241 Page 71 of 71 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 C.A. Page Company Craig Page 949-723-4177 Stanley R. Hoffman Associates, Inc. 31 Etiwanda Heights March 25, 2004 City of Rancho Cucamonga Fiscal Analysis