Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1988/05/18 - Agenda Packetr~ u C~ ~'~ CITY ~~ i COUNCIL ~II ~ i ~GEIV-I~~ ,I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA I REGULAR MEETINGS ~ Is[ and 3rd Wednesdays - 7:30 p.m. lfay 1g, 1988 Lio.^s Park Ccmmur,;ry Cznier 9161 Base Line Road Rancho Cucamonga ++• I City Councilmembers Dennis L. StOUt. Mavo~ ~ Pamela J. Wright, .[taro. r~r m i Deborah N. Brows, cov~onm<n,e<r j Charles J. Buquet, co~~d~m<me« Jeffrey King, counnlm<mD<. .*~ I Lauren M. Wasserman, arv .Ha~as« Jac<-s tiidrkinari. Grv um,...,. Beverly A. Authelet, ary co-.x City Ollice: 9A9-1851 Lions Park: 9607145 PAGE City Council Agenda May 18, 1988 All items submitted for the City Couacil Agenda mat be in i writivg. The deadline for aubmittiag these items is i:00 p. m. oa the Wedaeaday prior to the meeting. Tba City ° Clerk e Offiee receives all each items. i ~ I ~ e. cacl. To oet~ae 1. Pledge of Allegiance to Flag. 2. Roll Call: Brown ~, 8uquet _, Stout _, ~ i i I i Ring _, and Wz fight I I B, ANBOOBBIENT3/PffiSBNTATIONS I. No items submitted. C. COBBBIIT CALB90AY The following Coaaemt Calendar items are espected to be routine and son-mntroversisl. 'Sh¢y will be acted upoa by the Comcil et oae time withmt diacwsaiom. Any item may be I removed by a Coancilmember or meatier of the eudieece Eor diacuseioa. i 1. Approval of Minutes: April 6, 1988 May 4, 1488 i 2. Approval of Warrants, Regis ter No's. S/4 /88 and 5/11 /88, I i and Payroll sad ing 4/29/88 for the total amount of $2,429,396.32. 3. Approval of Pro Feeeionel Services Agreement (CO 88-063) I1 between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and CPS Consulting Civil engineers far the preparation of an Economic Study ae well ae Design Plaae, Coot rect Spec ifi.catione and Engineer's Eetimetee on the Cucamoaga Creek Storm Drain :.mprovemente, Phase I starting from the Cucamonga Creek Che_._a1 rn _ i"ste ly i ann c.,_ _ _ ____ _ e * ~, V not to exceed fee of $32,070 will he funded by the Dra inege Fuad, Account No. 23-4637-8763. ~~ PAGE City Council Agenda May 18, 1988 i ! 4. Approval of an agreement (CO 88-064) for Iasta llation of 12 Public Improvement and Dedication between William and Janet Lane end the City of Rancho Cucamonga for Street Prontage Improvements at 9517 Nineteenth Street, located j on the south aide of Nineteenth Street between Archibald Avenue and Amethyst Street, for the Amethyst Street at I I ~ Nineteenth Screer projec c. ' I RESOLUTION N0. 88-291 13 A RHSOLUTION OP TBE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMOHGA, CALIPOHNIA, ~ ACCBPTING AN AGREEIDZNT POA INSTALLATION I OP PUBLIC IMPBOVBMCNT AND DBDICATION FROM GIILLIAM AND JANET LANB, PJiD AUTRORIZ INC THE MAYOR AND CITY CLEBR TO SIGN SANG 5. Approval io accept a Aeel Property Improvement Contract I 14 and Liea Agreement (CO 88-065) from Valerian A, amd Elizabeth J. Leier for a single family reaidant, located on [he east aide of 3eott Lane, north of Palo Alto l ~ Street (APN 1077-071-12). i ~ ~ ~ i I ~ RESOLUTION N0. 88-292 15 l l A RESOLUTION OF TH6 CITY COUNCIL OP THE I ~ CLTY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIPOBNIA, I ~ ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM VALERIEN i A. ANO ELIZABETH J. LE IEH AND AUTHORIZ INf, THE MAYOR AND CITY CLEEU( TO SIGN SAME ~ i ~ 6. Approval and execution of Change Order No. 3 (CO 87-21) 17 for Profesaiouel Services Agreement with Norris-Repke, Incorporated, to perform design edminie tra[ion services I for various projec ta. I[ ie recommended to expand their ~ contract by $21,000 for the Ame[hgat at 19th Street, Hellman Storm Drain, AD 82-1 and Church-Nermoea Storm Drain projec Ce, to bring their contract total to $&6,474.75 to be paid from project funds indicated on said change order. 7. Approval to award the traffic signal and safety lighting 19 ai Righ land Avenue and Milliken Avenue Improvement Project to Hovey 6lec tr ic, Incorpora ied, for the amount of $81,332, [o be funded from TDA Artie le 8 funds, Account No. 12-4637-g708. PAGE City Council Agenda May 18, 1988 8. Approval to award the traffic signal and safety lighting ~ 21 at Highland Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue Improvement ~ Project to Hovey 6lec tric, Incorporated, for the amount of $93.255, to be funded with TDA Article 8 fuade, I I Account No. 12-4637-8707. I ~ ~ 9. Approval to summarily vacate an unused portion of the 23 Drainage Easement along the east side of Center Avenue, i south of Church Street. j RESOLUTION N0. 88~-293 24 A BBSOLUTIOH OP T}IB CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA, COUNTY OF SAN BBRNARD INO, STATH OP CALIPORNIA, SU141A8ILY ORDB BING TH6 VACATION OP A ~, PORTION OP A DRAINAGE eA86ilBNT, LOCATED ON THE BAST SIDH OP CENTER AVEHUB, SOUTH OP CHURCH STBBBT ~, 10. Approval of Parcel flap 10237 located between Arrom Route 27 ~ and Jereay Boulevard, and be [wean Utica end Vincent Avenues, submitted by Ar:ow Rancho Cucsmonga Limited. ~,, RESOLUTION N0. 88-294 2N ~,, i A RBSOLUTION OP Tee CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EANCHO COCAHONGA, CALIPORNIA, ~, i APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 10237 i~ ~ (TENfATIVe PAECBL NAP NO, 10237) 'i ~ ' 11. Approval of an indenture (CO 88-056) between the ~ 30 Southern Pacific Trenepor ta[ion Company and the Ci[y of Rancho Cucamonga for the cone [ruction and maintenance of a 48" storm drain facility located in Southern Fac ific Transportation right-of-way in the easterly aide of l Haven Avenue north of Valencia Avenue. PAGE City Council Agenda Hay 16, 1988 r - RESOLUTION N0. 88-295 31 I I I A RESOLUTION OF THB CITY COUNCIL OF THE i I CITY OP RANCHO COCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIA APPROVING AN INDENTURE BeTWEEN THE CITY t I AND THE SOUTHERN PACIPIC TRANSPORTATION , C2:ffi'A~. Pas TbB iNSTALLAIIOH OP s'IORM i DBAIN PACILIT IES WITHIN TH8 RAILROAD RIGHT-OP-WAY IN CONSUNCTION WITH THE DEVELOP[~NT OP PARCEL NAP 9504 LOCATED AT I THE NOBTHHAST CORNER OF HAVEN AVENUE AND BASE LINE ROAD I 12. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement and 32 Improvement Securitp for DR 86 -32~ located on the nor thereat corner of Civic Center Drive located on the nor[hvest corner of Civic Center Drive end Red Oak Street, submitted bq Carney Theodorou. BESOLDTLON N0. 88-296 33 A RBSOLUTIOM OP THB CITY COUNCIL OP TH8 CITY OP RANCHO CUCAHONGA CALIPORNIA~ APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AG88EHHMT AND IMPROVEMBNT SECURITY POR DHVeLOP MENT HEVIBW N0. 86-32 I ~ 1 13. Approval of map, execution of Improvement Agreement and 35 Improvement Security fot Tract 13644 located on the southeast corner of Hermosa Avenue and Via to Grove Stree[~ submitted by Noodridge Estates Limited. I RESOLUTION N0. 88-297 36 A RESOLUTION OP THH CITY COUNCIL OF THE I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ GLIFORNIA~ 1 APPROVING IMPROVe ME NT AGRBBME NT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY, AND FINAL MAP OP I TRACT N0. 13644 I 14. Approval to execute Improvement A¢reement Sxtenainn fnr 38 ' I ' ' Ira.: i2ii2~ located on aamom Avenue betmeea Eaea Line s ~ i Roed and Church Streets submitted by M 6 S Development. PAGE City Cnunc it Agenda Mey 18, 1988 RESOLUTION N0. 88-298 39 I A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT BRTENS ION i I i I I AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 12772 I I I I5. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extension for 40 DH 85-06, located on the north aide of Arrow Highway wee[ of Navea Avenue, submitted by Lincoln Property I ! Company. it RESOLUTION ND, 88-299 41 I A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THe CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPORNIA~ APPRWING IMPROVEMENT AGREE?~NT ERTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY POR DR BS-06 16. Approval to authorize the advertiaing of the "Notice 42 Inviting Hide11 for the Vic f.oria White Alder Replacement within Tract 11934 to be Eunded by Victoria Landscape ~, , Haintaaance District Hc. 2 - Account Nc. 41-4130-8769 'I ~ with a loan from Beeu tifica[ion Punde. ~ I I I I BeSOLUTION No. 98-300 43 i A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE ~ . CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPORNIA~ I I APPROVING PLANS AND SPHCIFI CATIONS POR "VICTORIA NNITE ALDER REPLACEI~NT"~ IN I I SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLBBH TO ADVERTISE TO RECe IVE BIDS 17. Approval to authorize the advertising of the "Notice 47 Inv icing Bide" for the Tryon Street Sidewalk Proj ect~ Tryon Street and Sadeite Avenue Weet of Archibald Avenue Improvement Project to be funded with TDA Pedestrian Granta~ Article 3, Account No. 16-4637-8717. HBSOLUTION N0. 88-301 4H A RESOLUTION OP THH CITY COUNCIL OP TH6 CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIP08NIA~ APPROVING PLANS AND SPHCIPi CATIONS FOR THE TRYON STREET SIDEWALK PROJECL IN SAID CITY AND AUTNORIZ ING AND DIRECTING TR6 CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RBCE IVE BIDS ~r 7 ( ~ PAGE City Council Agenda May I8, 1988 i i 18. Approval to release Heal Property Improvement Contract 52 and Lien Agreement for Parcel 3 of Parcel Map 6544, located on the nor Cheast corner of Siath Street and i i Utica Avenue, submitted by The Second RC Group, a i i Limited Partnership. ~ ~ t ~ i RESOLUTION N0. 88-302 ao ~ A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, i i ii RELEASING A REAL PROPHRTY IHP ROVEMeNT i i i CONTRACT AND LIEN AGRHEMENT FROM PARCEL 3 i OF PARCEL MAP 6544 19. Approval of a partial release of a Real Property 55 ' Improvement Centrec[ end Lien Agreement releasing Lot 2 of Parcel Map 8901, located on the east aide of Center Avenue, not th of Poo[hill Boulevard, submitted by Relbezt, a Par.tnerehip. RESOLUTION N0. 88-303 56 1 A RESCLCTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE ~ CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMOMCA, CALIPORNIA, eeLBASING A REAL PROPBRTY IlfPROVENENT CONTRACT AND :IEN AGBHEMENT PROM RELBHRT. ~ i ~ A PARTNERSHIP it j i 20. Approval [o accept improvement e, release Maintenance 58 Guarantee Bond for Tract 10047, located on the south Bide of Hillside Road, east of Archibald Avenue. Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) 8 34,700 21. Approval to accept improvements, release bonds and file 59 a notice of completion for the Hsven Avenue and 4th Street Traffic Signal Improvement Project, end approve [he Einal contract amount of $118,426.85. ~ RESOLUTION N0. 88-304 60 A RHSOLUTION OF TNH CITY COUNCIL OP THS CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIPOHMIA, ACCBPTING THB POB LIC IMPROVB!ffiNTS POR HAVHN AVH NllE AND 4TH ST RHHT TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND AUTHORIZING TBH PILING OP A NOTI CH OP COMPLETION POH THE NORR r ~, PAGE City Counc it Agenda May 18, 1988 i ! 22. Approval to accept improvements, release bonds and file ! a notice of completion for: ~ ~ ~ I DR 86-20 - located on the nor thves[ corner of 6th Street 61 i i and Roches tax Avenue ~ I Faithful Performance Bond (Street) $ 48,000 I I ImaOLuiION Nu. tltl-305 6'L ~ ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE ~ I I ~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAM.ON GA, CALIFORNIA, I ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR DR i 86-20 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A i I NOTICE OP COMPLETION POR THE WORE ~ ~ DR 85-45 - located on the nor theaet corner of Haven 63 Avenue and Acacia Street i Faithful Performance Bond (Street) $ 14,000 ~ RESOLUTION N0. 86-306 64 i ~ A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP T11E i ~ ~ CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CAL*_FORMIA, ~ ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOB DR ! 85-45 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A 1 i NOTICE OP COMPLETION FOR THE WORK '~.~ I ~ TRACT 12650-2 - located on the east aide of Haven 65 ~ Avenue, north of Hi 11 a ide Road i I ~f i I Release: I ~ i i i ! Faithful Performance Bond (Street) $267,000 i Accept: ~ Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) $ 26,700 I I RESOLUTION N0. 88-307 6fi I ~ I A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY raR~Cn. nu muv CiTI OF icnricxU CUCAMONGA CALIFORNIA , , ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS POR TRACT 12650-2 AND AUTHORI21NC THE PILING OP A NOTICE OP CO1PLETION FOR THE WORK r ~. PAGE City Counc i.l Agenda Nay 18, 1988 i i TRACT 12830 - located on the west aide of Beryl S[ree t, 67 t south of 19th Street. ' I ~' Release: I I i i I ~ I Faithful Performance Bond (Street) $739,222 i Accept: l ' I ~ Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) $ 73,925 ~: i I RESOLUTION N0. 88-308 68 I ~ i ' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING Tl~ PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS POR TRACT 12830 AND AIITHOHI2INC THE PILING OP A NOTICE OP COMPLETION FOR THE NORR 23. Approval to destroy records from the Adminia [ration, 69 I Engineering end Planning Departments. I RHSOL'~"TION I70. 88-:09 70 A BESOLUTION OF TFffi CLTY COUNCIL OF TEE 'i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA. '~i ' i AUTHORIZING THE DESTRUCTION OF CITY i t I RECORDS AND DOCUMENTS NHICH ARE NO LONGER ' i REQUIRED AS PROVIDED UNDER GOVERNMENT j CODB SECTION 34090 I RESOLUTION N0. 88=3i0 12 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE I CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AllTH0RI2ING THE DESTRUCTION OP CITY RECORDS AND DOCUIDiNT3 WHICH HAVH BEEN ' NICROPILl~D AND ARE NO LONGER REQUIRED AS ' I PROVIDED UNDER GOVERNMENT CODE SBCTION ~ i 34090 ~~ ~ ~ ~ I I 24. Set public hearing for June 15, 1988 - Adoption o£ a 77 Reso lu [ion of Necessity [o condemn portions of four real estate properties (APN 202-061-15, 202-111-06, 202-111- 17, 202-111-16) in the city of Rancho Cucamonga, located along the eouth aide of 19th Street, east and west of Amethyst Avenue i^[ere ec Cion for the purp oee of providing right-of-way For ultimate street improvements. 4 PAGE City Council Agenda Hay 18~ 1988 25. Set public hearing for June 15, 1988 - Approval to Aanea 79 Tract No. 13644 located on the east side of Hermosa Avenue and the south aide of Via to Grove Stree ty to Street Lighting Maintenance Die trio No. 2 as Annexation No. 29. RunuLUi IOM N0. 88-s li 8u i I A HHSOLUTION OF THH CITY COUNCIL OP TH8 CITY OF BANCIIO WCAMONGA~ CALLFORNIA~ OF ~, i ~ PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY HNCINBCB'S i i HHPOHT FOR ANNEBATION N0. 29 TO STRHHT ~. i LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTHICT N0. 2 RHSOLUTION NO. 88-312 86 A HESOLOTIOB OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THH CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIA DECLARING IT9 INTBNTION TO 08DER THE ANNHFATION TO STBEBT LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 2, AN ASSHSSMBRf DISTRICT: DHSICNATING SAID ANNBRATION AS ANNHSATIOM NO, 29 TO STRHHT LIGHTING MAINTHNANGH ~ DISTRICT N0. 2q PURSUANT TO THH LANOSCAP ING AND LIGHTING ACT OP 1972 AND ~ OPFB RING A TI!ffi AND PLACE POH FDSAHING OSJHCTIONS THEHHTO 26. Se[ public hearing for June 15, 1988 - Approval to Annex 88 Tract No. 13644, located on She east aide of IIermosa Avenue and the south aide of Vie [a Grove Street, to Landscape !fa intenance District No. 1 as Annexation No. 47. ~ RESOLUTION N0. 88-313 89 A RHSOLUTION OP THB CITY COUNCIL OF TXB '. CITY OP HANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPORNIA~ OP PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY BNCINBER'S REPORT POR ANNHRATION N0, 47 TO LANDSCAPE i MAINTENANCE OISTBI CT NO. 1 +K PAGE Ci[y Council Agenda May 18~ 1988 10 ~ RESOLUTION N0. 88-314 94 A RESOLUTION OP THB CITY COUNCIL OP THE i CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPORNIA~ ' ~ DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE ~ ANNERATION TO LANDSCAPB MA YNTE NAN CE ~ ll353'IILCT M0. 1: sN AS 565S!ffiNT DISTRICT: i D85IGNATING SALD ANNERATION AS ANNEXATION I I N0. 47 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT ~ i N0. 1, PURSUANT TO THB LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACf OP 1972 AND OFPBRINC A TIID: ' AND PUCE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THBRETO ~ i I 27. Set public hearing for June 15. 1988 -Approval to Annez 96 i Tract No. 13644, Psrcel Hap 9504 DB 86-32 (Lot 5: Tract 12176): end CUP 87-04 (various locations throughout the City), to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 ae Annexation No. 45. SBSOLUTION N0. 88-315 97 A RESOLUTION OP TIC CITY CWNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCHO L^J^!MONG~. ^9LIPOR.gZA, OP ~ PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OP CITY EHGINE68'S i BBPORT FOR ANNEXATION N0. 45 TO STREET LIGHTING MA'LNTBNANCB DISTRICT N0. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 88-316 I 106 I ~ A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE C'tTY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIA, i DECLARING ZTS INTENTION TO 0$DEH THE ANNERATION TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1, AN ASSRSSMENT DI3TRICf: i DES IGNAT INC SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNERATION N0. 45 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1, PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND OPPE RING A TIME AND PLACE POR iffiARING i i i OBJECTIONS THERETO i ~ i ~ ~ 28. Se[ puD lic hearing for June 16, 1988 -Approval to Annex 108 i CUP 87-04, DR 86-32 (Lot 5. Tract 12176). (IndueCrial /Comma rc iel)~ to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 ee Annexation No. 20. PAGE City Council Agenda May 18, 1988 11 ~ RESOLUTION N0, 88-317 109 A RESOLUTION OF TNA CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIA, OF PRBLIMTNAHY APPROVAL OP CITY BNGINEBA'S I REPORT FOA ANNEXATION N0. 20 TO LANDSCAPE I, i MAINTENANCE DZSTHICT ND, 3 i RESOLUTION N0, 88-318 116 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE 'i, I CITY OP RANCHO CUCAHONCA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTBNTZON TO ORDER TBE I ANNE RATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 3, AN ASSBSSMENT DISTHICf: DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATIOA 'I NO. 20 TO LANDSCAPE MAIATENANCE DISTRICT i N0. 3, PURSUANT TO TEE LANDSCAPING AND I LIGHTING ACT OP 1972 AND OFFERING A TIRE AND PLACE POH EEAHING OBJECTIONS THERETO 29. Set public hearing for June 15~ 1988 - Approval to Annex 118 I ~ i i CUP 57-04, DA 86-32 (IOC 5~ Tract 1217b), ~ ~i (Industrial/COasoerc ial), to Street Lighting Me intemnce District No. 6 ae Annexation No. 16. I ~ ~ i HESOLUTIOH N0. 88-319 119 II i I A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE i CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONCA~ CALIPOANIA~ OP PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OP CITY ENGIN68R'S i I ~ ~ ~ REPORT POR ANNEXATION NG. 16 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 6 RESOLUTION N0. 88-320 126 i A fl630LUTI0N OP T'AE CITY COUNCIL OF TAE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPORNIA~ DEC7ARING ITS INTHNTION TO OADEA TAE ANNEXATION TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE n2aTRICT NC. 6 Alt !SSESSM~°NT DISTRICT; DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION N0. 16 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0, 6, PURSUANT TO TA8 LANDSCAPING AAD LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND OPPH RING A TIl~ AND PLACE POH fiEABING OBJECTIONS THERETO PAGE City Council Agenda May 19~ 1988 12 ~ 30. Set public hearing for lone 15, 1988 - Appzoval to Amex Fereel Nap No. 9504, located at the northeast 128 corner of Haven Avenue and Base line Road, to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4 ae Annexation No. 8. I I RESOLUTION N0. 88-321 1 29 I A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE I CITY OP BANCHO CUCANONGA~ CALIPOBNIA~ OF ~ PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OP CITY ENGINHHB'S REPORT FOR ANNEAATION N0. 8 TO STRBET I I ~ LIGHTING NAINTENANC6 DISTRICT NC. 4 ~ ~ RESOLUTION N0. 88-322 135 A BESOLUTIOH OP TBE CITY COUNCIL OP THB CITY OP BAN CHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPOflNIA~ I DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO OflDBH THE ANNERATION TO STRBET LIGHTING MAINTEHANCE DISTBICf H0, 4, AN ASSESSMENT DISTDICT: DHSIGNATING SAID ANIPHHATION AS ANNBRATION N0. 8 TO STflBHT LIGHTING MAINTENANCE ~ I ~ DIET BIC2 :IO. 4, PUR3CANT 20 THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OP 1972 AND I OPF6 RING A TIME AND PLACE POA HEARING I I OB.IHCPSONS THHB8T0 I D. CONSHNT OflDLMAHC85 She following Ordinancee have had public hearings at [he j Cime of fireE reading. Second readings are ezpected to be routine and non-con[rmeraial. They will be acted upon by the Council st nee tier without diecuaaiea. The Ciq Clert rill read the title. Any item can be removed for discussion. ', 1. HNVIAONI~NTAL AS SESSMBNT AND DEVBLOPMENT CODE AAI6NDNENT '~~ 83-03 - CITY OP flANCHO CUCAMONCA - An amendment to i Chapter 17.09 of [he Development Code modifying certain i da'.'a lJpea :: Haan lat.cse for La_-M~dice sad Mr-dice Aes identiel. 4~~? Y PAGE City Council Agenda May 18, 1988 13 ORDINANCE N0. 345 (second reading) 137 AN ORDINANCE OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, I APPHOV ING DEVELOPMENT CUDH AiffiNDNENT N0. 88-03, AMENDING SECTION 17.08.040 P n:AINI:iG TC DEYnr,nnulgr CT41?4AR.JS ROR THE LOW-!ffiDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA COlRf1INITY PLAN I ~I ~, t AMENDMENT 88-02 - CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA - An ' ~I i I amendment to the Terra Vista Community Plan text i modifying car to in development regulations for Lora-Medium ~ and Medium Beaiden[i&1. ORDINANCE N0. 346 (sec and reading) 142 I AN ORDINANCE OP TXE CITY COUNCIL OP THE I CITY OP RANCHO CDCAMONGA, CALIPORNIA, i ADOPTING TH ERA VISTA COMMUNITY PLAN ~ AMENDMENT 88-02 TO MODIPY THB LOW-MEDIUM i ~ AND MEDIUM RHSTDe NTIAL DeVHLOP HE NT : ~ i i STANDARDS ~ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN i I AMENDMENT 88-03 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - An amendment to [ne vic ror is wuwuuiy Tlo ,.~..: ~cL i`_p°ico ' Loa-Medium and certain development re gula[iona for Medium Aeaidential. t i ORDINANCE N0. 347 (second reading) 158 i : AN ORDINANCE OP THE CLTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN Al~NDMENT 88-03, TO MODIPY THE LOW-MEDIUM AND MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DEVELOP MH NT STANDARDS 2. ADDITION TO CHAPTER 10.50 TO THE MUNICIPAL CODE I ~ ~ ESTABLISHING AUTHORITY AND PBOCBDUBE TO FORM PERMIT CAR[llm4 DLET ai CT^o. A RESCLLaIGM TJ 9hDV 9F OMT'a piHYINI_ DISTRI Cf A AROUND TII6 ALTA LOMA HIGH SCHOOL TO ELIMINATE THE 6NCROACAMENP OP VEHICULAR PARRINC II7CIDHIPTAL TO THE RICH SCHOOL. PAGE City Council Agenda May 18, 1988 14 ORDINANCE N0. 3ag (second reading) I 177 AN ORDINANCE OP T}lE CITY COUNCIL OF TAE CITY OF RANCBO CUC MONGA, CALIFOHNIA, A ADDING ARTICLE 10.50 TO TITLE 10 OF THE I RANCHO CUCAHONCA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ~ i i ~ PRCVID.. POP. T°..°, ES.A....,oAlie~r OP rnCliiT PARSING DISTRICTS i ~ I A. 6DN88SISBD PUBLIC UBARINCS ~ i ~, i She following items Lave been advertised sad/or posted ee public hearings ae requited by lar. The choir rill open the i meeting to receive pnblic taetimony. 1, APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION APPROVING TIt4 181 HRTENSION FOR THNTATIVE T&1CT N0. 32332 - CRISTIANO - A custom lot residential eubdiv ie ion of 151 lots on approaimately 85 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (lees then two dwelling unite per ~ acre), located on the east aide of Raven Avenue north of ~ the Nillaide Drainage Chnanel (Deer Canyon Drive) - APN I ~ 201-121-24. (Continued from May 4, 1988) I I 2. BNVIflONMENTAL ASS6881lENT AND DEVELOPMBNT DISTRICT 730 I xwnunana d/-11 - JAmed a. 4aR'1'EA - A request to amend I i the Development Dietric to Nap from Office/Profea sional (OP) to Neighborhood Co~erc iel (NC) for approximately 3.45 acres of lend, located on the sou thweet corner of Base Line Road and Hellman Avenue - APN 208-202-13, 14. ~ ~ I (Continued from May 4, 1988) RESOLUTION N0, 88-092 252 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF TN6 CITY I OP RANCHO CUCANONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A REQU83T TO A1~ND THE DEVELOP NB NT DIST8ICT3 MAP, DDA 87-11, PROM OFFICE /PROPBSSIONAL TO NB ICHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL FOR A 3.45 ACRE PARCEL ~ ~ LOCATED ON THE SOUTHNEST CORNEH OP BASE LIMB i ROAD AND HELi:riAN AV'aNLo, HANL'nv CUCnriONGA, i CALIFORNIA, AND 11ARH FINDINGS IN SUPPOET THER80F - APN 208-202-13, 14. 0. PAGE City Council Agenda May 18~ 1988 15 ENVIHONI$NTAL A558S SH8NT AND GENBHAL PLAN AMENDMENT 88- 230 OlA -JAMBS 6. CARTER - A request to emend the General ~ ~ Plan Land Use Map from "Office" to "Neighborhood ~i I Commercial" for approaimate ly 3.45 acres of land i located on the sou Chveat corner of Base Line Hoad and I I i Hellman Avenue - APN 208-202-13~ 14. (Continued from I I ' May 4, 1988) RESOLUTION N0. 88-093 255 I A RESOLUTION OP TH6 CITY COUNCIL OP THB CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIAN DBNYLNC A REQUEST TO AMEND TH8 LAND USB NAP OP THB GBNBBAL PLANS GPA 83-OIA~ PROM OPPI CE TO N6IGHBOBHOOD COlDRIHCIAL POH 3.45 ACHHS OF LAND ' LOCAT80 ON TH6 SOUTHSieST COBIiEH OP BASS LINE ROAD AND HELLMAN AVENU6~ BANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPOHNIA~ AND MARE PINDINGS IN SUPPORT TfD3RBOP - APN 208-202-13~ 14. i 3. APPROVAL OF TB6 HNYIHONlBNTAL INITIAL STUDY PARTS I AND 258 II AND ISSUANCE OF A NEGATIVE DECLABATION POB THE ETI,JASDA ST08.tl DRAIN, PHA9E Z, LOCATED 4RST OP I :5. I NOflTH OP VICTORIA AYENOE PROM TH8 VICPORIA BASIN TO NORTH OP HIGHLAND AVENUE AND PUTUBB HOUTB 30 PRBBHAY. RESOLUTION N0. 88-323 mu A flBSOLUTION OF TBE CITY COUNCIL OP T~ CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPORHIA~ APPBOV ING THE HNVIHOAMBNTAL INITIAL STUDY i AND ISSUANCE OP A NEGATIVE 08CLABATION POH TH8 PflOP096D HTIHAIiDA STORM DHAIN~ PHASE I, BNYIHONI~NTAL ASSBSSMBNT HBVIiSN 4. ENVZHONI~NTAL ASSES SMBNT AND GENBBAL PLAN AMSNDIDiNT 87- 281 04G - NOUHSH DHVBLOPMENT - A request to emend the General Plan Lend Use Map from Lov-Medium Heeidential (4-8 dve lling unite per acre) to High Heeidential (24-30 dxelling unite per acre) for 5.05 ac ree of lands located cn t'.:e accth •=de ^f Eaac Liac H,;a3, .moo, of Ateh iba.~ Avenue - A_°N: 208-031-18~ 19. PAGE City Council Agenda May 16, 1988 16 RESOLUTION N0. 88-324 425 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE j CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAt CALIFORNIAt I i DENYING GENERAL PLAN Al~NDLII+.NT N0. 87-04G REQUESTING AN AMBNDt~NT TO THE LAND USE 'I I ~ ELElL+NT OP THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENEEAL ' PLAN P80M LOW-ME DIUN RESIDENTIAL (4-8 ~ I DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO AIGH ( ~ RESIDENTIAL (24-30 DWELLING UNITS PER i I ACRE) FOR A SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT ON t 5.05 ACRES OP LAND LOCATED ON THE SOUTH I SIDE OP BASS LIMB BOADt WEST OP ARCHIRA:.D j AVENUet RANCHO CUCANONGAt CALTPORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT 281 j AMENDMENT 87-05 - NOUBSB DBVSLOPMBNT - A request to i amend the Development District Nap from Loa-Medium (4-8 duelling units per acre) to High Residential (24-30 daelling unite pet acre) attached ai[h the Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD) to the base din trio for j 5.05 acres of lands located on the south aide of Saee • i.-.e Eaa3t vast of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, I i 1 1 19. I I RESOLUTION N0. 68-325 426 I A RESOLUTION OP THE CIYY COUNCIL OF THE j I I CITY OF eANCHO CUCAMONGAt CALIFORNIAt DENYING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT ~ N0. 87-OS BBQllESTING AN AiRtNDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT HAP FROM LOW-MEDIUM ' i RES IDENTLAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) ~ TO HIGH RESIDENTIAL (24-30 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) ATTACHED WITH THB SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICT (SHOD) POR 5.05 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF BASE LINE ROADt WE9T OP ARCHIBALD j AVENUE, RANCHO CUCAMONCAt CALIPOBNIA I j ~ nr vat nraeym !GREE!'3NT E7-02 - LOPNE.:'" - •V w. Development Agreement betaeen the Ci[y of Rancho Cucamonga end Nou ree Development far the purpose of providing a Senior Housing Project per the requirements of the Senior Housing Overlay District (Section 27.20.040 of the Development Code, Ordinance 211) Eor 170 apes kmen[ un ita to be located on the south aide of Rase Line Roedt neat of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-0G1- 1St 19. PAGE City Council Agenda May 18, 1988 I lr ~ i DEVELOPMENT AGREENENT 87-02A - NOUHSE OHVHLDPNENT - A 281 tfiree-party Development Agreement between the Ci[y of flaacho Cucamonga, Nou rse Development and Nest 8nd i Invee [aente for the purpose of providing a Senior ( Housing Project per the requirements of the Senior Housing Overlay District (Section 17.20.040 of the I Deveiopmen[ code, Ordinance 211j xor 170 apartment ua its I ~ and office medical coop lea to be located on tfie south aide of Base Line Aoad, west of Archib eld Avenue - APN I i 208-031-18, 19. ! i i HNVIRON!¢NTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVHLOPMENT HHVIHN 87-33- 281 ~ NOUB36 DHVBLOPMHAT - Appeal of the Planning Comis eion ~e decision denying the development of 170 senior apertmeate on 4.85 acres of lacd is the Low-Medium Residential Diatricf (4-8 dve lling unite per acre), located an the eou[h aide of Baee Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19. Aseoe fated with the project ie Tree Bemovn/ Permit 88-14. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DHVBLOP!ffiNf RHVIBN 87-34- 281 NEST END INVHSTMENTS - Appeal of the Planning Con~ml^s~s decision deayiag the 3evelopment o'_ s 22,500 equere foot medical office building on 1.7 acres of lend in Cha Low-Medium Residential Die trio (4-8 dwelling unite per acre), located on the wee[ aide of ~ Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road - APN: 208- i 031-17, 54, 55, 56 and 57. Associated with the project I is Tree Removal PermiC 88-14. ~ HNVIRONMHNTAL ASSESSMENT AND GHNBBAL PLAN AMENDMENT 87- 281 I ~ 04M - NEST END INVHSTMENTS - A request to amend the Land i Uae Element of the General Plan from Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling unite per acre) to Office for 1.69 acres of land, located on the west Bide of Archibald Avenue, eou[h of Baee Line - APN: i08-031-17, 54, 55, 56 end 57. I /'/~'' ~ i ~ ~ ~ PAGE a`%~~~~~ City Council Ageada m~ k 3 ~'' ' / May 18, 1988 18 RESOLUTION N0. 88-326 427 A BESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MNCHO CUCAHONGA~ CALIFOANIA~ DENYING C~tiBBAL PLAN AASNDIlBNT N0. 87-04A i ~ ABQIIESTING AN AHENDMeNT TO THE LAND USE I ~ GLH HEAI Vl laD Aa1~4 G~ GUw.efORGn lmi~G-N1L PLAN PHOH iOW-lII;DIUH AESIDHNTIAL (4-8 DWHLLING UNITS PEH ACAS) TO OPPICB POR A I 1.69 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED ON THE WEST 3IDE ~ OP ARCEIBALD AVBNOB~ SOUTH OF BASE LINE I i HOAD~ BANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIA ~ i 6NVIRONlDiNTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPlD;NT DISTAI CT 281 AMENDMENT 87--06 - WEST END INVESTMENTS - A request to amend the Development Districts Map from Low-Medium Residential (4-8 duelling unite per acre) to Office Profeaeional Eor 1.69 acres of lands located on [he west aide of Archibald Avenue, south of Beee Line Road - APN: i 208-031-17, 54~ 55, 56 and 57. RESOLUTION NO. 88-327 428 I ~ A RESOLUTION OP TBE CITY COUNCIL OF TEE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHONGA~ CALIFOHNIA~ DH HYING A BHQUEST TO AMHND TEE i UEVE LUPMEMI' Ultl'1'N1 L'L' lIAY~ NU. UUA tl/-Uh i FROM LOW-iffiDIUM RHSIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING i UNITS PER ACRE) TO OPFIGe/PROFESSIONAL POA A 1.69 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED ON TAE WEST SIDE OF AACHIBALD AVENUE, SOUTH OP I BASK LING ROADS RANCHO CllCAHONGA~ ~~ CALIFORNIA 5. ENVIRONMHNTAt AS SBSSMHNT AND DEVeLOP MENT DIET AI CT qpg AM6NDl6NT 88-05 - ANHANSON - A requost to emend the ~ Development District Mflp from "FC" (Flood Control" to "LM" (Low-Medium Resident iel~ 4-8 dwelling unite per acre) for a 1.06 acre parts 1, located nortfi of Highland Avenues weal of Hilliken Avenue - APN: Portion of 201- 1 i I i I I I 271-ss. Wy PAGE City Council Agenda ~ May 18~ 1988 19 ORDINANCE N0. 349 (fire[ reading) AN ORDINANCB OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP TAE CITY OP $AN CflO CUCAHONGA~ CALIPORNIA~ APPROVING DEVELOP2~NT DISTRICT ANENDNENT 88-05~ REQUESTING A GRANGE IN THE DEVBLOPMENT DISTRICT DR37rNAmI^N PRC.; "PC" (FLOOD CONTROL) TO "LM" (LOW-MEDIUM ABSIDENTIAL) POR A 1.06 ACAS PARCEL L ):.ATED NORTH OF NT CNLAND AVENUES WRST OF MILLIRBN AVENUE - APN: A PORTION OP 201- 271-55 6. OBDERTNG TflE WORK IN CONNECTION WITA: A. ANNERATION N0. 45 PON TAACf N0. 13425. LOCATED BAST OP HAVAN AVBNtffi BBTWBBN HIGIN,AND AVENUE AND 19TH STRHET, TO LANDSCAPH MAINTENANCE DIST$I CI N0. 1. RESOLUTION N0. 88-328 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TH8 CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPO$NIA~ ORDERING THS WORR IN CONNECTION WITH A NNERATION N0, 45 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 AND ACCEPTING TN6 PINAt RNGTNNVD:C ~. ..r. .v6 •pn41 13425 44D 441 442 H. ANNE RATION NOS, 42 AND 27 FOR TRACT NO. 13425. 447 LOCATRD EAST OF HAVHN AVENUE BETWEHN NIGNLAND AVENUE AND 19TH STREET, TO STBEET LIGHTING MAINTB YANC6 DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2. BBSPE CTIVELY. R830tUTI0N No. 88-329 ~ 448 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCNO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIA, OeDeRING TAH WORK IN CONNECTION WITN ANNEIIATION N0. 42 TO STREET LI CNTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1 AND ACCEPTING THR PTM.^? ENCL`oH R'S RrtvOH'P nno T°:CT :... 13425 4~ //~~~- ~ PAGE /'~a '~ d °' ` > a City Council Agenda / /mie~5' / Hay 18, 1988 20 'I i i t RESOLUTION NO. 88-330 454 ' A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THB i I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, i i OHDBHING THE WORK IN CONNHCTION WITH V I ANNERATION N0, 27 TO STREET LIGHTING i Nlfin l6HAN.;c DLJT ALIT NV• 2 fLLYU Al,IrGCZING t THE FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOH TRACT N0. I I I 13425 ~ ~ B. ANNEXATION N0. 43 AND ANNEXATION N0. 15 POH DH 86- 4fi0 1 43. LOCATED AT THH NOBTHEAST CORNER OF 8TH STREET I ~ ~ AND BARER AVENUE, TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCH I I DISTRICT N0, 1 AND STRHHT LIWTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 6. I it RESOLUTION NO, 88-331 461 ~ I A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP TN8 CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIPOBNIA, OBDBHING THH WOHR IN CONNECTION WITH ANNERATION NOS. TO STHEeT LIGHTING I I MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0, 1 AND ACCBPTTNG THE PINAL BNGII03BH'S REPORT FOH DH 86-43 I i I RESOLUTION NO. 88-332 467 A RESOLUTION OP THH CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE WORR IN CONNECTION WITR ANNEXATION N0. 15 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 AND ACCEPTING THE PINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR DH 86-43 C. ANNEXATION N0. 19 POR OR 86-43. LOCATED AT THE 473 NORTRBAST CORNER OF STH STREHT AND BARER AVENUB, TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 3. RESOLUTION N0. 88-333 474 A RE60LUTION OP TIIE CITY COUNCIL OP THE ' i ~ l:I1Y VF uANcNO GUGAMUMUA, GALIPUHN LA, I ORDERING THE WOBR IN CONNECTION WITH ANNERATION N0. 19 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCB DISTRICT M0, 3 AND ACCEPTING THE PINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT POR DR 86-43 ~ ~ PAGE ~~°~4'"~~/~ City Council Agenda /a~~~y ~.9i3i, May 18, 1988 21 P. PDBLIC HEARINGS I ' j ~ She Following here have no legal publication ar poa[i n8 i i requirereote. She Chair rill opeo the reetiug to receive I I i public teatirony. i. riODirii:AliuN Iu PGLIi:ii rdnlAlNlhc; Yu Yrid Nci'kOUOLOC;Y UP 400 ASSESSMENT WITHIN TE RBA VISTAS LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE i DISTRICT, ~ I RESOLUTION NO. 88-334 ~ 490 I~ ~ A RESOLUTION OP TES CITY COUNCIL OF TAE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, I MODIFYING FOLIC I85 PERTAINING TO TAE MHTHODOLOGY OP ASSHB S[~NT WITHIN TERRA VISTA'S LANDSCAPE iMINTeNANC6 DISTRICT 2. CONSIDERATION OF BSTABLISflMH NT OP SPEED LIMITS- 492 Reco®endetion to ee[ab lieh speed limits on Victoria Street from Haven Avenue to Mendocino Place, Baker Avenue from 8th Street to Foothill Boulevard and Red Nill Country CLub Drive from Foothill Boulevard to Al[s Cueeta Drive. i I ORDINANCE N0. 350 (fire[ reading) dab AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, A24?NDING SECTION 10.20.020 OP THE HANCAO I CUCAMONGA CITY CODB REGARDING PRIMA FACIE I ' , I SPEED LIMITS UPON CeRTAIN CITY STREETS I C. CITY MAMAGBR'S STAPP RBPOBTS The following here do not legally require any public teetirooy, •l though the Chair ray open [he reetieg foz I public input. i ~ i i ~ ~ ~ ~ 1. CONSIDBBATION OF BBOUEST BV CITRUS LITTER LRAGIIR Tn H_OSR 498 t t U1ST Ri CT 21 PLAY-OFF TOURNAMHNTS AT R8D HILL AND I HBRITACB PARRS, 2. GUIDELINES AND POLICY POR FINANCING INFRASTRUCTURH BY 502 UTILIZING ASS6SSN8NT AND CO MHUNITY FACILITIES DISTRI CfS. ~~ PAGE City Council Agenda Nay 18, 1988 i 22 I l i 3. SETTING ANNUAL SPECIAL TA% FOR THE COMMUNITY FACILITIES 506 DISTRICT N0. 84-1 (DAY CRHER DBAINAGE SYSTEM) POR THR AMOUNT OF $350 PEH ACHE. j i RESOLUTION N0. 88-335 507 i I i I A RESOLUTION OP Toe CITY COUNCIL OP THE ~ CLTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIA, ~ ~ ESTABLISHING ANNllAL SPECIAL TAX FOR I COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 84-1 II ~ I~ I ~i I 4. CONSIDEBATION TO UTILIZE CONDEMNATION TO OBTAIN OFF-S ITN 513 ~~ RIGHTS-OP-WAY FOH 1HiPTATIVE TEACT N0. 13808 - LEWIS i HOMHS - A request for direction concerning the use o£ possible condemnation proceedings to obtain off-site street rights-of-wey aesoc fated with the development of a propoa ed tentative tract located at the southwest corner of Eaet Avenue and Summit Avenue (APN 225-181-4, 6, 7, 8 end 43, 225-201-28). 5. TREE PRESBHVATION OBDINANCE UPDATE. 521 j H. COUIICIL g0.gI11HSS Thw fnl lnvine itwme haves hwwn rwmvatwd hs thw CiI a C it _ for discussion. They are not pnbl is hearing items, although the Chair may open the meeting for public input. i ~~ 1. CONSIDERATION OF HEpUESTTNG PLANNING COMMISSION TO 525 ~ INVESTICATR THE POTENTIAL OP ALLOWING CHILD CARE I FACILITIES UNDSH A CONDITIONAL USH PERMT IN LIGHT ~ I ~ INDUST HIAL, INDUSTRIAL C0141H:HCIAL. AND RETAIL ZONBS l WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AREA, ~ 2. CITY COUNCIL SUBCOMHITTEE REC0141ENDATION TO FILL VACANCY ON PARK A RECREATION COMiISSION. j 3. CITY COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION TO PILL VACANCY I i ~ ~ ~ ON PUBLIC SAFETY COMiT3SI0N. I. IDHNT',PICATIOII OP ITHMB POH HH1(T MHTIHG ~~ This ie the tine Eor City Comeil to identify the items they !~ vieh to discuss at the Beat meeting. These items rill not be diecaseed at this meeting, only identified for the nea meeting. Y~ PAGE City Couacil Ageada Hay I8, 1988 23 J. COlMIINICASIO&S PHOM YHB POBLIC ~ Yhia is the tine amd place for the general public to addreea the City Council. State lam prohibits [be City Council from addreesiog any issue not previonely included on the Ageada. I ~ i The City Comcil may receive testimony sad act the matter for ' a smbaegmenC meeting. Cosments ere to be limited to five minutes per individual. I j L A0.TOOBI~6Ai ~ Meeting to adjourn to llaq 25, 1988 et 6:00 p. m., in the Lobby ~ Room ai Liovs Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Hoad~ for I a budget vorkehop. I, Beverly A. Authelet~ City Clerk of the City of Haacho Cucamonga, hereby certify the[ a [rues accurate copy of the foregoing agenda vac poa led oa May 13, 1988, seventy-tvo (72) hours prior to the meeting per A.B. 2671. et 9320-C Base I I I I l ~ ~ I ~ Line Hoed. April 6, 1988 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL HINUTES HeAU18r Mee[inA e. ceLL ro o7mEe A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga met on Wedneadsy~ April 6~ 1988 in the Lions Park Community Centers 9161 Baee Line Roed~ Rancho Cucamonga Ca lifornie. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p. m. by Mayor Dennis L. Stou [. Present were Counc ilmembera: Deborah N. Btown~ Charles J. BuqueG Ih Jeffrey Ring, Pamela J. Wright, and Mayor Denn ie L. Stout. Also present were: City Manager, Lauren M. Was sermavq Legal Counseh James Markman? City Clerks Beverly Autheleti City Planners Bred eu ller7 Ae aietan[ P lanner~ Chr ie Weatman; and Associate Civil Engineez~ Cindy Hackett. s e,+++• B. AMNODMCBMBYI'S/PY6861lIATIOtAS Bl. Preaen[a[ion of proclamation declaring the week of April 11 - 16~ 1988 ae "Week of the Young Child" is Aancho Cucamonga. a<. rreaencarion ui pruc is mnciou uec inriug cite mvu cil oI .+p~ii~ aaoo 00 "Earthquake Preparedness Honth" in Rancho Cucamonga. ~ a + t a n C. COMSEH'I CALBMDAII C1. Approval of Minutes: February 16, 19887 March 2, 1988) and March 12, 1988. C2. Approval of Warrants, Rag inter No'e. 3/16 /88, 3/23 /88, and 3/30/88, and Payroll ending 3i 17 /88 for the total amount of $2,062,270.64. C3. Approval to receive and file current Investment Schedule ae of Harch 28, 1988. nl. E\..v .l:. o • 1. .. [ /ACC C 1 n 1 D lJlt Yl~.... i .. ...1 ., es~ ..r~,...e..,... ., .. ., .,.,..~.,. ...yam,.. ~ e..~, Lee, Song and Lynda Eunkyung~ 8161 W. Foath ill Boulevard. C5. Approval to execute Contract Change Order No. 4 (CO 86-042) to Associated Engineers in the amount of $6/000.00 for design of concrete reservoir south of Hillside Road west of Archibald Avenue to be paid from Systems Development Fees, Account No. 22-4637-8748 bringing the contract total to $28 X054.53. (0602-01 CUNT AHEN)~ C i[y Council Minutes April 6, 1988 Page 2 C6. Approval [o execute Contract Change Order No. 2 (CO 87-020) for a p ro Eeeeional eery ices agreement with Don Greek and Asaoriatee to continue design admin is [ration repor to for the Runyan Street Extension and Channel Crossing of Alta Loma Creek to Se funded from the Systems Development Pund, Account No. 22-4637-8734. It is recommended to expand their contract by $5,000.00 to bring their total to $13,799.50. (0602-01 CONT AMEN) C7. Approval to avard and execute professional services agreement (CO 88-040) with GPS Consulting Civil Engineers to prepare plane, ep ec ificati one and estimates for the improvement of Reach 18, Watershed V (Alta Loma Storm Drain) for a fee of $23,315.00, [o be paid from AD 84-2 Punda, Account No. 80-4637- 6028. (0602-01 CONTRACT) C8. Approval to award and execute pzofeaei onal services agreement (CO 88-041) with Linville Civil Engineers/Lend Surveyors, Inc. to prepare plane, spec ificationa and estimate for Ninth SCreet Pavement Rehabilitation between Baker Avenue and Vieeyard Avenue, to be funded by Bye tame Development, Mcount No. 22-4637-8747. (0602-01 CONTRACT) RESOLUTION N0. 88-167 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL. OP THE CITY OF RANCRO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, TO AWARD AND ERECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SBRVICES AGREEMENT NITR LINV ILLS CIVIL ENGINEERS/LAND SURVEYORS, INC. OP 8ANC110 CUCAMONCA, CALIPORNIA TO PRHPARE PLANS, SPECIPICATIONS, AND BSTI MATE POR NINTH STREET rflVGmnnl I(811ap1LL1a11Un anY 1I1 YGn1nL ChVJG LI GGLI,6GP YnN.R AVENUE AND VINEYARD AVENUE C9. Approval to execute Lea ae Agreement (CO 88-042) with Cucamonga County Water Die tr ict £or placement of radio ee uipme nt et the Dietr is t'e reeervo it site at 4822 Archibald Avenue in Rancho CucamonBa• (0602-01 CONTRACT) C10. Approval to execute Professional Services Agreement (CO 88-043) with J.F. Davidson As eoc is to e, Inc., for design of traffic signal and street improvements at [he intereec lion of Foothill Boulevard and Roche a[¢r Avenue. Improvements will also inrlude storm drain conetruc lien, utility relocations and right-of-way engineering. (0602-01 CONTRACT) C11. Approval to award the bid for the Slurry Seal Prog ram, Phsae I, fiscal year 198?-88, Distric to 1 through 9 ae ehavn on [he attached maps, to IPS oervicc a, $85,782. 1Y w YY .Yn~e~ ,rim ..., 300 .,.r. a, aeewn~ number 15-4637-8050.x4 (0601-01 BID) C12. Approval to relea ae Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement (CO 88-044) for Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 6911, located a[ 10955 Arrow Rou [e, submit [ed by Walter E. Neller, Pec tore Incorpore led. (0602-01 AGREE I/L) City Counc it Hinutea April 6, 1988 Page 3 RESOLUTION N0. 88-168 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RELEASING A REAL PROPERTY LMPROVE!ffiNT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM WALTER E. HELLBR, PACTOR, INCORPORATED C13. Approval to release Improvement Agreement and Improvement Securities foz Tract 13057, located on the southwest corner of Highland end Fairmont Avenues, submitted by the Fieldstone Company. (0602-01 AGREE IMPR) RESOLUTION N0. 88-169 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIh OP THE CITY OP RANCNO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, HELEAS ING I1IPROVETffiNT AGREEMENT AND IllPR0Ve1ffiNT SECURZTY FOR TRACT 13057 C14. Approval to execute Improvement Agreements and Improvement Security for DR B7-16, located on the west aide of E[iwanda Avenue south of Foothill Boulevard, submitted by General Telephone Company of California. (0602-01 AGREB IMPR) RESOLUTION N0. 88-170 A RESOLUTION OF TN8 CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIPORNIA, APPROVING INPROVE!ffiNT AGREEMENTS AND IMPROVel83NT SECURITY POR DEVELOPI~NT REVIHW 87-16 CIS. Approval to execute Hap, Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security for Tract 12870, located on the north aide of Highland Avenue, between Etiwanda and Eeat Avenues, submitted by Refi Jav id, AAM Invee [manta, A California General Partnereh ip and NADFT, A Ca li Eornia Limited Par [nerah ip. (1002-09 MAP FINAL) (0602-01 AGREE IMPA) RESOLUTION N0. 88-171 A RESOLUTION OF TtIR CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCANON GA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVBNENT AGREEMENTS, IMPROVEMENT SECURITY, AND PINAL MAP OP TIUCT N0. 12870 C16. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security for 8162 Ninth Street, submitted by Oscar Hez e. (0602-01 AGRAB IMPA) RESOLUTION N0. 88-172 A RESOLUTION OP TFIE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP MNCHO CUCANONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEI~NT AND INPROVBMENT SECURITY POA 5162 NINTH STRBBT City Council Minutes April 6, 1988 Page 4 C17. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement a¢d Improvement Security for Tracts 12802-21 -S and -6 (Off-site Storm Drain), located east of Spruce Avenue and south of Mountain View Drive, submitted by Lewis Romea of California. (0602-01 AGREE IMPR) RESOLUTION N0. 88-173 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGAI CALIPORt1YA1 APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMELTT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACTS 12802-21 -5 AND -6 C18. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extension for CUP 85-14, located on the northwest corner of Archibald Avenue and 9th Street, submitted by Muller Company. (0602-01 AGREE ERTN) RESOLUTION N0. 88-174 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAI CALIF OflNIAI APP ROV INC IMP ROVEHEHT AGR68MENT EXTENN ION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR CUP 85-14 C19. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement 8xtension for Trac to 10827, 10827-11 10827-2 and 10827-3, located on Manz en its Drive between Hermosa Avenue and Haven Avenue, south of Wilson Avenue, submit tad by He lco, Induetrie e. (0602-01 AGREE E%TN) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAHONGA, CALIPORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVE1ENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND INPROVEMENT SECURITY POR TRACT NOS. 10827, 10827-11 10827-2 AND 10827-3 C20. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extension for Tract 11932, located on the south aide of Finch Avenue et Bando la Stre e[, submitted by C.T.K., Incorporated. (0602-01 AGEEE E%TN) RESOLUTION N0. 88-176 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGAI CAL Ir-ORNIAI APPBOV ING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT E XTO NC IDV AVT TVD9llYE W yT ~E ~IIp TTV Pl1D TD1~ 11072 C21. Approval to ec cept a Grant Deed for Spruce Avenue Park. (1404-06 PR DEVEL) (1002-01 DHED) C22. Approval of a loan end agreement (CO 88-045) in [he amount of $81000.00 e[ an interest ca to of eight percent (8y) [o be repaid within forty-eight (48) months for relocation costs incurred by Comnun i[y Services Manager. (0602-01 CONTRACT) (0502-02 PERSONNEL) City Couac it Miav[es April 6, 1988 Page 5 C23. Approval [o eatab liah a reserve account in the Systems Development Pund for segregation of available Eund balance. (0401-00 POND EST) C24. Approval of proposed sale of bonds Eor development of fire protection facilities. (1302-00 PIKE DIET) (0405-02 BONDS SALES C15. ApproVai of payment (CO 88-04G) got t- -r.e ad °6,000 f - -°.bsozptio^. ~*_udy for proposed Community Pac ilities District, ~E tiganda Highlands (88-I) from funds depoei [ed with the City by [he Caryn Company. (0401-03 BTI HT AD) (1141- 00 SP STUDY) C26. Approval to authorize the advertising of the "Notice inviting Bide" for the Red Hill Park Maintenance Building Improvement Project, funded from Capital Improvements Facilities, Account Ho. 01-4647-7043. (0601-01 BID) RESOLUTION N0, 88-177 A RESCLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THB CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SpECTPICATIONS FOR THE "BED HILL PARE MAINTENANCE BUILDENG", IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRHCTINC TEE CITY CLEER TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS C27. Approval to authorise the advert ieing of the "Notice lnvi ting Bide" for the Lion Street Ea team on portion of the Ci[y Corporation Yard Improvement Projec [, located south of 9th Street, to be funded by Civic Facility - Account No. 72- 4285-6028. (0601-01 BID) RESOLUTION N0. 88-179 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF T}IE CITY OP RANCHC CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIPIGITIONS FOR THH "LION STREET EETENS ION SOUTH OF 9TH STREET"~ IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CLTY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS C28. Approval to confirm City Couac it action on October 21, 1987 uitfi regard to Tract No. 13541 (Allmark), which is located north of Red Hill Country Club Drive and ea et of Valle Vie to on Sierra Via to Drive. (0101-06 APPBAL) RESOLUCION N0. 88-179 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONFIRMING CITY COUNCIL ACTION ON OCTOBHR 21, 1987 WITH BE GARDE TO TRACT NOS, 13541 (ALLMARK), iRIICH IS LOCATED NORTH OP REU NILL COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE, EAST OF VALLE VISTA ON SIBRRA VISTA pRIVE City Council Minutes April 6, 1988 Page 6 C29. Approval [o concur with eteff'e dec ieion to ea tabliah "No Stopping A¢ytimo. Zone" on Base Line Aoed 6e tween the west city limits and Milliken Avenue. (1163-01 PR b TRAF) C30. Approval to modify the unit amount for fees in lieu of undergmunding existing overhead etectrical lines. (1201-02 UNDHRGND Lt) (0401-12 FBHS) BESOLUTION ND. 88-180 A RESOLUTION OF TH6 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AAN CHO CllCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIAN RESCINDING RESOLUTION N0, 87-243 AND ESTABLISHING A REVISED SCHE DULB OF FEBS IN LIEU OF UNbHRGROUNDING EXISTING OVERIIEAD UTILITY LINES WNBN HEQUTAED BY PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL C31. Approval to support the Zone 1 Flusd Control Project Priority Lie t. (1170- 08 FLOOD CONT) RESOLUTION N0. 88-181 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THH CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPORN IA, SUPPORTING THH ZONE 1 PROJHCT PRIORITY LIST C32. Approval to participate in the Weet End Solid Nae to Alte rnativea Coalition (WESWAC) program. (1170-09 WASTB SOL) RESOLUTION N0, 88-182 A ABSOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPORNIA~ SUPPORTING NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN THE COUNTIES OF SAN BE RNARDINO AND RIVE RS IDS POR USE OP RIVERSIDE COUNTY LANDFILL SITES AND ENCOURAGING THE FORMAT ION OP A JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY FOR THE PURPOSE OF MANAGING REGIONAL SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL C33. Approval to accept improvemen[s~ release bonds and file a notice of completion for: (0602-01 BOND BeL) (0704-18 NOT COIQ'LT) DR 85-38 - located on the southeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Seventy S tree[. Faithful Per tormence Bond (Straet) $27000 RESOLUTION NO, 88-183 A RESOLUTION OF TH6 CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPOHNIA~ ACCRPTING TRR PUBLIC IMPROVBMENfS F~ DR 85-38 AND AUTHORIZING TRR FILING OP A NOTICE OP COMPLETION FOR THE NORR City Cou¢c it Mi¢utea April 6, 1988 Page 7 MDR 87-32 - located on the nor [hesat corner of Archibald Avenue and Fourth Street. Faith Eul Performance Bond (Strut) $18,000 BESOL'3I0*.: N0. 88-184 A BESOLDTION OF TH6 CITY COUNCIL OP TN6 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIP08NIA, ACCEPTING THE PSIBLIC IMPROVeMENTS POR MDR 87-32 AND AUTHORIZING THE PILING OP A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOH THE WOHR DR 87-02 - located at 9500 Santa Anita Avenue, north of Pourth Street Faithful Performance Sond (Street) $15,000 RHSOLUTION NO. 88-185 A H650LOTION OP TN6 CITY COUNCIL OP TF~ CITY OF BANCNO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCSPTING TNH PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOH Dg 87-02 AND AUTHORIEING THH PILING OP A NOTICH OF COMPLETION POR THE N08R Tract 11606 - located o¢ 19th Street between Haven Avenue and Deer Creak Release: Peithful Performance Bond (Streai) $554,000 (b roan ura i¢i 9 a4,vw Accept: Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) $ 559400 (Storm Drain) y" 8,400 RHSOLUTION NO, 88-186 A RHSOLOTION OP TH6 CITY COUNCIL OF TH6 CITY OP RANCHO CUCAHONGA, CALIPORNIA~ ACCHPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVHNHNTS POR TBACT 11606 AND AUTHORIZING THE PILING OP A NOTICE OF COlE'LETION FOH THE NORR Tract i223S - located on the nor [haeet corner of Hellman Avenue and Churcfi Street ic._._.~ ci.cc cnn we maa2: aaauuu• .ci wruwa.c Wuu ~~~. ccv r+ +,.~~ Accep [: Ma intenence Guarantee Bond (Street) $ 46,540 City Council Hinutea April 6, 1988 Page 8 RESOLUTION N0. 88-187 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO COCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS POR TRACT 12238 AND AUTHORIZING THE PILING OP A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE NORR C34. Set public hzaring for Nay 4, 1988 - Approval of a Resolution Paeaing on Reapportionment Report for the etozm drain (Aeaee~men[ District 86-2) for the lot line adjustment for APN 201-271-71, APN 201-271-72, and Tract Nap 12873, and giving preliminary approval. (0401-03 DRATN AD) RESOLUTION N0. 88-188 A BBSOLUTION OP TRH CITY COUNCIL OF TH6 CITY OF EANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIA, PASSING ON REAPPORTIONMENT REPORT POR THE STORM DRAIN (ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 86-2) POR TSE LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT POA APN 201-271-71, APN 201-271-72, AND TeACT MAP 12873, GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL, AND SETTING TNH DATE OF PUBLIC NEARING POR MAY 4, 1982 C35. Set public hearing for Nay 4, 1988 - Approval to annex Tract No. 12870 and DR 87-16 to Street Lighting Maintenance Die[r ict No. 1 ae Annexation No. 41, (0401-03 ST LT MD) RESOLUTION NO. 88-189 A RESOLUTION CP TRB CITY CONNCIL OF TFIE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OP PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S ItEPOHT POR ANNEXATLON NO, 41 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1 RESOLUTION N0. 88-190 A RESOLllTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF HANCAO CUCAMONGA, CALIPORNIA, bECLAAING ITS INTENTION TO ORDHR THE ANNEXATION TO STRHHT LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DHSIGNAT ING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION NO. 41 'TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OP 1972 AND OPFE RING A TIME AND PLACH POR SHARING OBJECTIONS THEAHTO C36. SeC public hearing for May 4, 1988 - Approval to annex Tract No. 12870, located on the north aide of Highland Avenue between 8tiwanda and Beet Avenues to Street Lighting Maintenance Die [r ict No. 2 ae Annexation No. 26. (0401-03 ST LT tffi) City Coune it Minu[ea April 6, 1988 Page 9 RESOLUTION NO, 88-191 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFOANIA~ OP PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR ANNEXATION N0. 26 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTAI Cf N0. 2 RESOLUTION N0. 88-192 A RESOLllTION OF TUE CITY COUNCII. OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIAN DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNERATION TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 2, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION N0. 26 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2, PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND OFPBRING A TINE AND PLACH POR HEARING OBJECTIONS TIDtRETO C37. Set public hearing for Hay 4, 1988 - Approval to annex Tract No. 12870, located on the north aide o£ Highland Avenue between 6tiwande Avenue and Eaet Avenue, and Archibald Avenue Gateway Monuments located at [he northeast and northwest corners of Archibald Avenue and 4th Streets to Landacepe Naintenanee Dia trio No. 1 ae Annexat io¢ No. 44. (0401-03 LNSCAPE L[D) RESOLUTION N0, 88-193 A RESOLUTION OF TNH CITY COUNCIL OF TH6 CITY OP RANCHO VVVMIM1V \.bn~ .+~ u_ _• • ... ENGINEER' S BEPORT POR ANNEXATION NO.f ,44 TO ^STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1 RESOLUTION N0. 88-194 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPORNIA~ DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER TEE ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE HAINTE NANCE DISTRICT N0. 1~ AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DEEIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION N0. 44 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OP 1972 AND OFPERING A TI!~ AND PLACE POR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO C38. Set public hearing for May 4~ 1988 - Approval to annex DR 87-16 located _ __de ..".:arw2 .h ^f .°~ R^.. to fo L•^ng.npn rna i..tenen,.e -isrr i.~r .o.. ~ _.. __ - No.~3VesyAnnexation No. 18.~ (0401-03 LNSCAPE ND) RESOLUTION N0. 88-195 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPOB NIA OP PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR ANNEXATION N0. 10 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO, 3 City Council Minutes April 6, 1988 Page 10 RESOLUTION N0. 88-196 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THB CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHONGA~ CALIFORNIAN DECLARING ITS INTBNTION TO ORDER THE ANNBRATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DBSIGNATING SAID ANN%RATI ON AS A:i:7EY TO LAI:JSCAPE ~.,'AINTEIUNC,." DISTPSC' HO 3; PUBSUANTV RO TH&~LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OP 1972•AND OFPBRING A TINE AND PLACB POR HEARING OB.IfiCTIONS THEBETO C39. Set public hearing for May 4, 1988 - App rove 7. Co ennea OR 87-16 located east of 6tiwaada Avenue, north of Arrow Rouse to Street Lighting lla intenance Die tr ict No. 6 ae Anneaation No. 14. (0401-03 ST LT MD) RESOLUTION N0. 88-197 A HBSOLUTION OP TBE CITY COUNCIL OF THB CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPORNIA~ OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OP CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT POR ANNB$ATION N0. 14 TO STR68T LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRI Cf N0. 6 RESOLUTION N0. 88-198 A BESOLDTION OF TNB CITY COUNCIL OF TID3 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIAN DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEEATION TO STRHBT LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 6, AN AJJEJJl16 nl L1D161ti1t n6J LbnGl Lnb aA LI/ nnnA MaiVn Ma ANNBRATION NO. 14 TO STRBBT LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0, 6, PURSUANT TO TBE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OP 1972 AND OFPERING A TIl~ AND PLACE FOR BEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO C/~0. Set public hearing for Nay 4, 1988 - An appeal of the March 9, 1988 P lenning Co®ie aion approval of a time extension For Tentative Tract No. 12332, located on the ea et aide of Haven Avenue north of the tlillside Dra Lnege Channel (Deer Canyon Drive). MOTION: Moved by Ring, seconded by Brown Co approve the Conaen[ Calendar. Motion carried unanimous ly 5-0. f * * * e q .Di"..r :w None submitted. City Council Miau[es April 6, 1988 Page 11 H. ADVBBTISHD POBLIC NEABINGS El. VARIANCE 87-18 - MOMS FBDHSAL - The appeal of the Planning Co®ia eion's dec ieion denying a req use[ to allow the sign copy to include the word "Any time[e ller" on two (2) new feces of ex ie ting wall signs located at 9596 Baee Lire Road. (0701-06 APPEAL) It was requested that the item be continued [c April 20~ 1988. Haycr Stout asked if anyone was present for purpose of addrea sing th ie item. There was no response. MOTION: Moved by Buquet seconded by King to continue to April 20, 1988. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. ~*,t+a r E2. STRHHT NAME CBAt1GES FOB TEBM VISTA PABEWAY AND ELM AVENUE - A proposal to des ignaie Weet Terre Vie to Parkway and Eeet Terre Vista Parkway and [o designate West Elm Avenue with the Terra Vie to Planned Coomunity. Staff report by Chris Wee tmaa~ Aaeie tent Planner. (Continued from 3/16/88 meeting) (1110-15 ST NAME CG) Mayor Stout opened the meeting Eor public hearing. Addressing Counc ii wa a: John Me lcher~ representing Levis Bomee Development Corporatian~ who had requested the name change or ig ins iiy. Iiwy ueu y.uyue~.. C:... ..6..... a. ..cc] Elm Avenue and strongly urged [he names of Ter za Vie to Parkway &aet and Terra Vie to Parkway West. There being no further public reaponae~ Mayor Stout closed the public hearing. Councilmen Buquet exprea eed it sae a go«1 way to approach the problem regarding Terra Yie to Parkway. Rowever~ he felt West Elm would be better ae Elm Avenua bleat and leave the Elm Avenue ae is. Councilman King concurred with Mr. Buquet. Councilwoman Wright exprea aed she did not like the idea of 61m Avenue Weet. Councilwoman Brown concurred aith Mr. Buquet. For safety reasons it would be _ ~__: __:__ ....a easier. She wouid rather have i~ vc ., .m .:u~ ..=e.....-..a t., ~••°• Councilman Buquet exprea eed Chet in the future we should not allow planning of a street Co occur like [hie again. Counc ilaomen Brown asked how long the street wea. Mr. Buller City Plenner~ xeeponded it was approximately one-half mile long. City Council Minutes April 6, 1988 Page 12 Councilwoman Brow felt Chet this should not be a problem. The safety people should be able to Eind 61m. Counc ilwman Wright concurred, that if the Fire Dia trict said this would work, [hen she would agree [a the change of Terre Via to Eas[ and Terra Via to Weat. CTI ..Ga4 - ___~ :ed - .. - A:-_ _ _.. old r~ia ee E'W, ad _.,.._..._ed with the section being named~E Lm Avenue Weet •` RESOLUTION N0. 88-158 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF TFDI CITY OF RANCNO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CHANGING THE NAME OF TERRA VISTA PARKWAY TO TERRA VISTA PARKWAY BAST AND TEHeA VISTA PARR{7AY WEST AND ESTABLISHING MILLIREN AVENUE AS THE DIVIDING INTERSECTION RESOLUTION NO. 88-200 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIPORNIA, CHANGING THE NAl~ OP ELM AVBNU6 (WEST OP SPRUCE AVENUE) TO ELM AVENUE NEST NOTION: Moved by Buque t, seconded by King to modify and approve Reeo lotion Noe. 88-158 and 88-200 before Council. Motion carried 4-1-0 (Wright: No). E3. AMENDMENT OF TRACT MAP N0. 10827-2 - Located in the Victoria Planned Comamity, and submitted by Mira Mar Land Company, Incorporated, a California Corporation, a Delaware Corporation. Sta Ef report presented by Cindy Hackett, Associate Civil Engineer. (1002-09 MAF AMEN) Mayor Stout opened the meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing vas closed. RESOLUTION NO. 88-201 A RESOLUTION OP TH6 CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDING MAP TRACT N0. 10827-2 MOTION: Moved by King, sec onded by Wright to approve Reeo lotion No. 88-201. Motion carried unenimou sly 5-0. *r+I, a r. E4. ORDERING THE WORE IN CONNECTION WITH: City Cou¢c it Minutes April 6, 1988 Page 13 A, -03 LNSCAPE RESOLUTION N0, 88-202 e ~e0r.rryION OF Grua rlmY mUNrrt nF mt1~ CITY OF F_4NCNO CUCAMONGA~ CALLPORNIA~ ORDERING THE NORR IN CONNHCTION WTTR ANNEXATION N0, 16 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0, 3 AND ACCEFTINC TIIE FINAL ENGINEHR'S REPORT FOR DR 87-31 ANNEXATION N0. 2 POR TRACT NOS. 13557. 13562, AND 13554 (CAHYN) TG LANDSCAPE NAINTENANCE DISTRICI N0. 6 (0401-03 LNSCAPH MD) RESOLUTION N0. 88-203 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPOENIA~ ORDERING TN6 HOER IN CONNECTION NITH ANNERATION N0. 2 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTRNANCE DISTRICT N0. 6 AND ACCEPTING THE PINAL RNGINEER'S REPORT POB TRACT NOS, 13557, 13562 AND 13559 ANNEXATION N0. 39 FOE DE 87-31. TAACT NOS. 13557. 13562 AND 13559 TO STREET LIGHTING HAINTHNANCE DISTRICT N0, I (0401-03 ST Li }II1} RESOLUTION N0. 88-204 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCEO CllCAMONGA~ CALIPOHNIA~ ORDERING THH WORK IN CONNHCTION NITR ANNERATION N0. 39 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTHNANCC DISTRICT N0. 1 AND ACCHPTING Ti3E FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR DR 87- 31~ TRACT NOS. 13557 13562 AND 13559 D. 03 ST LT RHSOLUTION N0. 88-205 A RESOLUTION OF TNF, CITY COUNCIL 6P TID3 CITY OF MNCNO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPORNIA~ 08DERINC TH8 NORK IN CONNECTION NITE n Nlm~nmrON vn 12 mn amovv_m LrCRmryC ~:IN'!'.yN".yw DIST.°.ICT N0. 6 AND ACCEPTING TNH PINAL BNGINEE H'S REPORT F0E DH 87-31 E. ANNEXATION N0. 2 POR TRACT NOS. 13557. 13562• ANU 13559 (CARYN) TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DYBTRICf N0. 5 (0401-03 8T LT MD) City Council Minutes April 6, 1988 Fags 14 RESOLUTION N0. 85-206 A RESOLUTION OF TkfE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANCNO CUCAMONGA, CALiPORNIA, ORDERING T}IE WORE IN CONNECTION WITH ANNERATION N0. 2 TO STREET LIGHTING HAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. S AND ACCEPTING THE FINAL ENGINEER'S EEPORT FOR TRACT NOS. _a5 s~~ 1z55?~ 4km lgs so A brief report by Mr. Wasserman, Ci[y Manager. Mayor Stout opened the meeting for pub lit hearing. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. MOTION: Moved by King, seconded by Brown to approve Reeo lu [ion Nos. 85-202 through 88-206. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. * * ~ * ~ P. PUBLIC B'BA87BG5 None submit tad. # # ~ # G. CITY NAMAGER'S STAPP RBPOIITS i:~=~, ~ .ve ~_~_.. w~ w uwu auu i.e aiu ii.n ~, ai riw ugu miuu yen ace iu age naa order. )~ G1. meeting) Staff report presented by Monte Preacher, Public Works Engi.nee r. (1180-10 COMPLAINT) Mr. Preacher showed slides of the appellan to property. Mr, Markman, City Attorney, pointed out that there is a State law that there moat be a permit issued before starting work. Any contrec for who has a Sta [e license knows this. He also stated that there ie a lieb ility exposure Eor the C ify. The reapona ib ility ie with the contractor. Mayor Stout opened the meeting for pub lie hearing. Addres Bing Council were: The appellant's, Cerl and Pet Blakely, of 5514 Morning Canyon Way. They prase nted el idea showing other situation's similar to the ire in the City. (Counc il• pointed out that in each of these ce see, it had occurred before City incorpore tion.) Mr. 6 Mre. Blakely asked Council to approve their re.queet, since they felt they had acted in good faith and had received approval by staff. City Council Minutes Apri.i 6, 1988 Page 15 There being no further public responee~ Mayor Stout closed the public hearing. Councilman King stated it was a dangerous si[uacion~ and the driveway should no[ be [here because of its proximity [o [he tuts rest [ion. Councilwoman Wright concurred. She a[a [ed the pit turea they had ahovn portrayed p:vJ CC t.S ~.. LCh hev 0.C..rrCd bCf p:C 1.:C vrp vrati v.:• Councilwoman Brown also concurred. She expressed it was the con[rec tor's feu lt~ not the home owners. Councilman Buquet also concurred. Mayor Stout felt [hat iF an accident occurred at that corners [he City wind be liable. He did not like any driveways on collective street e. This ie one of [he reasons he was in favor of incorpora [ion 30 years ago, because [he County was allowing [hinge like this. He stated the next time [hie heppens~ if they approve th ie~ then people would be taking pictures of this driveway and requee Ling Council [o approve it because [hey had approved th ie once before. MOTION: Moved by Ring, seconded by Brown to uphold staff's posit ion and deny the appeal. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. ~~~~~ Mayor Stout called a recess at 9:20 p. m. The meeting reconvened at 9:35 p. m. with all membe re of Council present. G2. MUSIC AND AMPLIFICATION POLICY FON CITY PARK PACILITIES - Cone ideration of a vnta is end ampl ificetion policy in city park facili[ie s. Staff report presented 6y Kathy Soreneen~ Senior Recreation Supervisor. (0102-02 POLICY) Mayor Stout opened the meeting for public hearing. Addree sing Council was: William Johnson, loco tad on Vineyard Avenue ac rose from the park, asked Council to please consider [he our round ing ne ighb orhoad when considering the policy. He also asked [ha[ [he cur Eew go back to 9:00 p. m. at the perk. There being nn further public reeponse~ Mayor Stout closed the public hearing. r.~.. - .. igh -xpr - ~ .- - ighb - would gi << pJl ~y chance~~then we could get wit ~[o work.'c She fel t11 that the City could provide aerv ices end ye[ be a good neighbor. Councilwoman Brown expressed that she would like to see the policy a little etr is ter for the once-a-year or a one-time user. She asked who would be overseeing which group could receive a waiver and which group could no[. She felt that everyone shoo ld have a Code RnForcement person present. City Council Hinu tes April 6, 1988 Page 16 Councilwomen Wright stated [ha[ there sere pens ltiee~ but she believed that a more effective and harsh method would be a prohibition or a suspension of use if they violated the policy. Mr. Markman, City Attorney, responded [ha[ this could be irc laded in the policy. Xs. .-~r.~ ----~ ~ercufion Supe[v iauc~ aenpmuied ii~ai ii cuu id be •wc iuded under. VI [em 9 of Ct~he policy. Councilmen King agreed philosophically with both Councilwoman Brown and Counc iimen Buquet. Mayor Stout expressed [hat we should get a policy adopted and try it, and then fine-tune it later. Councilman 8uquet suggested [hat a report come back in 90 days for an update on [he policy. Mayor Stout opened the meeting £or co®ente from President of the Citrus Little League. Addressing Council woe: Rocky Reynolds, President of Ci[rue Little League, who ata Ced that last year they had had some oroblema with amplification, but they had made some changes and felt that there would be no further problems. Councilwoman Wright wanted to be sure that there would be a prohibition and suspenai on or a permrt a amplr cs.ca uon goes aoove the is una`e~ suo3 act to [ne appeal [o [he Park S Recreation Commie aion. MOTION: Moved by Wz igh t, seconded by King [o approve the draft Music end Amplification Policy. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. * a r r x G3. CONSIDERATION OF TELEPHONE SERVICES IN RANCRO CUCAMONGA. (Continued from March 16, 1988 meeting) (1200-00 P UTILITY) ACTION: Council concurred to contimse the item to April 20, 1988. ~,r~~r,t Gv. report (1153-01 PK S TRAF) Councilwoman Wright expressed the only way [o control parking in the neighborhoods would be to issue the neighbor'e pe rmite. The other issue of whether to have stud ante park et Red Rill Perk was a separate issue. City Count it Minutes April 6, 1988 Page 17 Mayer Stout asked for a list of eolu [ions [o the problems that other cities have initiated in the area. Mr. Wasserman, City Manager, stated he would also sit-down with Paul Ward the Principal and convey Counc il~e conterne. _ __ _____ F:i alas r .. • 'hat ....~athia^ be br^•• '~• bstk vh°-•' xe ^^-c_ld b° aY° 6 "b'° implement the parking in the neighborhoods. Mr. Markman, City Attorney, stated an ordinance would have to be approved fire t. Mr. Wasserman, City Manager, asked if Council wanted staff to contact the aeighbcre. Council responded yea. Mr. Wasserman, City Naneger~ stated that eta Ef you ld try For the fire[ meeting in May to bring this item 6aek. Councilwomen Srovn reminded Council that in Etiwanda the City had entered into en agreement xith the School District Co build a park xhen the school wee boil[, since the echnal xaa on too small of an area. In this case, we did not want to eo lve the school~e problem. She did not feel the school should use the parka, and we should start a permit proces a. Councilman Buquee ezpreeaed that ve should target an area of one-half mile raw ius crom me acnauia. Councilwoman Brown also suggested that perhaps some type of via itora temporary a ign could be provided the neighbors Eor the times xhen they have vie itore. ACTION: Staff received CounciL~s direction end will try to bring Lhe item back at [he fire[ meeting in May. • e ~ a + G5. CONSIDERATION OP RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A SUBSIDIARY FIRE DISTRICP. Staff report presented by Lauren H. Weave rman, City Manager. (1302-00 FIRE DIST) RESOLVTION N0. 88-207 Y ~DLN viI. v9 TuT /.TTV D9 VIM~Yl1 CUCAMONGA,~ CALIPORNIA, VREQUSSTING TUE LOCAL AGBNCY PORKATION COMMISSION TO TAKE PROCBEDINCS PON TflE ESTABLISHMENT OP TNN POOTHILL PIKE PROTECTION DISTRI Cf AS A SUBSIDIARY DISTRICT OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONCA NOTION: Roved by Ring, sec ouded by Brown to approve Reeo lotion No. 88-207. City Council Minutes April 6, 1988 Page 18 Councilwoman Wright expressed that she had a strong reluctance to proceed with this and was concerned because she felt [his item should go Co the vote re. Hay or Stout responded that LAP CO may recn~mend that this be done. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. ~ ~ t t ~ t H, COHNCIL BUSINHSS H1. CONSIDEHATION OF PHOCEDUAES POE FILLING VACANCIES ON PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION AND ON THE PABK AND AHCSEATION COMMISSION. (0701-01 COMMISSION) MOTION: Moved by Stout, seconded by King to advertise the openings and have the same subcomnit tee's interviea. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. * ~ ~ + w H2. CONSIDHHATION TO SUPYONT HISTOHIC PNESHHVATION COMMISSION MISSION STATEMENT. (0701-01 COlD[ISSION) NOTION: Moved by Wright, seconded by Brown to approve ae submitted. Motion carried unanimously 5-0. a • • • k Councilwoman Wright requea [ed a report on the dec iei on between LAPCO and the City of Fon[ene regarding the project Hunter Aidge. Mr. Markman, City Attorney, sugges tad that rather then have [his an agenda item, he would prepare a report since th ie was a con Fidential matter. None submitted. r * x * * r J. COMMONIGYIOMS PYOM THH PUBLIC w w * • x a v_ anrmtomrevr MOTION: Moved by King, seconded by Brown to ed journ to a closed session regarding acquie it ion of property on Lions Street. Motion carried umnimoue ly 5-0. The meeting adjourned et 10:32 p. m. not to reconvene. Reepec [fully submit [ed, Bevar ly A. Authelet City Clerk Approved[ ~ May 4, 1988 CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONG4 CITY COUNCIL HINUPES Reeulas NeeCing ~e~,r mn ngnxg A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamongs met ott Wednesday, May 4, 1988, in the Lions Park Community Center, 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. The me sting xae called to order a[ 7:30 p. m. by Navor Dennis L. Stout. Present xere Counc ilmembere: Deborah N. Brown, Cher leg J. Buquet II, Jeffrey fling, and Mayor Dean ie L. Stout. Also present were: City Manager, Lauren M. Wasserman; City Clerk, Beverly A. Authelet; Deputy City Attorney, Andrew Arczynaki; Assistant City Manager, Robert A. Rizzo; Sr. Planner, Dan Coleman; Sr. Planner, Larry Benderson> City Engineer, Russell Naga ire; Sr. Civil Engineer, Berrye Nanson; Sr. Civil Engineer, Paul Rougeau; Aeaoc fate Planner, Arlene Banks. Absent xae Counc ilmembsr: Pamela J. Wright. • • * * ~ w n. nenuuu.nmwioil':~~~d l~^~ None submitted. t ~ * t ~ x C. GOMSEBL CALEMUAF C1. App rowel o£ War rant e, Reg ie ter Nose. 4/20/88 end 4/27/88 find Payroll ending 4/14/88 for the total smount of $1,105,943.09. C2. Approval [o receive and file current Investment Schedule ae of April 25, 1988. C3. Alcoholic Beverage Application for On Sale General Eating Place, Oriental Rouse, Raemee Mekarabirumya, Bw.a ..auto .+v~n,.a #."~• C4. Alcoholic Beverage App licetion for Off Sale General Type 21, Longs Uruge, Longo Drug S[aree Ca lifornie, Inc., 7207 Haven Avenue. C5. Approval of Parcel Map 10351 located on the south Bide of Iron Mourtta in Court, vest of Hermosa Avenue, aubm it tad by Nordic Woods II, Limited, A Cali EOTR18 Limited Partnership. (1002-09 MAP PARCEL) City Council Age¢da May 4, 1988 Page 2 RESOLUTION N0. 88-255 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORN LA, APPROVING PARCEL MAv NU183ER 10351 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP N0. 10357) CL. Appc---.. ,.u ___ .a TWvr-:2~a' ..°.grnWen r• ., f^ Pe_ e1 wap In1 R5; located onY the southwest corner of Highland and Milliken Avenues, submitted by The William Lyon Company. (0602-01 AGREE ERTNj BESOLUTION H0. Bb-256 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIPORNIA, APP AOV ING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT E%TENS ION AND IMPROVBlBNT SECURITY FOR PARCEL MAP 10185 C7. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extension for Tract 13118, located on the east aide of Haven Avenue between Kenyan Street and Lemon Aveaue, submitted by Paragon Homes. (0602-01 AGREE ERTN) RESOLUTION N0. 88-257 A RESOLUTION OP THH CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON GA, CALIFORNIA, APPROV ZNC IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT H%TENS ION AND IMPAOVEI~NT SECURITY POR TRACT 13118 CN. wpproval or map, ex ecuciun ¢i imp cuvemcu~ .+a~ccwc..i e...: IWr..,,. _•._..: Security for Tract 13476, located on the northeast corset of Ne llmen Avenue and Trycn Street, submitted by West Venture Development Comps¢y. (0602-01 AGREE IMPR) (1002-09 MAP FINAL) BESOI.UTION N0. 88-258 A RESOLUTION OP TAE CITY COUNCIL OF TNH CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CAL IPORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IHPROVEt~NT SECURITY, AND FINAL MAP OF TRACT NO. 13476 C9. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extension far Tract 12938, located on the north aide of Highland Avenue east of Hillike¢ Avenue, submitted by Ma riborough Development Corporation. (0602-01 AGEEE E%TN) .,....,...~ ION ::... SS-2;9 A RE60LUT ION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONCA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT RXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY POR TRACT 12938 C10. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Eztension for Tract 12936, :ocated on the north aide of Highland Avenue, east of Milliken Avenue, submitted by Her lborough Development Corporation. (0602-01 AGRHS INPAV) City Council Minutes May 4, 1988 Page 3 RESOLUTION N0. 88-260 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TBE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IHP ROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 12936 C11. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extenaion for Tzect 12939, located on the north side of Highland Avenue, east of Milliken Avenue, submitted by Marlborough Development Corporation. (0602-O1 AGREE ERTN) RESOLUTION NO. 88-261 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF 1'!ffi CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APP BOV ING IMPROVEMENT AGREEI~Nf EXTENSION AND IMPROVBMENT SECURITY POA TRACT 12939 C12. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extenaion for Tract 12943, located on the north aide o£ Highland Avenue east of Milliken Avenue, submit [ed by Marlborough Development Corporation. (0602-01 AGREE EXTN) RESOLUTION N0. 88-262 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF TAE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPBOVING IMPROVEMBNT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY POA TBACT 12943 C13. Approval [o execute contract (CO 88-056) for the Archibald Avenue Entry Monuments Improvement Proj ec [, awarded to Bop ark Enterprises for the amount of $129,246.00 to be funded from Landscape lfa inte nonce District No. 1, - Account No. 40-4130-8767. (0602-01 CONTRACT) C14. Approval to execute a Professional Services Agreement (CO 88-057) with J. P. new idson and Aaeoc ie tes, to prepare landscape improvement and renovation plane for the ea et aide of Carnelian Street from Vineyard Avenue to Base Line Rnad for a fee not to exceed $15,960.00 [o be funded from [he Beautification Fund, Account No. 21-4647-8046. (0602-01 CONTRACT) RESOLUTION NO. 88-210 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP TIffi CITY OF RANCNO AWARD AHD °XECUTE np nyga Slnvsr •c'., A, SERVICES AGREEMENT,~WLTH VJ. P. DAYIDSON AND ASSOCIATBS OF RIVERSIDE, CALIPORNIA, TO PREPARE PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS AND ESTIMATE POR CARNELIAN STREET LANDSCAPE IMPROVHMH NT AND RENOVATION BETWEEN VINEYARD AVENUE AND BASE LINE ROAD C15. Approval to execute eg reement (CO 88-058) for Acquisition of Easement end Installation of Public Improvement between Donald G. Hwene end Miki H. Evens, and [he Ci[y of Rancho Cucamonga for Street Frontage Improvements at 9611 City Council Agenda Maq 4, 1986 Page 4 dill aide Road, located between Malachite Avenue and Archibald Avenue. (0602-01 CONTRACT) RESOLUTION N0. 88-263 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO ~uGAMON GA, IFG 'A~ AC INC eH ennFF wwT FnR ACQUISITION OFu EASEMENT AND yINSTALLATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT FROM DONALD G. EWENS AND NIRI E. EHENS, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN SAME C16. Approval to authorize the advertising of "Notice Inviting Bida" for the E [iwande Storm Drain Sya tam Line 2-1, Phase I Improvement Project, located west of I-15, north of Victoria Street from the Victoria Hasitt to north of Highland Avenue and future Route 30 Preeway [o be funded fram Drainage Fund - Account No. 19-4637-8194. (0601-01 BID) RESOLUTION N0. 88-264 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA, CALIFOBNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIPI:.ATIONS FOR TBE BTIHANDA STORM DRAIN SYSTHM, LINE 2-1• PRASE I, LOCATED HEST OF I-75, NORTH OP VlCfORLA STREET FROM THE V ICTORU BASIN TO NOHTE OF HIG1I'w1ND AVBNIIE AND FUTURE ROUTE 30 FRHEHAy TO BE PUNDED PROM DRAINAGE PUND IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RR GE IVE BIOS C17. Approval to authorize the adver[ie ing of [he "Notice Inviting Bide" Eor Che H illaide Road Storm Drain and Street Improvement Project, from Malachite Avenue [o Archibald Avenue to be funded from System Development Fund - Account No. 22- 4617-8748. (0601-01 BID) RESOLUTION N0. 88-265 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCZL OP THR CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA, CALIPORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS POR TAE "HILLSIDE ROAD STORM DRAIN AND STRHET IMPROVEMENT", IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS ci8. Approvai ro author ire the adverliuiag o .. - - L-.viting Eid c" fnr •hc Archibald Avenue Sidewalks, Phase II Improvement Project, from Foothill Boulevard to 6th Street to be funded from SBA 325 /TDA Article 3 Funds - Account No. 12-4637-8605. (0601-01 HID) RESOLUTION N0, 88-266 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA~ CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS City Council Minutes May 4, 1988 Page 5 FOR THE ARCHIBALD AVENiIE SIDEWALXS, PHASE IL, IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING TFiE CITY CLEBK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS C19. Approval [o authorize the advertising of the "Not i<e Inviting Sida" for Che Sapphire Equestrian Trail Reconstruction Improvement Project, located south of Banyan Sireei iu be im,ued Ieow 9~ao of ica:ion v a z _ Aecocy Nc. 41_46G7 _n72a, (0601-01 BID) RESOLUTION N0. 58-267 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HANCHO CUCAMONCA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS POR THE "SAPPHIRE EQUESTRIAN TRAIL RECONSTBllCTION", IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS C20. Approval of consultant contracts for Stone and Youngberg (underwriter) (CO 88-059), Fie ldman and Holapp (financial consultant) (CO 88-060), and Jones, Nall, Nill and White (bond counsel( (CO 88-061) in correction with proposed cer[if ice to of partic ipetion bond ea le for fire facilit iee. (0602-01 CONTRACT) C21. Approval to amend agreement (CO 88-062) between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Recreation Sya terra, Inc. (RS I) for pro £ee eional services regarding the planning design and development of Red Nill and Heritage Community Parke. (0602-01 CONY AIaN) C22, Approval to purchase a Vermeer Stump Cutter Model 665A from Vermeer- California of Ontario, California ae a sole source vendor in the amount of $20,615.00 - Account No. 01-4647-7044. (0606-01 EQUIP L/P) C23. Approval. [o request LAFCO to review the City~e property tax revenue pursuant to SB 1063. (0401-00 REV S TAX) RESOLUTION N0, 88-268 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIPORNIA, REQUEST ING LAFCO TO HARE A DETERMINATION OF PROPERTY TAR REVENUE FOR THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA PURSUANT TO TBE PROVISIONS OP SB 1063 C24. Set public hearing Eor May 18, 1988 et 7:00 p. m. (with RDA) - Reviea proposed bond and other legal documents in connection with the ea le of certificates of participation Eor [he fimncing of fire Eac ilities. C25. Bet public hearing for June 1, 1988 - Approval to Annex Tract Noe. 13476, located on the nor theaet corner of He llmen Avenue end Tryon Street and 12902, located on the asst aide of Nermoea Avenue, south of Almond Street, to Street Lighting Maintenance Die tr ict No. 1 and 2 ea Annexation No. 44 and Annexation City Council Agenda May 4, 1988 Page 6 No. 26, (0401-03 ST LT MD) RESOLUTION NC. 88-269 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CllCAMONGA, CALIPORNIA, OP PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ~~/ Tn CTUIINT LTCATT G EHGINEHR 3 sHFGRT MGR a~IEXATIO:; P,.. , w_ MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. I RESOLUTION N0. 88-270 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAHONGA, CALIFORNIA, DHCLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEXATION TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1, AN ASSHS SIffiNT DISTRICT: DHSIGNATING SAID ANNE7tATI0N AS ANNEXATION N0. 44 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1> PURSUANT TO TH6 LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OP 1972 AND OFFERING A TINE AND FLACH POR HEARING OBJECTIONS THE8ET0 RESOLUTION N0. 88-271 A RESOLUTION OP TNH CITY COUNCIL OP TNH CITY OF NANCHO CUCAHONCA. CALIFORNIA, OP PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OP CITY ENGINBER'S RHPOBT POH ANNEXATION N0. 28 TO STRHHT LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1 NGJ UL U11Un nU. p0-U [ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CAI IFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEXATION TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 2, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION N0, 28 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0, 2; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAP INC AND LIGHTING ACT OP 1972 AND OFFERING A TI[~ AND PLACE FOR HBA$ING OBJECTIONS THERBTO C26. Set public hearing Eor June 1, 1988 - Approval to annex Tract Noe. 13476, located on the aor [heaet corntr of Hellman Avenue and Tryon Street and 12902, Locaked on the veet aide of. Hermosa Avenue, south of Almond Street, [o Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 as Annexation No. 46. (0401-03 LNSCAYE MD) EESOLII; IGH Nv. 00-273 A RESOLUTION OF THH CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OP PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S RHPOBT FOR ANNE RATION N0. 46 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1 City Council MirtuCea May 4, 1988 Page 7 RESOLllTION N0. 88-274 A EESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORIQIA,L DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER T11E ANNERATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1, AN AS SESSNENT DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID ANNE RAT ION AS eyHe vemrnN un G5 Tn IANDSCAPB MATNTRNANCJ? nI3TRICT N0. 1; PURBUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND OPPeRING A TIlse AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO C27. Set public hearing fnr June 1, 1988 - Consider retteval of ambulance services permit for Hercy Ambulance. (1206-1 A!ffiULANCE) C28. Set public hearing for June 1, 1988 - Approval of Preliminary Engineer's Reports, levy [he annual ae aeaament and approve the Final Engineer's Reports for Landscape Haintenance Die trio Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. (0401-03 LNSCAPE MD) RESOLiffION NO. 88-275 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP BANCRO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OP PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINHE R'S ANNUAL REPORTS POR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 AND 6 RESOLUTION N0. 88-276 n h6uvi: -iv.: __ - - _ .. ..... ... CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA,V DECLARING ITS^INTENTION TO yLEVY •AND COLLHCT AS SESShENTS WITRIN LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 AND 6 POR FISCAL YEAR 1988/89 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972, AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THHRSTO C29. Se[ public hearing for June 1, 1988 - Approval of Preliminary Engineer's Report e, levy the annual eeeeeamen[ end approve the Final Engineer's Reports for Street Lighting Maintenance Die tr it[ Noe. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 end 6. (0401-03 ST LT MD) RHSOLUTION N0. 88-277 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF Tiffi CITY OF BANCHO ,.J ^AMCH C", geLrynnNre~ nn nvaLrgrrvavy aNn u0y4_. iw Cpiy ENGINBER'S ANNUAL REPORTS FOA STRHHT LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS N0. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 AND 6 RRS OLUTION N0. 88-278 A RESOLUTION OP TFtB CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTBRTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN STR68T LIGHTING MAINTENANCE City Council Agenda Hay 4, 1988 Page 6 DISTRICT NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 AND 6 POR PISCAL YEAR 1988/89 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAP INC AND LIGHTING ACT OP 1972, AND OFFERING A TITD: AND PLACE POH BEARING OBJECTIONS TUEBETO C30. Set public hearing for June 15, 1988 - Approval of Preliminary Engineer's Report, levy [he annual assessment, end approve the Final Hngineer'e Report for ,...a .ar..a and °O-tom:oat io: Imo, ..,r,et Diet•it« l911-R 51, (n401-Qi PARR AD) ABSOLUTION N0. 88-279 A ABSOLUTION OF TBR CITY COUNCIL OP TBE CITY OP RANCHO WCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OP PRELIMTNARY APPROVAL OF CITY RNGINEER'S ANNUAL REPORT POH TN8 PARRS AND RECREATION INPROVBMENT DLSTRI Cf (PD-85) ABSOLUTION NO. 88-280 A ABSOLUTION OF THB CITY COUNCIL OF THB CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHONGA, CALIFOHNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LBVY AND COLLB CT ASSBS SlD:NTS NITBIN THB PARBS AND RECREATION II~ROVEMBNT DISTRICT (PD-BS) PURSUANT TO TH8 LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972, AND OFPBRING A TIME AND PLACE POR HBARING OB.TBCTIONS THBRETO MOTION: Moved by Ring, seconded by Buquet [o approve the Consent Calendar ae presented. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Ab seat: Nrigh t). f *+r ~+ D, CONSENT ORDINAN(83 C i[y Clerk Authe let read the titles of Ordinance Noe. 343 and 344. D1. MUNICIPAL CGDE AMeNDMENT - CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA - Amendment to Chapters 10.52 end 10.64, and repeal of Chapter 10.68 of [he Municipal Code pertaining to [he parking of overeiae vehicles end treilere on City streets alloying improved enforcement by Sher itf'e Depar tenant end City Code Bnforcement Off icere. (1163- 01 PK d TRAF) ORDINANCE N0. 343 (second reeding) v ~.. GP ~vu nITY GvLTY~T~ (1D TVp OTTV 119 D~N!`ND CU CAMONGA, CALIPORNIA, AMENDING SELBCTED SECTIONS OP CHAPTERS 10.52 AND 10.64 AND REPRALINC CEAPTER 30.68 PERTAINING TO REGULATIONS ON THE PARKING OR STANDIIIG OP VEHICLES • Ir* *++ City Council Minutes May 4, 1988 Page 9 D2. CONSIDERATION OF ESTABLLSEMBNT OP SPEED LIMITS - Consideration to eatab liah a 35 HPH speed limit on Victoria between Archibald Avenue and Ramona Avenues a 45 MPH speed limit on Wilson Avenue between Ame thy et Avenue and Archibald Avenueq a 45 MPH speed limit on Wilsoa be[we en Arch ibal.d Avenue and Haven Avenue, a 40 MPH speed limit on Wilson between Haven Avenue and 200 feet east of Canis tel Avenue. (1141-30 SPEED LIM) ORDINANCE N0. 344 (sec and reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCEO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIAN AMENDING SECTIONS 10.20.020 AND 10.20.020 OP THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY CODE REGARDING PRINK. FACIE SPEED LIMITS UPON CERTAIN CITY STAEE^tS MOTION: Moved by Ring, seconded by Buquet to waive full reading end adopt said Ordinance Nos. 343 and 344. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Absent: Wright). •*,ro*• H. ADPHYTISHD PUDLIC HHARINGS The app licane had requested the item be continued to May 18, 1988. E1 6. CARTER - A request to amend the Development Dis tz is to Map from Office Professional (OP) [o Neighborhood Co®ercial (NC) for approximately 3.45 auc .wa.: a..~ ..c ....a.. acres or cana~ cocacea on cne auu rhweac cm uer uL liaa< L - Avenue APN 208-202-13. 14. (Continued from March 16~ 1988) (0203-09 DD AMBN) RESOLUTION N0. 88-092 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA~ CALIPOIINIA~ DENYING A REQUEST TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRI LTS MAPS DDA 87-I1, PROM OFPI CE /P ROPESSLONAL TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMlII:RCIAL FOR A 3.45 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OP BASE LING ROAD AND HELLMAN AVENUES RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIAN AND MARS FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOP - APN 208-202- 13~ 14. n ny tttunManlwu as ~n~sncm wnu unnnnau ruM maaunanr oo-van - ~anca CARTER - A request to amend the General Plan Land Use Map from "Office" to ueigbburi:uou w aJPc„n.~aaw.> ca ... ....~ southwest corner of ~Baee Line Roed and Hellman Avenue - APN 208-202-L 3, 14. (Continued from Nerch l6, 1988) (0203-03 GP AMEN) RESOLUTION N0. 88-093 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP TUE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPORNIA~ AENYINC A RH(+UEST TO AMEND TEE LAND USE lIAP OP THE LRNEBAL PLANS GPA 88-OlA~ FAOM OPPICE TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL City Council Agenda Nay 4, 1988 Fags 10 FOA 3.45 ACRES OF LAND LOCATF,D ON THE SOUTNWEST CORNER OP BASE LINE ROAD AND MELLMAN AVENUE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AND HARE FINDINGS IN SUPPORT TREREOF - APN 208-202-13, 14. NOTION: Moved by Buque[, seconded by Ring to continue Item E1. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Absent: Wright). k ~ k k * # E2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CODR AMEND[~NT 83-03 - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA - An amendment to Chapter 17.08 of the Development Code modifying certain development regulations for Low-Medium find Hedium Reaidentia 1. Staff report presented bq Dan Coleman, Sr. Planner. (0203-03 DC AMEN) Mayor Stout opened the meeting for public hearing. Addreasiag Council was: Steven Ford, representing William Lyon Company, who elated they were in full support of the amendment ae eta tad. There being no further public input, Mayor Stout closed the public hearing. City Clerk Authe let read the tit lee of Ordinance Nos. 345, 346 and 347. ORDINANCE N0. 345 (first reading) eut uw aa~in:.". ve Ii,c "-ii - "' ~" CUCAMONGA, CAL IFORNIA,y APPROVINGj6EVELOPMENT CODE-AMENDMENT N0. 88 -G 3, AMENDING SECTION 17.08.040 PERTAINING TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS POR THE LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TERRA VISTA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 88-02- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA - An amendment to the Terra Vie to Community Plan text modifying certain development raga la[ione for Low-Medium and Medium Reside n[ial. (0203-05 TVCP AMEN) ORDINANCE N0. 346 (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACOPTING TEAM VISTA CONMIINITY PLAN gE~ vGDI9Y mVe il,V-vp DT,~v 1ND yF IIt ICY AESIDENT~IAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS - An emeadment to the Victoria Cammun lty Ylen text me regulations for Low-Hedium and Mediuv Residential. VCP AMEN) City Council Minutes May 4, 1988 Page 11 ORDINANCE N0. 347 (first reading) AN ORDINANCE OF Tt~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AANCNO CUCAMON GA, CALIPOANIA, ADOPTING VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDl~NT 88 -03, TO MODIFY THE LOW-MEDIUM AND MBDTUM RES IDENTL4t, -EVBLOP[~NT STANDARDS MOTION: Roved by Brown, seconded by Buquet to waive full reading of said Ordinance Nos. 345, 346, 347 and set second reading for May 18, 1988. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Absent: Wright). ~ * ~ * ~ ~ E3. Manager. (0401-03 DRAIN AD) report Mayor Stout opened the meeting £or public hearing. There being no resporae, the public hearing was closed. RESOLUTION N0. 88-281 A RHSOLUTION OP TIC CITY CO'JNCTL OP THB CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIAN CONPIRlfING Al~NDED AS SESSl~NTS FOR 1Mn J1Uan U4H Ln VDADnDL \JJ JDJJryYD• ~/ . LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT POR APN 201-271-71 ,J,APN X201-271-72, AND TRACT MAP 12873 MOTION: Moved by King, seconded by Brown to approve Resolution No. 88-281. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Absent: Wright). * * * * t E4. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION APPROVING TINE ERTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 12332 - CRISTIANO - A cue tom lo[ residential eubdivie ion of 151 lots on approximately 85 ec res of land in the Very Low Residential Die [r ict (leas than Cvo dwelling unite per acre), located on [he sae[ aide of Naoen Avenue north of the Hillside Drainage Channel (Deer Canyon Drive) - APN 201-121-24. Staff report presented by Barrye Hanaoa, Sr. Civil Engineer. (0701-06 APPEAL) Councilman Buquet euggee[ed the matter be reechaduled to a night when Counc ilaoman Wright would be present so she could lead the discussion, since she was the one who appealed the project. Councilman King expressed concern also [hat Counc ilwmen Wright was not present. City Council Agenda May 4, 1988 Page 12 NOTION: Moved by Buquet, seconded by Brown to continue the item to May 18, 1988 for the purpose of having a full Council present. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Ab sank: Wright). Mayor Stout asked if anyone was present who would not be able to be at the May IB, 1988 meeting, and would like to addxesa the item. Addressing Council wa 9: Paulette Mil ly, 10630 Boulder Canyon Road. She exprev wed concern as to whether Councilwoman Wright would be prevent at the next meeting, and also how were they to know that [hey would not be sick for the next meeting. Mr. Arczynaki, Deputy City Attorney, pointed out [hat anyone could vubmit a written ete[ement to [he Council, which would be included in the record. There being no further public response, Mayor Stout continued the public hearing to May 18, 1988. Mayor Stout called a recess a[ 8:00 pm. The meeting reconvened at 8:12 p. m. with all Counc ilmembe re prevent. :~,*~ a ~ a * + E5. ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH: Staff report presented by Lauren M. was sermon, icy nanager. Mayor Stout opened [he meeting for public hearing. There being no response, the public hearing was closed. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITN ANNEKATION N0. 41 TO STREET LIGRTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT nn9 OTTVn TVD 9TVIi 9V/~T V99 D.C 99 D11OT p119 TD C(T 12870 ANDY DRV87-16••~ •.~ ._.__ _..__.._... _ _.___ ._.. ______ B. RESOLUTION N0. 88-282 City Council Minu[es Hay 4, 1988 Page 13 RHSOLllTION N0. 88-283 A RESOLUTION OF TBE CITY COUNCIL OF TEE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHONGA~ CALIFORNIAN OBDEBING TH6 WOBR IN CONNECTION WITH ANNERATION NO. 26 TO STREET LIGHTING NATNTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 AND ACCEPTING THE FYNAL HNGINHBR'S REPORT FOR TRACT Hn_ 72n7n A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORHIA~ ORDBRING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WLTH ANNEXATION N0. 44 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANC8 DISTBICf NO. 1 AND ACCBPTING THH PINAL ENGINBER'S REPORT POH TRACT 12870 AND AHCHIBALD AFHNUE GATENAY MONUM8NT3 D. ANNERATION N0. 18 POR DN 87-16 LOCATED BAST OF BTIWANDA AVENUB. NORTH OF ARROW ROUTE TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICI NO. 3. (0401-03 LNSCAPE MD) BBSOLUTION N0. 88-285 A RESOLUTION OP TH6 CITY COUNCIL OP TFDI CITY OP BANCNO COCAMONGA~ CALIPORNIA~ ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNERATION N0. 18 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 3 AND ACCEPTING THE PINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT POR DR 87-1E E. NNSOLUTION N0. 88-286 A RESOLUTION OP TIIE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIFORNIAN ORDERING THE NORK IN CONNECTION WITH A ~vE.°v.TIQV VQ 1~. TA CT09ET 1T/~VTTH!' VITPTFPCNIR TT CT OT/-'1_' N0. 6 AND ACCEPTING THE PINAL HNGTNBE R'S REPORT POR DR 81-16 MOTION: Moved by Ring. seconded by Stout to approve Reeo lotion Nos. 88-282. 283. 284 285 end 286. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Absent: Wright). • ~ r ~ ~ + RESOLUTION NO, 88-2d4 City Council Age¢da May 4, 1988 Page 14 F, PUBLIC BBA8IMG5 F1 preaenEed by Pxui Rougeau~ Se. mow.. ugi .ear. ( '63 ~l _,~ ,. Mr. Waeeerman~ City Menager~ added to the report Chat he had met with Paul Ward Principal of Alta Loma Aigh Schools and he euggee tad an interim solution to permit a portion of the Red Aill Perk ae overflow parking for the high school. Mr. Ward had explained that the parking prob Tema a[ the high school was caused primarily by the growth which had occurred in the covmuni[y, and the problem would continue until the completion of Ghe new high school in 1990. Councilwoman Brown elated she had requea ted~ at the last meeting, that in order for her [o approve th ia~ she would want a joint-use contract just ae they had done in Atiwanda. She also questioned how they could tell how many spots the kids were using in the park. She felt there would be a great deal of expense involved in patrolling and monitoring th ie program. Councilman Buquet responded Chet this would be a selective enforcement proces 9. Carol Younger, Adminia tra [ive Assistant to Paul Nerd, was present co answer some concerns of the Council. Mayor stout opened the meeung ror puo uc nearing. nmaresaing iounc ii were. Bob Neufeldt~ 9061 Alta Loma Dr ive~ spoke in opposition to the Ordinance and Resolution. Ne expressed the rea tr is Lion of the parking in the neighborhoods you ld place a hardeh ip on the res idente, A¢ felt the so lu tf on euggee led by the City Manager could resolve the pr ob lem~ there Eore~ he encouraged Council to reject the Ordinance and Reeo lu lion. Sandra Gebel 8867 Beachvood Or ive~ expressed this vas a co®unity problem not a school problem as quoted in the Deily Report. Ure la Neufe ld t, 9061 Alta Lome Dr ive~ applauded Mr. Wae German's euggee [ions and encouraged Council to give them a try. There being no further reeporee~ Mayor Stout closed the public hearing. Councilman Buquet felt the[ we should continue monitoring end sit-down with the high school et the end of each year to go over potential probleme~ and to da eo until the new high school was in place. Re further euggee led Chat we limit the perking on the streets. Mayor Stout ate led he had a problem with the Reeo lotion because he would be upset if he were notified that he could no[ perk in front of hie ow house wi tfiout a permit. Ae felt Chet everyone in the die tr ict should be notified end City Council Hinutea May 4, 1988 Page 15 have a meeting a[ the high school [o discuss th ie to find out if they felt [here was a problem, and ae needed [n go forward with this program. He also felt the[ the perking at the perk was a separate issue from the parking on the streets, and he liked the City Manager's alternat ive e. ACTIONS: Council concurred ni no[ proceeding with the Reao lotion, but to approve the ordinance. To notify the School District of the following nix conditions: a. City staff will designs to the spaces which may be used. b. Dierup bone of City sponsored programs should not occur. c. At the time Rancho Cucamonga High School is completed, the interim parking will be discontinued. d. The interim perking arrangement to be monitored regularly by the school and City staff. Reports to be submit tad to the City Council 30 days after the alert of the school year. e. That the City not experie¢ce any park vandalism caused by students using the parking lo[. f. Review with Che School Dia tr ict e[ the end of each school year. 2. To set-up a meeting with the rea iden[e in the parking die tr ict area before September, 1988. City Clerk Authe let read the title of Ord inence no. d4t3. OMINANCE N0, 348 (fire[ reeding) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COllNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ADDING A@TICLE 10.50 TO TITLE 10 OP THE RANCHO CUCAHONGA MUNICIPAL CODE TO FROV IDE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF PERMIT PARKING DISTRICfB RESOLUTION NO. 88-287 (ITRM Pi1L18D) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY CWNUIL OF THE CITY OF flANCH0 CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING PERMIT PARKING DISTRICT A MOTIUN: Moved by King, seconded by Eiovn ro waive fuli rand ing o• uaw Ordinance No. 348. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Absent: bright). NOTION: loved by Stou [, seconded by euquet to set second reading for May 18, 1988. Motion tear ied by the following vote: City Comcil Agenda Nay 4, 1988 Page 16 AYES: Brom, Huque t, S[ou[ NOES: King ABSENT: Wright i < ~ ~ t x G. CITY MAHA(ER'S STAFF REPORTS G1. CONSIDERATION OF TELEPHONE SERVICES IN AANCFIO CUCAMONCA. (Continued from April 20, 1988 meeting) Staff report presented by Lauren M. Wasserman, City Manager. (1200-00 P UTILITY) Nr. Wasserman ata tad that General Telephone Wanted to notify their customers and wou1L do so through the billing procee e. ACTION: Consensus of Council was to authorize GTE to proceed with aotifica[ione of their om cua Comers. • : + • ~ G2. NISTOBIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF 7914 ALTA CURSTA DRIVE - A proposal Co designate the Adams Rouse ae Hie toric Landmark No. 29. The house is located near the corner of Alta Cuesta and Buena Via to Drive - APN: 207-073-09. Staff report presented by Arlene Henke, Associate Planner. (1402-06 HISTORY) RESOLUTION N0. 88-288 A RESOLUTICI: OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING HISTORIC LANDMARK N0, 29 TO DESIGNATE THE "ADAMS HOU56" LOCATED AT 7914 ALTA CUESTA DRIVE AS HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION N0. 29 MOTION: Moved by King, seconded by Buquet to approve Reeo lu tion No. 88-288. Motion carried 4-0-1 (A6 eenL Wright). M Yr k * a C3. HISTORIC LANDMARK DESIGNATION N0. 30 - CITY OF RANCHO CIICANONGA - A proposal to de aigna[e the Nab ie co Brenda, Inc. Regina Cooking Nine and Wine v._.....a v._e,:...i~n _-- v__.~_-_ v:_-__. ,_-_._~ _. ins<+ n_-- •:__ o..a -- .~~o... .y,.... ~.b ~.~ wee .....~ .. Hie for is Landmark No. 30 - APN: 227-161-10 end 24. Staff report presented by Arlene Banks, Associate Planner. (1402-06 HISTORY) Mayor Stout exp ree aed [hat he had some Arab lame with [hie, because he felt this was en eyesore and felt he did not want to place a condition on th is un lees it could be returned to its original condition. City Council Minutes Mey 4, 1988 Page 17 Councilwoman Brown wanted staff to get with Nab ieco to tell them what the designation meant and see how they renpoaded. ACTION: Council concurred to continue the item until such time ae staff had the oppor [unity to work something out with Nabie co. nacC1!"II09 Nn nn_nao A RESOLDTION OF TIIE CITY COflNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA~ CALIPORNIA~ AFP ROVING HISTORIC LANDMARR DESIGNATION NO. 30 TO DESIGNATE T~ REGINA WINERY ALSD RNOWN AS THE ELLENA BROTHERS WINERY LOCATED AT 12467 BA5E LINE BOAD AS HISTORIC LANDMABR DESIGNATION N0. 30 * * * * * a. cowclL sosnaBH No items submitted. * * * * * * I, IDBNTIPICAiIOe OP I'IEIB POt ~II MBSTIEG None submitted. J, C01970NIGTIOBS PROM TH6 PNBLIC None submitted. * * * * * * C. ADJOflYffiNT MOTION: Noved by Ring, seconded bq Stout Co adjourn. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Absent: Wright). The meeting adjourned at 9:25 p. m. Eeepec [fully submit [ed~ Beverly A. Au[hele[ City Clerk Aoproved: May 18, t988 Mayor Stout and Members of the City Council: Tonight, when you consider the request by Citrus Little League to permit district and sectional playoffs at Redhill Community Park, please do not forget the neighbors who must live next to the nn rk! Do not lose sight of the fact that the decisions you make concerning the use of thle park directly affect us in our homes. The sanctity of our homes has already been intruded upon by the irresponsible overexpansion of this gark, ii,y ~ovr decision to extend the park lighting curfew from the rromised 9:00 pm to 10:00 pm, you have already allowed the special interest groups to dictate to us what time our families maY go to sleep. Please do not act as irreaponeibly when you consider the leagues request tonight! We homeowners bez vout nn ro« °cr6ct Ka; icye quality of cur families lives has already been infringed upon by this over- built park which you have thrust into our established neighbor- hood. Do not allow the abuse of our neighborhood to worsen. 4he increased border. that these playoffs will impose cannot be endured! We urge you, do not make an already unbearable situetion worse! Ss tabli sh a precedent tonight for sensible use of this park. Leny the leagues re ru est for this onnortuni ty to further abuse our neighborhood! Respectfully, ~~~ y William J. hnsan 7321 Vineyard Avenue v J/ Q/u/6L~/d,t x ~ off---, Marva Jo son 7321 Vineyard Avenue ztEM E.2 JAMHS CAHTB'R DBVELOPMSNT COMPANY 888 North Main Street, Suite 801 Santa Ana, California 92701 (714) 543-9259 May 12, 1988 Mr. Brad Buller Planning Department City of Rancho Cucamonga 9340 Baseline Road Unit B Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Re: Baseline and Hellman Neighborhood Commercial Center Preliminary Review 87-68 GPA 88-OlA DDA 8711 City Council Meeting May i8, i988 Dear Mr. Buller: I am writing to bring you up to date on my proposals to the City. As you know, the primary impediment to the development of the Neighborhood Commercial Center, which has been identified 6y your Staff, is the effect of the driveway that bisects the property. The Staff feels that the a conflict between the apartment project and a Baseline Project would be intenaif led by an NC designation. Over the past several months, I have negotiated an agreement with the owners of Rancho Meadows whereby they would abandon their interest in the existing driveway easement in return for my granting them a new easement to Hellman, assuming I am allowed an NC designation. Enclosed ie a conceptual design drawn by POD, which is acceptable to the Rancho Meadows owners. Based on that ucai4~i• iIIV aL LI11 LCI~F. UTP. U.ITPI] ,l TPW C• hC T~~ ... 1.: ..L . also attached. It was also suggested to me that we relocate~the~ main entrance to the shopping center 200 feet to the west and combine it with the Park entrance. The new design has the following advantages: 1. It allows for a aepara to identifiable entry statement for Rancho Meadows Apartments as a part of their street frontage jd t t o :. i L 1 i `~ t, ' ~~l J ~ tt _ 1 t~ ` i~ ~ ~ 14 ~.s .. •i ., ~;~ ," .~=-~ ; ~` II ~-I K M L ( ~ ~, L.{~ ;~. _„ :~ s' __ -- ~+ ~ c s ~ i ~ E ~~, ~~ 4 1 I, '~. v _. '~ ~~ ~ l ~' .. ',-J 3+ ~i u~ Y i .^'' '. .t ,~~ F c e ~~, ~.,~ I Fly{ °o ~ ° °o °v°or°a~ ua~m~~n °om ~.r ommo°ro°o++°.ryr i'o°ou°o OO mi-.y mprvOPnm+wrOnrvmpSOOr00linm0 r v0+'~m mpnm r.in-.~NOry~a ym+y u~mwPm m 6 3, ' cl rn n N n O 2~ +u~~0~mP0"~n mrN A1-mP0^rvm~f inmmmmYiNmPi! ++.Y .(rr a.r am ~'rYtrJrrlrrrYrV ¢ mnNNNNrvNNryNNNNnNNNnrvNn j~ nrv NN nnNNnNnnrvNnrv ~ , U w 6 w r0 W 1 00 j y r~ti ri0 J r~ n ~ n ~ Ff I- pOw F ¢ nZw r+Zi tiOw~i wN Omu „100¢J_w c ~~ ~Fww m Z Noo ~`o OpVw O J ~.. ~m~p'Jw ..2 t~2 v0 U V SW N~6¢ O'l SVJ41i NV.O NON SO¢V a V ¢ J¢v,S <~n ~Nt w l.nu rrD U •l{ wVw w w mOJ mp OmVw m6 O ~ ¢ <ZU¢u uf¢OODUVV m + + u CwU OSN~ mV V'J OP ¢N¢SO¢¢Rw0 6 ,n s.-.-win+.¢-~-z< r>~.. o Y2 VyK Uwt¢60N2< 66 N<NwwNN=f OS U O Y o ~nJ ywJ~6t „-~Y¢¢Z Yf N2 V Opw iHr w Y1 V.+ M M<WO~- U V O U riVwY<ap<¢JJw pOCOjMV U_u20mw _ HWm2Qw .. .n 22ZrN 2f JW Oti w w6r F' ~62LLn¢u¢N4¢¢QY¢LN O w6 6>¢0406Y« «<¢w6~wuM1~~'w2a > ~ o > <Y~OOV u~O N¢<u.NOtSV¢2N¢NF O~n N~nw>raw u ~ 3 3 7 Uti Z m OZ O V6 V 2 N~ w n wJ ~S NO z a n z u ~. _ 2 o u _ a~ i c~ WziW zN <r n.> ¢auw ii i ~ .. N „J mu zzJWJx2zvomF< zz `~ ~ wu as u~L o.~~ xa<.. u t o Jz .~ w JomWNL¢'WU~m<a >wm NH c z u ,~.¢~w mz z¢zp¢oNZ w o rNN w°o ~z uo~oommww>mm uJOw c~ ¢ K ljwa Nw ¢« ¢V 2Lwm 2Unu¢ _ S_ LOV L3¢ LN„J Ow j •~O w m wOw ~- L<SwS<LNF OWJ,NOJwZN • ~<wU» J J <h ^~<OVr O VMO¢3LYY• 2 ~.f ~nZNVWN M>2n <~'341N Ym 1iNNry>1'OOJ¢RNtiJJ w~0 ~m VONJt6N <tt <{=mm m « l N w O i r+ «..a t<JmmW mmmY02 ~ UVVV I r >I <1 P O W NryyY<N mOPmmPmP.~h N1m 410h N.pm .~NmVhn ¢~ O ti lmPm• r NmmymmmOmlmNmmmm mip Y~mrmm N ' D m ^ J ~mymP.P Mym.~n wn yP Qy w mmNmtimP~ NpPrrPWyWy~NrS~N V'PpNP rrNNrJ rOP P.O p PpPVOwWPP r lPPrWPW~W~DPa.-.IUNNrYlTS ^IPN wP J.wOy-, ~. I.PFUWpyI-WP w1.N-IOP PW r.OW rP I> I DynoNnnNr~mtiT..lm mma~s-.m°mr°en~~nnnnnn nnn ao>~-mao }r+x ms~~y mroammos ccc9oe 5'irs> ommzz°z>z~NmnmmnN~ m+..c srnntnnnnasssD-sac you nTn N »N99zmD m.. i °>aOr m-~T ]1 a FG.Di00>T'~SPmSxoo CCC2CmOT DY~}20y Y T Z N c > rzc9rii- n ti n ~ nnn nD NZ> nz- zoyn °m~`zocco~~ai nn~zri T m O-1>nnyZmp C n Om>2 ZNH> > m}>par O nFO3marmTn%TmTr> NDTnrZ » y -I>} T rm09mZ>a r9^~ Z< m >Sm N9Np00 00=FaTN L > a C9A I}-N~m YnnT > Hamm } m02 O>ON~ ~nmpm ~y)>f Cm-~ D n OZa2 mpmnTOrr 2T Y n T n zn 2N~00022 mmm n r 1 9_n Pn a_ _ n__ n ODaD = >Zm N }' > SO O ~ Fa Z n - C I N a T 2 N 2 G m (~ m60N~OJaNOxON}pOPNaaNNODOZDNNWSZmmD9WmNNNn T}ri9«W9mm99mmGm[~mDpNmm O 9m i00 9=m3l.m OT 9~D^•D TTNDTTA029mnLT D DZ9+9pyy 3J0 IC10 n9rDD CC.'.D ~>D O.+rrrynSmmPrr<~- PN F>r2PNnti9m99N2Z22-1>r 9m'J(ZZS-1>OTm > r+Zm CPrOmnP01y20r >}ZOOOO~nrD>DNYON>DND mG1m yN Nr4DD-1 -1 NDZS<l0 <f ±'D OS>Nm~ DCP 1 2 jn~- yCf OLmmm Om T m~ rNTT .S-NO r mn0(lW)GI>I •y2 NY>NTNmZ INn9rY9m ZN22n j I TOD ON T'12 N -I'~INNyMCT-Ig4nti >D a>D yOD m.'l 1+OD 1 DZS nn DNNDmD9 OOD Z>OL D"ILr Om~ rn m> OOrC >m001 COF D C 9 ~y0. in2 TT niP~mmnTOWmyNxm Dr19yiOM 1 ODD KS N>O m dP90PPwWO P Nn0 1((tt Ol O ~ ZT n P> NCODlODN C-IPYD OAO~Dr92 1 z z' Nn- 00 oP No o.l a z ~90N2 .-n • . F hTyy O 00 m9~ lTN CSmDiY Tn mT0 2' .+Z ~^r'D n m 9DDrmT N - "r-Ir mmNpC .+D O =N0 1 CH mx2 ,. 1 >9 n N Z~ _ _, nn« -ten nnr.Nn r.Nr - r. nNnnnna- ~ i oar oi•~ }<° o iiP~inma °POacorxv N I i~tiPaNl°mra-~ .• tiNS N .". i m J.wD SN O ~T xPrO.-TPx-Ix SOZxmx n Om oc r oNroTmmam mWmm m N D 0y n ND ~NAO-IN D D D- DDDD .y P. o C L m0 r mhmmmm 2 y ~ ~~ - r ~ hISi~N+ -1 w • N N N N v. N n NNNNVNNNNNNUNNNv llrJM}l1PlNl~l lull. i.r m P6mJyry -.PP PPPPPPPNNNNU1lTU UPVI}s! rPNlw D.OP-IPN./.w NrOyPrPUlwNrOyP~IPNIw N~-Odgy I 1 1 J.p NNrN• rPN O.pY NP v~~°°NO~°.~+won~vw P.r-lo aoPmr±N mmao°,om°aommNm lP.aa NPOOVNOPOOWOPOPONNOOOOUPOrPOn.Orpy00pOON00 I 2 9 D n 0 C n D Z 2 > 1 9 D m > O y N ooYmlr.o..or~nYONmoo oo o..pooooo00ooooomNOo ~!-moorvY,-h-.oooYrvd I-oonNONmo c~-rroNOOOO•.NYhdo ••~ - ommo+PO.+,:.P:u,n.o,.~..e.oem o.-~,c.: r.o ,~.:o m•.rooon~o-.NON rvoP rvodm mommnNwlN n N •. PN~ Y N 0 nNd n m .r POJrv Adm m .y 6 S i -~ OpO.yNmYNdrOpOrrvmYNdF mP O-~Nm YN dn0P0•+N mYNdhO O_ ¢ ~ OgPPPPPPpPPp0000000000.w A•~n r.r Ar~r.+N NNryNNnNN !1 NNNNNNNnNNrvNnnNryrvNNnNnNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNMNN 7 O SU O O1~ O N j V w Z -{ d0 d S 06< O rm.,¢ O ¢ WO ¢OY¢ O+r-O YON m6N wU ~O OOY mOU •Y~N SNm20 NNO-~d .~> OYA Zd~¢ON Nil~m dOmdN rv0 6 < o xyN R2< YO y0 P w¢ 02N WNUW;NOhN4 V? NU o~d,uN ~rirc m° z<m °i~ ri,°ni irm: x ~rii~ >w <V r ors SU V a r Nu C1N ¢w~w~ OU vU2% SV~ ~V iUNwUZUY __ 6,mN UV• ¢OY Z¢O W¢< A2W¢¢7 w06uO~Or< Om GOIIO pYOW %w~nOOm .Z-•J NO<1- 6¢~- rOt'Jw 2w~<-,-,~ <L 6r-h UUU;~•+V U'-wU lUU oUU VYZw ruVV ZwOU N ~~~,oY~Q,NJawW~° ~~a»w^~ °~>rLLr¢¢b=~~~ 'Sw.hA .->:~~~~ n~W WWJ w2N NS•uqu LG TI SV m1,FU NN2 >FZmZw LGZ¢aNZ~C2wOS2262O wVC° aL=¢2=w r~wrY3 <ro~" ¢.~ .,m W~~r¢ w3<U<- lY~]Z ,n-,O mr~nu¢ <G7LL «2nruuu< C26rJ ZU Zrn 2-+-26 r~nLaNZ 20.'uhUw¢OL<¢Yl C¢¢4 ¢,V-,¢3~•u uO~ u40Z~¢Rw uaNO AayNWw<•aiWwnuwuswq<>wYwogw° dLL> ...N .. <~.• mNxNNO¢oNNnN uo¢I¢NN¢mo`•c N~~o V U V O 2 w 3 Y Own UO V < W Z V _ r V ,-~ _ LuV w•UO ~1wy ` < w¢ r K N y rrry ¢LM Z w N•nN r d_ Nw F ~ ~Jr ~Z 2NwwU7 ¢ ``°~NUOq<Ylv ZhJ twl YZ¢2l ¢O~Z¢>oaN uJVON W'J2¢LO 'JA w02 O Ww O•~O 06'NSw¢I 2 OZOrW U V¢SwUS6AI.< 22222 OGNU<O NOO ¢ MVVwV'Sw 00 tZ r0<wl w UWw.lA VI2 JW<1wZ) NppLi• .. zw .'+swY`wuwlzw:°ig~',jo2 ~<2 ..a Y<>c¢= .+ aW~~oioNmumzr¢<•N-, -+o ioiiiii`~¢iiiuiiY~A~i i.A+o S¢~¢N22,-~~+1~-,~Z-,,UOYYYJwI<NO.rY<SLF~L2ZZLY¢OSSI ! ~-.+ PO.-,N mNmrvrydrydOOmnNONANNNYOnY OmdmOddrPl-r1lmPOPmmN~r`ryN OryN ONY NlON N AmYmN Syr mh y.-, d•O-"FNmAm nNmP md~ydmNPl~wNm J rm~+PmawmNrmmu OPNa dmmwoN rP-lo mr-ya+:P~mmm PMy.YN{yu•1w bN.pNNrmUP•'•N YwJ.N yPm -IwdyrmN~wuJ I wNdVIN mOpPNrdPONPmaOrmPPym•OPPy{UdrmOPr Pd iT NZI..NNNNATAA <TanDAAp99n 9999999TS9mZZ OS2 i m >pY> ~im }'>»> p ppzm>am. ~ m sNmxzznn<risnDacz a~+nco..n ~°z spvp>zznrmKnzyy - mZ mNm~r>%m= 2 OAT 00>m 2A• >n'32 r• H 2'+2 nm~nN m mmnm Tin30Z 2mSFKUN„Y 9m~Om o N>m n. ~naNONp zp > >r•'•pm N nmNYmn3r-•+>N m> rs-.z nzn xNa99~ oNnmm~> y nzpz pmx pY'9>Nrnr cr o>p<N N>pYmo r~ N9>-~•. nnmmz oc.p..czv-I>N;nn>rn apIK..NO o nF9amnpY ~n> nnmxp~ vm vl-wp m~..z z>r r Tr ~zyNro:>~~xPOZ m>Npa cx mmo >n~imri ~i `<°oz>z c •1p iF>2Cn3a NOy< mZ KCC >m iNrmTmn Y ZOTmmO py y2 On^ a mZ NK 92%C AOKm 09u ny I n -IN m3 n< Nn '-Z I N • p _ >p z ~Kn pn°v i N G .+ v • N om 2 Yn K ~ < > Ny n 00 nz rJ[99m mN Nan •12mN3 n. 9+0ynY9T tm100mCO99<TC 1 3N99mamm~2>O 99m u•-inm>rn TG>ym m ;O9YAKpO~NtDOAyylDrr+uy93N 9KTTS mNaAmYm AO rr r•Nmr}y0up<K>NF ZTnOmON C~ CNxuupmN mYrNYm O>. Z•11'• _>mCH mmhYm>YnuYS9Tn ~-I Am N••r>nPTnnrCl ~nmr dm ~ nu1YS0>~Cymnn>9a m ^ rzr o oNm.. Tc9 yN r KNr. ix om.+p prF"'im$rrp n }~o cprpTV> raxv mNNTn pmnrp~aN,9nc N mnT nar9izmrr io IZK>NZ m > 0 9T'mA OAf OOOUaNN29n A• y TS TTrur2 9NnTGTUK2YTGSO~-••~ur _ CnCtm~AZmi ZCTry npaZnYFrm T9r yGCO In » n OJa9p>nnCOn > MTppm3 YnirAmnf~ r in 90tH a>N yn PiN T n Z OppTmNTmnooT O ND09mD >r'p000 K ^nOD NOTE m=ApaL •nTm [1 r ~ T 9 nT T y9rNP%YmnnN 11 nY•^ C =~r Y'r 0•~ o _ Ommrm rvri 1 >mxmy 9 2 >Z2-1 /~ p ZNNm > ON>y3 Sr< pTa Z 1 On nnN nn Nmmlinn nOmN .1v NNn ~ 1 naN >R'FKO COC RNr >NTpO w '^~ i r2 Pp O0 yl.•Wry O 90 OQ> p 1 r0Tbr2 Z2n ANT ZS DOSS S -~ m w P 1 +mm mz oT ..z x n ora < 1 Am••PnA DA AD < Aa O r0 ~n 2 Pn C 1_P nru S•^ NPU _ Z fl pm m rr Tm S OW S ~O, mN NNm NN N NN N O O Ln NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNVN IL (1 uWWWWWWwwwW > b•PNPmmmPP.W,~m IA PPPPPPO'P PPmTmbNU Um Vim P+>Y{{++s++WwWwWWWWWWN In O amrPP+ NrOdmyPNJwNrOdbyPP I.W NUOdPKP { NrOa It ; ix I> 9 1 A > ID N+ d mmJOww J 1• m PP'R NPmO WOJN N'•1 .1PUW N.Or P•• I> dOwr~TONSPJI'PUO{b{ONrOPNamOOyrPrNpr++w'armON IS J dw0~+0 paNJmmOOyViPOwrJrpO{OaPw+000N00••NOWOO NOO'+OpAWNm+00uOmObIN00000ra00a0U000Am0000 1 ~ns0mm'n OO C~ry0rl-Om m~00 W0O0hP P `/OTm wP0 mOmT0 'rOmOmm m-.rv Onu.O P mV n 00nP r.+r .pYP rn~a 21 rr m rvrv-. m ~ OrrvmamM1l-0 P00 m[p0m000PPPPPP 31 rvrvnnrvnrvrvrvrvmN rvnnNnrv NrvnnNrvrvNrv O OiL im O wW O V n O p'w-' ? N 2 ww w MK ~¢ 'J ¢ 60n¢¢ ~¢2 Op Ow 222-~Y2 ¢SPSO wS~x N _ _ __ ___ ~-¢ Lrw mVV .lW WO~rWW WOWw UWr m0 0V ¢) U 6~n < ~6P w6 O¢< ¢ UP z wLVmmzN w2V _ VZ m>WZ O¢Z U2NP¢w<¢ r 7 wOZ~ O Iw-V ~ewod\¢~a°wri<zrn¢wa uuw~'a ¢f<<22 2<wOOm~P2 tOT«~~n rU~OmU¢rU0 UZ rjJ 6V0 ~Sl vZwwOimL7 ZO< Oa U2uu Y O'VVOnZOUOr r„ ' NK99~r~.¢¢FF~-I ZZ uwhZu wOP Y~mW rinW OV T~Zpu ¢v~tiWT6 ~wVms m.n~~n<wr>mriuZPa'%26.n¢r~ 000 V22 S 000 OUO O ww iUw ]V V. i-. w2 ¢ N OO O~n~V wVOJ 00 < <JZm UWNI J<~ T i<1<z~ <V Yzi W3 c uuuorx~.i Ulx-y WWwi >W z.vozzZZ z0.+ NK OYw<OWw~l ~U¢¢¢¢OO'u Owe TuZr <~uiiiio~.'Or .¢ azT¢w<~nwszx~.. ¢...-.- zr miNNaF r.. ~rz~Yz fU0O00NNNFFI~ w OJ~nz<R< «ff WwO2<O J 7» >USS¢TSINiI < tl mrml~h nh±nNJ~OhhP0Y1m0 pnY rn ¢I .r LPnmrmPNh Lrh l I rrr mmm am~P Nr~1 ~Y iffmn~ rmP~O ~~~ WPr V«ipPP P «PrPPO rarOP Y PrP m ~" WWON0J. 1.aNPa:ar N ~w ~ u ~m A1. mN ~/ NyWW«NN«rpPPOaPa « a N N P m N ~) ~nnnmm mmm mmm>mm-~>I'»N> » C SN~n n I- m OC D~ O>n»SN«9rrn -.~.~^ a <imznmNNO~m. y z m m P s m'"<« si ma moo> m"r ~~i ° i « i n «. > a > n> F m N > YmZ ««mA2°r O~+n OZ2 ' > i > TO% »n 'pPm mn92nTmmiOP ' Z mDn Z Z > y y O ' m y02 3m> C2~ 2m°xZrT I [2) m K O c< C O >C 2 y =0>)y002~Or« ~+ n?nNmay wzPm Vmz p z oc ( s o o "" i m n mTyvmmy2vFi In-Iraz '2-~ ` , 2 } S S E ~ n mp j T n C m S O > nl D A ZO « 2 r . mn _r» nmz _ _ C_ m - °oo m _ _ Z m ..... n m y n A N m n n y N = N C ZZ N ZZ S ^D9 y2 T A n n' D __ y • m m N N m r n _ > T ~ Am « _ 1 m ~ _ 2 C (1 ' n P y ; ~ ~ p o~mi°.,«aNm TmxipnK n~>mb'v i°" m° v n i < «O> <>n O>V tP 'p3ZN9Tr>mp<A0D2p c tT O r y «mr ««O a v >° x im y C m N~ .. xn T z « ay~ T 2 < f ' z o m y C T.A ZO fPmm 9NNm> «mymrm~S >D2N«ZS Np ~ oFm n c m u2i { m T nN«nmm x>y o.-~<vyz . .mz xn~ i r . o N nzzcz ODm>2« ~C1p p Tpm CT ~~ o 02~ !n > C I n ' <m~ >« AO CZ p p n0 > ~ o y n y "1n yHfymmO O mOnmA>Of ^^ Tr TTy ~ > ~ }~m > y 3 w• =p „ Nm = j N I"wNOL~i n Z Ong C A F 11 nmy cT ssn m ~m r ° ~ Tj m a Nm N o .. r c n~"-. ss nnnNeyNnnNn c° ~ n r'~ ~ .°. a i' F ° n y 'oz ' z o a opptiv mpoap~ o ~iyv .x~ a m f1 m°SCP <VNi m mnm P y Nn NT m n 1 ~ I rv •y= DDac DvD ~ O O n A N Nr N r 4y `" ~q m W L Pm y n NNH NN N P A r N O N v.a N I ~ n vvvNNVVNVNNNNNVNNVNN NN N NNN N N NNVNNNNNV I Y V p P w W ' _ w N PPPPP P PPP PPP vI ptiuuuu~P..P ~"c$ooooo$ooa~aa~ m « PNpvl +vN ID aa P~Nr`.Nm m P:wN«oam-. N. .W ~oamyPm:wN«pam«~ : ro-~P ~.+o .ar z _• ~ Woy o w.. v ' z m v. ~o~° ~v rN m.° « .° ~r N ° < ~° ° u N P o io °a ~4 "' o , ° , . . - . .~ , , . .1 . o . o ~ . ° °O O O ° ° ° a il p , a ~ « iy vm OO~I:YO m O O°P ~oo o oomvi p a. . o°o°o o °o N $ .- oo oooNaP°oIr-rmmr°°.a.,P.lom°°n:o°o,Nno~mo~°p°mo°m+~.°~°o °o m r,°. rN-°D°o aoo~oo~oou. ml=oow+~oroa; + aO.r" +rnOPmm m mPmP~nO++u•Om Nm~+OarmmmNN No- Nay-ma.o .. marmno-.Nm++~a~-mco.. N,.~rlna arm mr rmr +rr w~oNNNN amnoT~oaam~aoiu+oio ro aoaaaaaaaaaua a;o~aam as aami ii NNNNN NNNNNN nNnn Nlm.Irv nnN nem~In nnnHnnNNNNNNNnNNN s i r Wsw ~z~ io „¢d~¢ Wmvd ¢LN ¢-~ a .. .. FN ..xxz z uzmx xDi,°a irn il~: i =' +x o.-.-.-N~- r N r>~- o m o0 zoooDO 70. n~F _rvs`am Uuu uZm NW mWm Y W~t}Wi u i' iu yW pF i 6Zw ¢ NNn m Z4 Im 1-O V 3VN< > o.ZiO ~n ~64d ~K~ ~- YN Zpw .nf ¢w6 wV6 Lu. M1U _ U¢~m~l WOOm<„OM6 wwrl y ¢Y¢JU° Ou H< OZZ¢D~ p mpW O> p<m Oyu>6u nWL~+2`2 j ~QZUN j¢ wzm m'^~w`~ u wow<pJ o~ _ ~ wo~r a=c r<orz~miw . w.. D Wz puiii zzoww wzD ..LL w~a ~U MN ¢r4 XNPrY w uUZ MwV„Om<OYN<¢¢~.~ U/ U% oVraw -~ ~ZV wIJp .•J <n ~+: pm .+V.P Hw y.+Yw ~ uF~-IO «wO'-6 DZ Y~J ~+wos¢iwF~`DZ'iuWZnio..<>awrWnN..ni+xn x rnd onNao~ w, zw><o JzwJwxWZxWp.ww~a urwD ~ o sN.•.a N~uwzp¢I.~mi~wwo~=W p..N OUmioamNKPWN V V V w N Z Y > w ZL Y W w U J In j W 2 O j V= ~.~ ¢ VV V J n U plYriVV _ U~1 .~ ¢V 212-ID L DU - ~<+ - V V r VVQrmm¢W Y66~W~ RaVN WOVN S <JNwrZrJLw~ rr Ll+uwi t+<Z J~ t<NN uyW C i L VUw t Vii»V.~¢nZw u0 I-w -. F¢N~y .2+<RO VwM< 2 '~ND¢urlu D¢¢ ¢ n:0 LUZ V K d ~'VOD2UI+wN 416U 3w ZM pOUlus]ui~> p WJin a[ w<~20 LrN w • I WVW On'pX ¢I-~<UVL O S~rU<In <Wp< 2<w=V< m'n2 uVWwhn M ~-nYOW VS Z uU¢ILOyZ ~ D u0 .~ < LLW U6u V ¢JUN Ja zzrwwrz2w~~ iWZi..ozD <~~ .+< ~- O¢{ U<w j~-~VU WNN6«FY< Z^+ViYI { m ¢ U7ZLYLw<Op.n<061Lw 0<K2F<Z O<wS¢ww U .+~'<%<xw1=61+<N~1 JgVLY~OWOYZti-~W ^~NI-wWZLCyw .l VVY >Urli <uuN>ZNV JJpV¢2Um> <I-12rU <uu 'uuouu°OOpoDO«wi W.... ......Y <yw~wwNDDDO m<rcow ` u ~ u~uuuuooomyoppoDDwwWww ¢,.. ~. ~.. ~. ~.w yt2 ii oNOrmrNmrom ml.r a~rr~--.c m+onncormrNaamaWr~-I- .. aaNrmNN m mmm rv~-rv Ors-onm~n Nln NCN mI-.. armnr»nnl- N I r NI_nr^a..r NNw^^Da a.-Nr y~-..„r..rvo^~+.~^ Ma rte/ Pr Nprp~fPPrPPm P rPNdrPWWpPO UrPPP ~' rOWWOOfrwrN ~PdPw d~Wr~.Nm dPPNPr00 -1r .p NNJ. 1-NmPWm+rT W w•T ~-vlw OdnIP OdPyprPmO.pm ~< 22223nA.r Sr'rrN„SrmT mr'~'~wNZSARF 1 T~1•y00m> CS~+r•mn>)O>f TT> Z2. pOCaa 1 P yAnnDA3ym rinn> yDZDnnOC~r )9rOmD r~ymn93TrZNn -~)~-ISAO)r y x2 OTZ2}__ Srr nT %OntiAt>3>rr 2 ~Op rlvw} 2tD>mN {r 1 Nn ~ nrAmmDOnrip ym z>rAm x3• z ox.ym °z iim~ .+ ..xnp r.a ..~! amm n<mzzapNt omom>mzm .. mpzrz>m N nTn r nmp ocmyv• KrKZ z N Dp n s a aixmpyxmN}a~no D•.> zy~^ x <• aom~~N x > c ew<eDn< na~+ms ° mco ir-IfT >PNa> iyT~z n...z m....r ypNa> Nrp<Tr v°ir~~o n>yyz o mn)DymcanpnK ~ OG m- O wy Nm Z i+N N ryi r 3 R22m vc2+N am z..Niv>iN m2 if'z o r`y19i r2~n ..m^n r ny ni <N.. r a o ~.°, ~ n R~ °z .. °c r'i aP it min i- y on a zN i~ n y z~ ~m y i ~• o N cr°i n ~ n~ N 2 a 3 K >m T fNJ2 < A n .T, D n >~ n N z N n r n i in„o aa3NZNmNxppnnNn N..apNnDN.NMI:.S..m ix>NNN I nom mo>es-~ Am«src>mzm<cp>m.. mmm ~ a9mamzpmm<oxmrmm3)mNArrmm.s3r~p33NO<> mnmcymyN3a noDDmmNmM )caNOpr•+ mamr~T$nnn az- .. zp ., nms-.. va~3n nAnczzmmpN among^.... ,. y!> l'1nmA$ >'AimO»Ay»Dm > »> m y Dr 'ryONrr Tf SH yKl-Im A\DyS V•2Tyyrrr IS amP 9 9T O mmy90NTTmyD> OIT' ~»N: m =mNrA~ftln 0l'•YCyyZC y<A9wZyrNm3r 09>OT «< n1-102m0223 yr O M• Om2>\ 22 r T 1 N ~ ym2m ZQ 02Z'2mD 2AC2N w100 <~+ Zyy zrG> cmm <m)m mN n in 9nVTA\A m0 n>DTZy PDOZOmnnti< P'o Np nnN mOm2•~Sm a[. 00T0ti9 1P01..Ii 02Tr ~1+ w n ~ mAyW>> m <NyN \ 20 m > = mm0 I AO>WOT Z AP ~p >AN002 ry tDR2An >CDSpTNyN Af 9m A f yLm T N O PO N_nH nA COf NO N ~m} (t nn C12y ~ =PN 1 .j ~mmyD rnnnR; Winn m 1 o ppp m Nir.°a) °>oo.no iNyppm yOpj m mxm 'O n Quiz ic4. xmz ~ 1'1 NPTT 1Mam rZ 9 A AAa 22 A A AAAD aADm z ii m¢ 2m::Na y ~: 2 n ~ N~~ a N~ ?v~~ NNN ° n WwwwWWwWN ~'W WwWWwWWwWWWWwwWNww~'wwWwwwuww WiNi. ~~ } PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPUPPPP PPPPpP D 20 OONOONOOy•pdO.DdddO9mmm mmmmmmJ+y+Ni ~n~ryP P 1 P OdmyP P,pWNrO.pP-•P VI ~.WNr O.Om yP ~ Odmr IM 2 _ 'I i o m is OOrmrPNwr A uTOdOgdWN~JNJ LPNmI-•J lP~yPjmCaNrMNwd (~Nd 41 m OTd OiTOJOP000•Ud VIP ~Z w CmrOPP000000mO00VWOPpy000pO00000pOOmrP000 1 V rmnO Y0lN w000 NNhNNONwmOOpmOON00N^P nmryNJrONr v OnmOO V'In mOOU`.e <O.n •'~ NOOWmNNA.r dOrru~P ~nnN nOM ONOnmN .n0000r9 rO Pinr u~ PNON .n mPmm •+OOrOOw mOd~ v.O .v ¢ I n Nd -~~ -~N N 6 =; P v m y Q •~ OPOwnmYN WngPOn~ImvgdrOPO~+NIm •w~onwRO~N m.f'0. dr0 r l.e .fiYa' rl~nrrrr ~n•+mnmmm nnmmmmm i~l NNrvnNnNNNNNNN,..n NNNNNNNNNNnNnNN nN NNNnNNNNn o x xcs x Wi r s i Z ri V •~ > r w w rl r ¢ ¢¢~n YSn¢¢0.'N< F2N¢ d ~'I w V O F Y w S NK NW Sw Wn Ym6m ~~ OGn Z2~ 7JAZNON\ Sww006 O SN a< V O N3w ~¢ ..JOOia ~-¢~ i<nFZ¢ 6~w wr LwF wW6¢¢wN~ V GS6u S¢~f Fw rU ZUN Wx 6w¢ ¢J~n U <6N ~=-li f_w > ¢w<fw ¢pYYw NW ¢Zwp<~ OwN¢ti-. I J n U ¢mFZ ~¢ O<1-I 'O.< 'fir ¢ M rx¢w¢ < d7OYLL~ ~L ¢wOwU60OWU Y~ K w ~ ¢V~ _ ~jPZ„ZNfww^o>¢wJO??V^~ NPw6 F'nJ LLFI-O~-¢6 YLL N p¢< 6 ~~' OxLL NVV y~'n YUU<uNNYww 31- J J w _ W Ww >OW Zww¢ov~.. <V>Z02VN<<V< Z >\INZw¢¢J Ow¢w O 06 ¢2w> SwSuN w2J¢S¢i=V'Up y~ .F-~f~LL~<J W2KNPV mV' f< 24 t1-J 32~Nti<-IY¢inSOOJ <.<wLL .i2 2iNNw0~~'ZZ2¢0.p `I~wwX V^%9 NV¢r JVCV~<N m~+JOOwwYJw w¢ V¢i OrnO ~~n ~ ¢~p~UrwwO¢ ¢06G U. 'oiY<N>Y'L rwWUYK t¢r60 v0.iw~wVJ_J4NNn¢ N6 w <Y O., uw w LLUJ6 OLLU6m< 0.eYm ¢PNw~p JNNO n2009 U~N6% ll < ZSV J Y O OOV V y 00< YV 0.O ~ o s wwu az YJ N << o< u .~ ZV _ ZJ _ WR6 1 % O'er N _~ ¢ .iY Or 3 JON Nnl Zrun lur ruv ZV•Nrw~ 61Jf70•IJJ < Z wU F pp uYJJJN¢ /<w¢O¢ZW'+ w? Jp'J ~•i V2f Or~V«f .w OV<W 2 KO <ZN< JVUwUVV •r+SVJ w ww6<TWF _ O ~ 2622„ p~w w< fLL f ~-w„wV¢~L J'n J OYwwLUQONY¢ Z22Ja<¢>Z• VOO ~Y<wr0 Yy~' NVSVw V<~+~+'< w WIL ¢I¢G jnw<ON¢NU U¢i O V 2 ¢O ¢Op VNN H < w y2 2w2YJ¢G¢O YI WST <¢ a Ww:wmari-z ri0 ~..oor-uwNw iNw a % .. zip iuzJ .~ z s z YYJ ..r ¢xo w SLR~nL <Fn>YOWZwI-~J7?f=Fwww¢v~wF Z2LX~n<¢¢ ¢¢¢ <~..o.... ~+ua<-.iooon xzaJ a.. «•.«wx<w ua¢¢¢sa¢-~¢r¢¢¢N¢u. ,n /~N NN.~r ~.. ~-wF »u>r>-~SSNxx y Oi N'dwmOOtmr9Ndm~p w 41n gPN'nOmryONNFP n.a ~~ O<yNAnW„<vY I"<N.F'IO d<N•'~wmm wr mPwNwwP JnO N I NN Ond nNywwNT^^mm~+m mfln mayaON U'dvmNdNN9PPN l~ 19 n ~ 1 1 ~ is 'n in m i i~ r a CITY OF RANCHO CL'CAMONGA STAFF REPORT 4 Date: May 18, 1988 To: City Council and City Manager From: Russell N. Maguire, City Engineer By: Richard R: Coto, Associate Civil Erg',naer ~I Sub,{ect: Approval of the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and GPS Consulting Civil Engineers for the preparation of an Economic StuQy as well as Design Plans, Contract Specifications and Engineer's Estimates on the Cucamonga Creek Storm Drain Improvements, Phase I starting from the Cucamonga Creek Channel to approximately 1300 feet east thereof. The not to exceed fee of 532,070.00 will be funded by the Drainage Fund, Account No. 23-4637-8763. RECOMMENDATION• It is hereby recommended that the City Council approve and execute the above subject Professional Services Agreement with GPS Consultfilg Civ11 Engineers. BACIOROUI6/AIYILYSIS r~.., _~ ,~.._.._ it=i==-- ~~^r~..•~s.:.~~t'o w i:is cni ai.i ny i.UlaMUn9a I, reeK JTArm oral n, Phase i are intended to increase the stonK drain s current undersized capacity of approximately 680 cubic feet per second (cfs) to the required capacity of approximately 2093 cfs. These Phase I improvements starting from the Cucamonga Creek Channel west of the Carnelian Street and Vineyard Avenue Intersection, to approximately 1300 feet east thereof, are the first of a flue (5) phase construction program to improve the Cucamonga Creek Stores Drain easterly up to Amethyst Avenue. Said Cucamonga Creek Storms Drain which parallels the Southern Pacific Railway Tracks requires improvements to carry the 100 year storm flows in accordance with the City's Master Pi an of Drainage. Respe y subgltted, / ~;/ r ~,/T///'°~~ r RHM: Rf(C: pa~ ------ CITY OF RA4CH0 CL'CAMONGA STAFF REPORT ` ~~ Date: May 18, 1988 To: City Council and City Manager _~ ~ i From: Russeil H. Maguire, City Engineer By' John ! . Marti.^., Assaiate Civil E~lyinaer Sub,iect: Approval of Agreement for Installation of Public Improvement and Dedication between Niliiam and Janet Lane j and the City of Rancho Cucamonga for Street Frontage i Improvements at 9517 Nineteenth Street, located on the south side of Nineteenth Street between Archibald Avenue ~ and Amethyst Street, for the Amethyst Street at Nineteenth i Street protect. RECDI~EIDATIOM: It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving the Agreement for Installation of Public Improvement and Dedication between Niliiam and Janet Lane and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. BACKGROUND/ANRIYSIS• The attached sub,{ect Agreement between the City and Niliiam and Janet I a n..i An. t "° "" -`~""' iniy, v.ewenia wnicn incluae curDS, gutters, sidewalks, drive approaches, street lights and street pavements along the Lane Nineteenth Street frontage. Niliiam and Janet Lane have agreed to grant to the City a Roadway Easement to allow for the widening and improvement of Nineteenth Street in return for the construction of said improvements. Said street improvements will be constructed in con,iunction with the City's Amethyst at Nineteenth Street Improvement Pro,~ect which includes a signal installation for the intersection and a stonx drain in Nineteenth Street and Amethyst Street. P.espectful 6mltted, // / -, -~ ~i''''~ ~" ~- RNMt,ILNtpam' . - Attachment ~~ RESOLUTION N0. S p ~~9~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA ACCEPTING AN AGREEMENT FOR INSTALLAT20N OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND DEDICATION FROM NILLIAM AND JANET LANE, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN SAME NHEREAS, the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has established reguireawnts for corstruct!ors of frontage tmproveeents in conjunction with the Amethyst at Nineteenth Street Improvement Project; and NHEREAS, installation of curb, gutter, drive approach, sidewalk, street lights and street pavements located at 9517 Nineteenth Streei shall be made part of the Amethyst Street at Nineteenth Street Improvement Project; and NHEREAS, Niiliam and Janet Lane have agreed to dedicate Right- of-Nay as reimbursement to the City for said improvements. NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, Lhat the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does accept said Improvement Agreement, authorizes the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign same, and directs the City Clerk to record same to the Office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, California. T4 - r3 - CITY OF kANCHO CI;CA~SONGA STAFF REPORT T GATE: May 18, 1988 ~~ _i i0: City Council and City Manager ~ I FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer j RV• IinAa 0.nnL Cnn;~nn.;..~ Te~l.n:~:.~ .,.. .....__ .,......, ~..~........ ...y ~~......... ~.... ' SUBJECT: Rcceptance of a Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien ~ Agreement from Valerien A. and Elizabeth J. Leier for a i single family residence, located on the east side of Scott !, Lane, north of Palo Alto Street (APN 1077-071-12j RECOlMENC#TION: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting the subject Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement and cause the same to record. Background/Analysis The developers of 7461 Scott Lane, Yaler ten A. and Elizabeth J. Leier, requested a building permit for a single family residence. Street improvements are a condition of issuing the building permit. _ The City • ~ ~CyV IIV ~OIV III IIII VYGIIC II LJ 4V VC V411L GL LIII) LIIIIC• IIIC ('1.'I U('e, the= deve loners have submitted a Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for the future construction of the improvements on Scott Lane. A copy of the agreement is available in the City f, Jerk's office. Respectfµl]y-submitted, i // / EV ' . ' (i~~ Ri~M:LB:s Attachment RESOLUTION N0. ~~ ~ d I d- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, ACCEPTING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM VALERIEN A. AND ELIZABETH J. LEIER AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga adopted Ordinance No. 58 on February 21, 1919, to establish requirements for construction of public improvements in conjunction with building permit issuance; and WHEREAS, installation of curb, gutter, sidewalk and pavement established as prerequisite to issuance of building permit for 7461 Scott Lane has been met by entry into a Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement by Valorien A. and Elizabeth J. Leif 2 NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California does accept said Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement, authorizes the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign same, and directs the City Clerk to record same in the Office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, California. 1 ~~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGBQEERIIdO DIVISION PAOSECT SITE TT~ APN 1077-07.1-10 V N ~; 7461 SCOTT LANE ~ ~' ~~- ~~ ~-wui R 20 .. ___.~~__ ~_ e I GATE: May 18, 1988 CITY OF RANCHO CL'CAMONGA STAFF REPORT T0: City Council and City Manager i FRCM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer O1: M11411 a1d R• 4V44, HJJ VI.IatC ~.IYII [Ilj-'111C C1 _, SUBJECT: Approval and execution of Change Order No. 3 for Professional Services Agreement with Norris-Repke, Incorporated, to perform Design Administration Services for various projects, C.0. 887- 21, It is recommended to expand their contract by 521,000.00 for the Amethyst at 19th, Hellman Storm Drain, AD 82-1 and Church-Hermosa Storm Drain projects, to bring their contract total to 586, 474.75 to he paid from project funds indicated on said Change Order RECOMMENDATION: Approval and execution of Change Order No. 3 for Professional Services Agreement with Norris-Repke, Incorporated, to perform Design Administration Services for various oroj ects, C.0. 887-21. It is recommended to expand their contract by 521,000.00 to bring their contract total to 586,474.75 to be paid from project funds. CHLRhKU UK U/HKNL1JlJ On March 4, 1987, the firm of Norris-Repke, Incorporated, was engaged by the City for the preparation of design reports for Hellman Avenue Storm Drain, Industrial Assessment District 82-1, Church-Hermosa Storm Drain and Amethyst at 19th Streets Drainage. Said work was to be performed on an hourly basis. It is now found necessary to augment the original contract limit to continue administration and minor design updates to said project. In summary, the additional work includes: a. Amethyst and 19th Streets E 3,500.00 b. Hellman Avenue Storm Drain 3,500.00 c. AD 82-1 8,000.00 d, Church-Hermosa Storm Drain 9.000.00 TOTAL 521,000.00 Re/sped P mitted, ._-~ RHM:R C:dlw Attac / /7 CITT OF RANCHO CUCAMONGII ENGINEERING SERYICES CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER Project Administration E Studies - Hellman Ave. Storm Orain, AD 82-1, Church-Hermosa Storm Drain, 19th d Amethyst Streets 5/10/88 a~_~- T0: Norris-Repke, Inc., 507 E. First St., S_te. A, Tustin, CA 92680 ngi near You are hereby requested to comply with the following changes from the agreement for engineering services. in Contract Price In Cantract Price 1. 19th E Amethyst Streets (22-4637-8763) = 3,500.00 2. Hellman Storm Drain (22-4637-8763) 3,500.00 3. AD 82-1 (83-4637-8028) 8,000.00 4. Church-Hermosa Starm Drain (23-4637-8108) 6,000.00 70711E 3Yi,~Q:06 Continue Project Adminis tra loon Services. The amount of the Contract will be ;"cc-..=_'; (Inereased) by the sum of: Twent One Thousand and no/100 Dollars (521,000.00 -~'--~ The Contract Total including this and previous Change Orders will be: Ei9h~Six Thousand Four Hundred Seventy Pour and 75/100 Oallars 086,474:75 ~-- The Contract period provided for completion will be ( (Onthanged) Nork on an Hourly Basis. This document will bec e, a ypplement to the Contract and all provisions will apply hereto. Y Requested: / / ~ / _--~~-~- ~ ~~ /~ ..II<CP agD uy~y iice~ a Y Accepted: ~~,xy;%( ,~ 'r„e•~C( t-;G'-,F,~ ng neer a e Approved: ayor, y o anc o ucamonga a e s n ora~n on r e use as recor o any c anges or g na eng neer ng agreeaent dated: Approved March 4, 1987 C.O. 87-21 I~ ----- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIKONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer i DY: .Al chael G. Lvng, Sr. 7uui(c Nurks inspector SUBJECT: Award 4he Traffic Signal and Safety Lighting at Highland ~' Avenue and Milliken Avenue Improvement Project to Hovey ~I Electric, Incorporated for the amount of E81, 332, to be funded with TDA Article 8 funds, Account No. 12-4637-6708 ~' RECOlMENd1TI0N: It is recommended that the City Council accept all bids as submitted and award the contract for Traffic Signal and Safety Lighting at Highland Avenue and Milliken Avenue Improvement Project to the lowest responsible bidder, Hovey Electric, Incorporated, for the amount of E81,332. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Per previous Council actfon, bids were solicited, received and opened on May 10, 1988 for the subject project. Hovey Electric, Incorporated, is the apparent lowest responsible bidder with a bid amount of E81,332 (see ai~aciieu hid summary 1. ine engineers esc imace was 3a~,uuu. Scarf nos reviewed all bids received and found them to be complete and in accordance with the bid requirements. Staff has completed the required hackgro and investigation and finds all bidders to meet the requirements of the bid documents. Respecter suhm'. tted, f ,o RHM: Attachment cc: Purchasing rq 0 m m v N O Z U U Q 7 Q d s f a m m Q a c L S t0 C L J m ro N g m m c Q y Y m F 0 J ~ ~ b T ~ C p1 m m N ~ U C C ~ ~m ~ ami m O1 c w N N m W 0 0 r E _~ ~ 3 U _d W O m m 8 N 5i U Y f• W ~j r m ~ o "' x A Y m H (~ STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager ~~~KCCJJJ FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer "o'i: iSiGhaei u. Lung, aY. Pubiit nJrkS iiiipcCtJr ~~i SUBJECT: Award the Traffic Signal and Safety Lighting at Highland Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue Improvement Protect to Hovey Electric, Incorporated for the amount of 593,255, to be funded with TDA Article 8 funds, Account No. 12-4631-8707 ii RECOMENOATIOM: [t is recommended that the City Council accept all bids as submitted and award the contract far Traffic Signal and Safety Lighting at Highland Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue Improvement Protect to the lowest responsible kidder, Hovey Electric, Incorporated, for the amount of 593,255. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Per previous Council action, bids were solicited, received and opened on May 10, 1988 for the suh,{ect protect. Hovey Electric, Incorporated, is the apparent lowest responsible bidder with a bid amo~mt of f43,255 (see ai~acircu uiu amnnary ~. Tile uiy ineerb eaiimaie waa io7, vuv. 5iaii ilea reviewed all bids received and found them to be complete and in accordance with the bid requirements. Staff has completed the required background investigation and finds all bidders to meet the requirements of the bid documents. RespeCxf submitted, //'~ RHM:M L:dlw Attachment cc: Purchasing ~~ 0 m ;~ o e Um N aE m ~ T C G 0 Z (A V1 U U Q U C C ~ N (7 N . O W r- w N N 4 m La C o m 4 m T Y m m E _ w 3 ~ 3 w g dm w ~c ~ m ~ a ~ ~ W 2 A ~ U L P '1 r W N m m N N y ow g = m m Q ~ in 4 ~ m ~ '= FO- /^~ ~'J - CITY OF RANCHO CliCA910NGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer BY: Lucinda E. Hackett, Associate Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Summarily Vacation Eas anent along the Church Street RECOMMENDATION: -; of an unused portion of the Drafnage east side of Center Avenue, south of It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution to summarily vacate said portion of said drainage easement and authorize the City Clerk to cause a certified copy of this resolution to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder. BACXGRDLM OJANALYSIS The City has received a request from the Deer Creek Car Nash to vacate the unused oortion of the Citv's drai nacre easement. located along the easterly side of Center Avenue, south of Church Street. The before mentioned easement, which is described in the attached Exhibit "A", and was required due to the improvement of Deer Creek Channel by the Army Corp of Engineers. The above-mentioned easement was acquired by the County of San Bernardino by a Grant Deed recorded May 23, 1957. Respectfu ly submitted, .. / R :L Attachment a~ RESOLUTION N0. ~ 8 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFIXtNIA, SUMMARILY ORDERING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF A DRAINAGE EASEMENT, LOCATED ON THE EAST SI OE OF CENTER AVENUE, SOUTH OF CHURCH STREET WHEREAS, by 'haptC l Ar li ll2 i SC1. 41011 V33V, UI LIIC Jtt~CC LJ OIIU Highway Code, the City Counci l~of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is authorized to summarily vacate a portion of a City Drainage easement hereinafter more particularly described; and WHEREAS, the City Council found from all the evidence submitted that said portion of said drainage easement, dedicated to the County of San Bernardinc on May 23, 1957 is no longer required for its intended purpose. NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Councii of the City of City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: Section 1: The Council hereby makes its order vacating that portion-said drainage easement as shown on Parcel Map 8901 on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, which has been further described in a legal description which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part thereof. Section 2: That from and after the date this resolution to Icwlueu, Bald pm iiun ui eaiu urai nays easement nu ionyer constitutes a public service easement. Section 3; That the City Clerk shall cause a certified copy of t iF s resolution to 6e recorded in the office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, California. 1 1 a4 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description of Propeaed Vacation Being [hat portion of Che following described property within Parcels 1 and 2 Parcel Map No. 8901 in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, per Pla[ recorded in Book 314, Pages 26 thru 28, inclusive of Parcel Maps, records of [he County of San Bernardino. The Wee[ Chirty (30) feet of Lot 4, Tract 2202, County of Sao Bernardino, State of California, ae per map recorded Sa Book 34 of Maps, Page 67, records of said County; EXCEPTING the North one thousand three hmdred and Cwea[y (1320) feet [hereof; and EXCEPTI::C the South two hundred (200) feet thereof. a~ "''"° PARCEL MAP N0.890.1 • •l i'f ii fl(i iI iiiiif lii\iiiiM M Y~ Y 1/1. N r f~~ u Ir~rrw'•irluu M 4i11V.NN it Y. tMIN • M1.111'"1~w.t~i I~.i"w. V. EXHIBIT "B" )) MiVM'~Y yitn) A PORTION Of EXISTING EASEMENT PER EK 4299 PAGE 6811 O.R. TO RE VACATED Fln.J Alit xrr.t.ud A.dAY / {I/ Af..W ~M• /IYi ~.. ~~7 V 1~a 3 ~~ ~~ ~ /~~~~ av ~ yr ~WY 'St `4 .*X f ~ A Wt ai nr' A1A iw ~ N' \~ N ~ Iw.i ~ ~."II~YMi4"fIW 1Y11. ~~ rr r 1. 1.1. \Ni.l AA4 111. ~~. ~~ ~i ICI ~ ~. I •rI/.. r. r/n-il ---- CITY OF RANCHO CUCA~IONGA STAFF REPORT GATE: May 18, 1988 1'0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer BY: Linda Beek, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Approval of Parcel Map 10231, located between Arrow Route and Jersey Boulevard, and between Utica and Vincent Avenues, submitted by Arrow Rancho Cucamonga Limited RECOIMENDI1TIOp It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution approving Parcel Map 10237 and authorizing the City Clerk to cause same to record. Analysis/Background Parcel Mao 10237 was aooroved by the Planning f.ommissinn nn November 12, 1985, for the division of 40 acres of land into 14 parcels in the General Industrial Development District, located between Arrow Route and Jersey Boulevard, and between Utica and Vincent Avenues. Improvements are to be constructed at the time of building permit issuance. Respe u bmitted,- ~~ c~ -= %' - _ / RHM. B:s A Ltachmerts ~~ RESOLUTION N0. b D ^~~~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NUMBER 10237 (TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP N0. 10237) "liE"'" nano, Tentative Parcel ida"y "number 10237, submitted by Arrow Rancho Cucamonga Limited and consisting of 14 parcels, located between Arrow Route and Jersey Bo uievard, and between Utica and Vincent Avenues, was approved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; and WHEREAS, Parcel Map Number 10237 is the final map of the division of land approved as shown on said Tentative Parcel Map; and WHEREAS, all of the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the final map by the City Council of said City have now been met. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said parcel Map Number 10237 be and the same is hereby approved and the City Engineer is authorized to present same to the County Recorder to be filed for record. I ~~ a O x a~ ~~ xo o~ c ^z° I'4 a A m 0 r m n s 0 iU a~ . trs!-_ p a,~q-~ w~~ --- CITY OF RANCHO CtiCAMONGA STAFF REPORT GATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager II FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer ui ~~., nidd E. Ha net , ASS O..iat2 Ci'Jii _.^yi ~cer I SUBJECT: Approval of an indenture between the Southern Pacific Transportation Company and the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction and maintenance of a 48" storm dram facility, located in Southern Pacific Transportation right-of-way in the easterly side of Haven Avenue north of Valencia Avenue I RECOMMEN011TION: It is recommended that Cfty Council adopt the attached resolutfon approving the Indenture between the City and the Southern Pacific Transportation Company and authorize the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign same. Background/Analysis IIIC JUU LIIL'f'll ~YL II fL 11 C11 ]rlUI LpLI VII 1. NIIrIGI I,r 110] 1]]000 LIIC ULL nVIICU indenture to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction of a 48" storm drain facility in railroad right-of-way in the easterly portion of Haven Avenue. Construction of the above storm drain facility was made a condition of approval of Parcel Map No. 9504, located at the northeast corner of Haven Rven ue and Base Line Road. The developer, Lewis Hanes is having the work performed 6y their contractor, Mercer Construction Company. Respectful fitted, / ~''.--~ ..r~ ~~ "nni~, c Attachment RESOLUTION N0. ~ ~ ~ d /~~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN INDENTURE BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC TRANSPORTATION COMPANY FOR THE INSTALLATION OF STORM DRAIN FACILITIES WITHIN THE RA ILROAO RIGHT-OF-MAY IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF PARCEL MAP 9504, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST ,.ORi7ER DF iiAVEiY AVEHUE AN"u oASE LINE ROAD WHEREAS, storm drain facilities are required to be installed within the Southern Pacific Transportation Company right-of-way near the Engineer's Station 2151+54.?6, Mile Post 523.91 and 12 feet west of the easterly curb of Haven Avenue, County of San Bernardino, State of California, for the project, PM 9504; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has far its consideration an Indenture to permit construction, maintenance and operation of storm drain facilities between the Southern Pacific Transportation Co~any and the City for the right to install the storm drain facilities at the above location. NOM, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Indenture be and the same is hereby approved and the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to sign same on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. n ~~ -- CITY OF RANCHO CCCA~IONGA STAFF REPORT ,_ DATE: May 16, 1988 J T0: City Council and City Manager ~I I FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer i °_Y: !inde Beek, Engine ring Techr.iciar. ' SUBJECT: Aoproval of Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security for DR 86-32, located on the northwest corner of Civic Center Drive and Red Oak Street, submitted by Carney Theodorou Architects '~. RECONEMDATIgI It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting the subJect agreement and security and authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreeaent and to cause said map to record. ANALYSIS/BACKGROUND DR 86-32, located on the northwest corner of Civic Center Drive and Red Oak Street, in the Endustrial Specific Ptan Development District, was aDProved by the Planning Commission on Deceaber 10, 1986. .r .. • n..-... 'v1--1-.. ~.. i~ -..I ~J~Lt a J -..-..-1 ~.• ~- nic ccrcivy ci, wiuc! i v~ , ~ .. oy .. ~~ ..yi ..~.. ~~. .. ~ .. .y ... guarantee the construction Vof~ the off-site improvements in the ~follawing amounts: Certificate of Deposit Faithful Performance Surety: 55,600 Labor and Material Surety: f2,800 Copies of the agreement and security are available in the City Clerk's Office. A letter of approval has been received from the Cucamonga County Nater District. Resp ul}y-;u itted, r RHM: L~ , .~ Attachments ~~ RESOLUTIOR N0. gp ~d /{o A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW N0. 86-32 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Cai ifurnia, hes fur iLS eonsideration an improvemeni Agreement executed on April 14, 1988, by Carney Theodorou Architects as developer, for the improvement of public right-of-way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located on the northwest corner of Civic Center Drive and Red Oak Street; and WHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the terms thereof, is to be done in conjunction wfth the development of said real property as referred to Planning Commission, Development Review No. 86-32; and WHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement is secured and accompanied 6y good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is identified in said Improvement Agreement. NOM, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Agreement and said Improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk to attest thereto. ~~ 33 G~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGIIIEERING DIVISION MME,, TI'I'I.E: on sb-3z 3 ` ERHIBIT: ---- CITY OF RANCHO Ct;CAMONGA STAFF REPORT ~- DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager ~ I~ FROM: Russell N. Maguire, City Engineer Di: Linda SEek, Eriyii,eer{ny Tach0iCid^ ~~I SUBJECT: Approval of Map, Improvement Agreement and Improvement ~ Security for Tract 13644, located on the southeast corner of Hermosa Avenue and Vista Grove Street, submitted by Woodridge Estates Limited RECOMIEMDATION It is recomaended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving Tract 13644, accepting the subject agreement and security and authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreement and to cause said map to record. ANALYSIS/BACKGROUND Tract 13644, located on the southeast corner of Hermosa Avenue and Vista Grove Street, in the very low residential Development District, was approved by the Planning Commission on August 26, 1987, for the division of id acres inw ~+ fiats%parcei s. The Developer, Woodridge Estates Limited, is submitting an agreement and security to guarantee the construction of the off-site improvements in the following amounts: Faithful Performance Bond: 5496,000 Labor and Material Bond: 5248,000 Copies of the agreement and security are available in the City Clerk's Office. Letters of approval have been received from the high school and elementary school districts and Cucamonga County Water District. C.C.BR.'s have also `veep dpyr uVed by ih2 vi iy Aiiorney. Res y,su fitted, RNI~h!<B,1h ~~~ Attachments RESOLLRfON N0. 8 ~ ' ~ / / A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEAffNT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURI?Y, AND FINAL IMP OF TRACT N0. 13644 WHEREAS, the Tentative Map of Tract No. 13644, consisting of 24 lots, submitted by Noodridge Estates Limited, Subdivider, located on the southeast corner of Hermosa Avenue and Yista Grove Street, has been submitted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga by said Subdivider for approval by said City as provided in the Subdivision Map Act of the State of California, and in compliance with the requirements of Ordinance No. 28 of said City; and NNEREAS, to meet the requirements established as prerequisite to approval of the Final Map of said Tract said Subdivider has offered the Improvement Agreement submitted herewith for approval and execution by said City, together with good and sufficient Improvement Security, and submits for approval said Final Map offering for dedication for public use the streets delineated thereon. NOM, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLYED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, as follows: I. That said Improvement Agreement be and the same 1s approved end the Mayor is authorized to execute same on behalf of said City and the City Clerk is authorized t0 attest thereto; and 2. That said Improvement Security is accepted as good and sufficient, subject to approval as to form and content thereof by the City Attorney; and 3. That the offers for dedication and the Final Map delineating same be approved and the City Clerk is authorized to execute the certificate thereon on behalf of said City. -1 h, ~ a~ Q z~ xo ~o~ ~ ~ d A O C x z G~ a Iy n I~ z~ 37 - CITY OF RANCHO CtiCAMONGA STAFF REPORT GATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Ras sell H. maguire, City Enoineer BY: Steve M. Gilliland, Public Morks Inspec ~- ~l i SUBJECT: Approval of Improvement Agreement Extension for Tract 12772, located on Ramona Avenue between Baseline Road and Church Street, submitted by M d S Development RECg1EMD11TI0N It is recoimaended that the CTty Council adopt the attached resolution, accepting the subiett agreement extension and security and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign said agreement. ANAlYSIS/BACKGROUND Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security to guarantee the construction of the public lagrovements for Tract 12712 were approved by the City Council on March 5, 1987, Tn the following amounts. Faithful Perforawnce Bond: f300,000 Labor and Material Band: (150,000 The developer, M d S Development, is requesting approval of a 12-month extension on said tagrovement agreement. Copies of the Improvement Agreement Extension are available 1n the Ctty Clerk's Office. Rasp ~submltted, i ct!r ~• '~ - AHM G: A+: rnwnn+c a_.._._.. __ ~~ RESOLUTION N0. ~~ ~ ~ / U A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGII, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 12772 NHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for !is ccrtsidaratlon art Imprcven;ent Agreesent Exteasicrt executed on May 18, 1988, by M d 5 Development as developer, for the improvement of public right-of-~rAy adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located on Ramona Avenue betvreen Baseline Avenue and Church Street; and NHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the ternis thereof, is to be done 1n contunciton with the development of said Tract 12772; and NHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement Extension is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Security, Mhieh is identified in said Improvement Agreement Extension. NON, THEREFORE, 8E IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, that said Improvement Agreement Extension and said Improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor 1s hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement Extension on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, end the City Clerk to attest thereto. 3~ - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager FRO?;: Russell Y. Maguire. CStr Engineer BY: Steve M. Gilliland, Public Norks Inspecto`~~ SUBJECT: Approval of Improvement Agreement Extension for DR 85-06, lecated on the north side of Arrow Highway, west of Haven Avenue, submitted by Lincoln Property Company pEC01/EIOATIOM It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution, accepting the suD,{ect agreement extension and security and authorizing the Myynr and CTty Clerk to sign said agreement. ANALYSIS/BACKGROUND Improvement Agreement and Improvement Security to guarantee the construction of the off-site improvements for DR 85-06 were approved by the City Council on February 20, 1986, in the foilowi ng amounts. Faithful Performance Bond: 3318,190 Labor and Material Bond: 5159,095 The developer, Lincoln Property Company, is requesting approval of a 12-month extension on said improvement agreement. Copies of the Improvement Agreement Extension are available in the City Clerk's Office. Respectfully fitted, r ~~ - _--~ a~+:sMS sum J~- Attachaer~ts ~D RESOLUTION N0. g p -~ 1 ! A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR DR 85-06 NHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Cal ifo•nia, has for its considerattcn an Improvement Agreement Extension executed on May 18, 1988, by Lincoln Property Company as developer, far the improvement of public right-of-way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally located on the north side of Arrow Highway, west of Haven Avenue; and NHEREAS, the installation of such tagrovements, described in said Improvement Agreement and subject to the tenas thereof, is to be done in conjunction with the development of said DR 85-06; and NHEREAS, sold tagrovement Agreement Extension is secured and accompanied by good and sufficient Improvement Security, which is Identified in said Improvement Agreement Extension. NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Callfornta, that said Improvement Agreement Extension and said Improvement Security 6e and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor 1s hereby authorized to sign safd Improvement Agreement Extension on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the City Clerk t0 attest thereto. -ti--' ~I ---- CITY OF RANCHO CtiCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 J i T0: City Council and City Manager i r-ROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer RV; Mich and D Inng fr D~F11~ Works Ir,peGt er SUBJECT: Authorize the advertising of the "Notice Inviting Bids" for the Victoria White Alder Replacement Improvement Project, within Tract 11934 to he funded from Landscape Maintenance Assessment District No. 2, Account No. 41-4130-8769, with a i loan from Beautification funds RECOl~ENC1ITION: It is recommended that City Council approve plans and specifications for the Victoria White Alder Replacement Improvement Project within Tract 11934 to he funded by Landscape Maintenance District No. 2, Account No. 41-4130-87-69, with a loan from Beautification Funds. BACKGROUN O/ANALYSIS vuuj..~.t Nlv~~a aMuVi~ Y~< 1V<CII VV1Y~/I<4<V V,) I, VI'1 V<]I~fll Group, reviewed by staff andY~approved by the City Engineer. The Engineer's estimate for construction is 524,000. Legal advertising is scheduled for May 24 and May 31 with the bid opening at 10:30 A.M., Friday, June 3, 1988. R/es/pec/tf~ui bmitted, RHM:MOL: w Attachment __ oll.~~.~:~~ Revenue Assessment q z. RESOLUTION N0. ~~ 'c7`~~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE "VICTORIA WHITE ALDER REPLACEMENT", IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS. 'WH'c"n'cAS, it is tFrc intention of the City of "n an chu Cuc arnonya to construct certain improvements in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has prepared plans and specifications for the construction of certain improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the plans and specifications presented by the City of Rancho Cucamonga 6e and are hereby approved as the plans and specifications for "VICTORIA WHITE ALDER REPLACEMENT". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed 61ds or proposals for doing the work specified in the aforesaid plans and specifications, which said advertisement shall be substantially in the following words and figures, to wit: "NOTICE INVITING SEALED RIDS OR PROPOSALS" Pursuant to a Resolution of the Council of the Ct ty of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California, directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY ~iv2n ciwc uie solo icy ur wancno t,uuamonga will receive ac the urn ce of the City Clerk ir. the offices of the City of Ran tho Cucamonga, on or before the hour of 10:30 c'clock A.M. on the 3RD day of JUNE 1988, sealed bids or proposals f-r the "VICTORIA WHITE AL 6ER REPLAN T" in said City, Bids will be opened and publicly read immediately in the office of the City Clerk, 9320 Base Line Road, Suite C, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91130. Bids must be made on a form provided far the purpose, addressed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, marked, "Did for Construction of VICTORIA WHITE ALDER REPLACEMENT". PREVAILING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance wfth the provisions of California labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the Contractor is required to Day not less than the aener al orevai lino -"`" of per di,3i~ wages iui• work of a similar character in the locality in y which the public work is performed, and nut less than the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per diem wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per d{em wages are on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 9320 Base Line Road, Suite C, Rancho Cucamonga, California, and are available to any interested party on request. The Contracting Agency also shall cause a copy of such determinations to be posted at the fob site. ^ `1' The Contractor shall forfeit, as enalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars (E25.00~ for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman, or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages herei nbefore stipulated for any work done under the attached rontract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of said Labor Code. [n accordance with the provisions of Section 1777.5 of the Labor Code as amended by Chapier 91i, St aiutes of ivs9, and in accordance wiin the regulations of the California apprenticeship Council, properly indentured apprentices may be employed in the prosecution of the work. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1777.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him. Section 1771.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or subcontractor employing tradesmen in any apprent iceable occupation to apply to the ,joint apprenticeship committee nearest the site of the public works project and which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance of the contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in such cases shall not he less than one to five except; A. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90 days prior to the request for certificate, or R. When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a ratio of one to five, or C. When the trade can shcw that it is replacing at least 1/30 of its membership through apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide or locally, or G. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered apprentices on all of his contracts on an annual average of not less than one apprentice to eight journeymen. The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs registere4 apprentices or iourneymen in any apornnticeahle trade on cgih rnntrgr 4c and if other Contractors on the public worKS site are making such contributions. The Contractor and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1771.5 and 1777.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, or from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. Eight (8) hours of labor shall constitute a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract and the Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall comply with and be governed by the laws of the State of California having to do with working hours as set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State of California as amended. The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars (E25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic ~aployed ir. the exetuLiun of the contract, by him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day during which said laborer, workman, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (B) hours in violation of said Labor Code. Contractor agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as such travel and subsistence payments are defined in the aopiicable collective bargaining agreements filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 1773.8. The bidder must submit with his proposal cash, cashier's check, cert if ted check, or bidder's bond, payable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga for an amount equal to at least ten percent (10X) of the amount of said bid as a guarantee that the bidder will enter into the proposed contract if the same is awarded to him, and in event of failure to enter into such contract said cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bond shall become the property of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. If the City of Rancho Cucamonga awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the amount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the ~i cy of non ciio uuc anion ga to ine aineren ce oecween cne Iow ota and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any, shall be returned to the lowest bidder. The amount of the bond to be given to secure a faithful performance of the contract for said work shall be one hundred percent (100X) of the contract price thereof, and an additional bond in an amount equal to fifty percent (50X) of the contract price for said work shall be given to secure the payment of claims for any materials or supplies furnished far the performance of the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, or any work or labor of any kind done thereon, and the Contractor will also be required to furnish a certificate that he carries compensation insurance covering his employees upon work to be done under contract which may 6e entered into between him and the said City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construction of said work. No proposal will be considered from a Contractor whom a orooosal form hac_ iiot beeo ii>ued by Lhe City of Rancho Cucamonga. Contractor shall possess a Class "A" Lfcense (General Engineering Contractor) in accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (California Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto at the time time this contract fs awarded, f The work is to be done in accordance with the profiles, plans, and specifications of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on file in the Office of the City Clerk at 9320 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Copies of the plans and specifications will be furnished upon application to the City of Rancho Cucamonga and payment of (25.00 sai6 525.00 is nonrefundable. Upon written request by the bidder, copies of the plans and specifications will be mailed when said reyvest is accompanied by payment stipulated above, together with an additional nonreimbursable payment of 515.00 to cover the co;*_ a ~aail irg charge; a}d ever hood. The successful bidder will be required to enter into a contract satisfactory to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In accordance with the requirements of Section 902 of the General Provisions, as set forth in the Plans and SDecifications regarding the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, the Contractor may, upon the Contractor's request and at the Contractor's sole cost and expense, substitute authorized securities in lieu of monies withheld (performance retention). The City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, reserves the right to reject any and all bids. By order of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Dated this day of . 19 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Counci', of the C'.ty of Rancho Cucamonga, California, this ~ day of 19_ ayor ATTEST: ty er ~- I Y I STAFF REPORT GATE: May 18, 1988 70: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer 07: ~vci R. ~d<G, ~ur~i or e „ ~i EnyinEer r, i SOBJ ECT: Authorize the advertising of the "Notice Inviting Bids" for the Tryon Street Sidewalk Project, Tryon Street and ,jadeite Avenue west of Rrchibald Avenue, to be funded with TDA Pedestrian Grants. Art. 3, Account No. 16-4637-8717 RECOMI£Ng1TI0N: It is recommended that City Council approve plans and specifications for the Tryon Street Sidewalk Project, Tryon Street and Jadeite Avenue west of Archihald Avenue, and approve the attached resolution authorizing the City Clerk to advertise the "Notice Inviting Bids." Background/Analysis The subject project plans and specifications have been completes by in house design, reviewed by staff and approved by the City Engineer. The engineers ClLIIIIa LC IUr WIA Li'"~llUll 17 JY+, wv. w. ~eyai a~w,i.ia~uy ~a scheduled for May 24, 1988 and May 31, 1988, with the hid opening at 10:00 R.M., Friday, June 3, 1988. Respect 1 bmitted, ~' ` i RHM:.IRLo-jh~` Attachment cc: Purchasing ~~ RESOLUTION N0. Q D ~ ~~/ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE "TRYON STREET SIDEWALK PROJECT", IN SAID CITY AND AUTHORIZING ANO DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO ADVERTISE TO RECEIVE BIDS. WH EPE"5, `.t the ^tent icn ^f the ~i•" ^f P3oeho CUE 3^^^^' t0 C.,~~~trtlGt .~ ..y. certain improvements in~the City of Rancho Cucarcwnga. WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has prepared plans and specifications far the construction of certain improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE [T RESOLVED that the plans and specifications presented by the City of Rancho Cucamonga be and are hereby approved as the plans and sVec if ications for "TRYON STREET SIDEWALK PROJECT". BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to advertise as required by law for the receipt of sealed bids or proposals for doing the work specified in the aforesaid plans and specifications, which said advertisement shall be substantially in the following words and figures, to wit: "NOTICE INVITING SEALED BIDS OR PROPOSALS" Pursuant to a Resolution of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, San Bernardino County, California, directing this notice, NOTICE IS HEREBY V 41 l) V~ 110114.11V I.Yl WllV lly9 ,1111 IC4.C I,C O~ Ir IIC VII II.C VI 111C City Clerk incthe offices of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, un or before the hour of 10:00 o'clock A.M. on the 3rd day of June 1988, sealed bids or proposals f~o~ the "TRYON STREET SIb~WALK PROJ " in said City. Bids will be opened and publicly read immediately in the office of the City Clerk, 9320 Base Line Road, Suite C, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, Bids must be made on a form provided for the purpose, addressed to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, marked, "Bid for Construction of TR YON STREET SIDEWALK PROJECT". PREVA [L ING WAGE: Notice is hereby given that in accordance with the provisions of California Labor Code, Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Articles 1 and 2, the Contractor is required to pay not less than the general prevailing ]fu nti _ fn wL of •in.il, n1.a •An to •lt•~r age u,1c 1 .) which the public work~isVperformed,~and not~less~than^the general~prevat~ling rate of per diem wages for holiday and overtime work. In that regard, the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California is required to and has determined such general prevailing rates of per diem wages. Copies of such prevailing rates of per diem wages are on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, 9320 Base Line Road, Suite C, Rancho Cucamonga, California, and are availabie to any interested party on request. The Contracting Agency also shall cause a copy of such determinations to 6e posted at the Job site. ~~ The Contractor shall forfeit, as penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars (E25.00) for each laborer, workman, or mechanic employed for each calendar day or portion thereof, if such laborer, workman, or mechanic is paid less than the general prevailing rate of wages hereinbefore stipulated for any work done under the attached contract, by him or by any subcontractor under him, in violation of the provisions of said Labor Code. In accordance with the provisions of Section 1177,5 of the Labor Code ds diTicridcd Gy Chapter 9Ti, 6tdtut25 Jf Si39, and in aceurdan Ce wiit! the regu', ations of the California apprenticeship Council, properly indentured apprentices may be employed in the prosecution of the work. Attention is directed to the provisions in Sections 1777.5 and 1717.6 of the Labor Code concerning the employment of apprentices by the Contractor or any subcontractor under him. Section 1717.5, as amended, requires the Contractor or subcontractor employing tradesmen in any apprentice able occupation to apply to the joint apprenticeship committee nearest the site of the public works project and which administers the apprenticeship program in that trade for a certificate of approval. The certificate will also fix the ratio of apprentices to journeymen that will be used in the performance of the contract. The ratio of apprentices to journeymen in such cases shall not be less than one to five except: A. When unemployment in the area of coverage by the joint apprenticeship committee has exceeded an average of 15 percent in the 90 days prior to the request for certificate, or B. When the number of apprentices in training in the area exceeds a ratio of one to five, or C. When the trade can show that it is replacing at least 1/30 of its membership through apprenticeship training on an annual basis statewide or locally, or D. When the Contractor provides evidence that he employs registered apprentices on all of his contracts on an annual average of not less than one apprentice to eight journeymen. The Contractor is required to make contributions to funds established for the administration of apprenticeship programs if he employs regf stered apprentices or journeymen in any apPrenticeab le trade on such contracts and if v her wn~i aC tora 'vii the . pub ilC nai~ki site are making such coni:ribut ions. The Contractor and subcontractor under him shall comply with the requirements of Sections 1777.5 and 1771.6 in the employment of apprentices. Information relative to apprenticeship standards, wage schedules, and other requirements may be obtained from the Director of Industrial Relations, ex-officio the Administrator of Apprenticeship, San Francisco, California, ar from the Division of Apprenticeship Standards and its branch offices. ~~ Eight (8) hours of labor shall const itu*.e a legal day's work for all workmen employed in the execution of this contract and the Contractor and any subcontractor under him shall comply with and be governed 6y the laws of the State df California having to do with working hours as set forth in Division 2, Part 7, Chapter 1, Article 3 of the Labor Code of the State df California as amended. The Contractor shall forfeit, as a penalty to the City of Rancho Cucamonga, twenty-five dollars (E25.00) far each laborer, workman, or mechanic anyloyed in the execution of the contract, by him or any subcontractor under him, upon any of the work hereinbefore mentioned, for each calendar day during which said laborer, wnr M.man, or mechanic is required or permitted to labor more than eight (8) hours in violation of said Labor Code. Contractor agrees to pay travel and subsistence pay to each workman needed to execute the work required by this contract as suth travel and subsistence payments are defined in the applicable collective bargaining agreements filed in accordance with Labor Code Section 1713.8. The bidder must submit with his proposal cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bidder's bond, payable to the City of Rancho Cucamonga far an amount equal to at least ten percent (10X) of the amount of said hid as a guarantee that the bidder will enter into the proposed contract if the same is awarded to him, and in event of failure to enter into such contract said cash, cashier's check, certified check, or bond shall became the property of the City of Rancho Cucamonda. If the City of Rancho Cucamonga awards the contract to the next lowest bidder, the mnount of the lowest bidder's security shall be applied by the icy or xancno t,uc amon ga to the dlf Terence between the low Did and the second lowest bid, and the surplus, if any, shall be returned to the lowest 6ldder. The amount of the bond to be given to secure a faithful performance of the contract for said work shall be one hundred percent (lOOY) of the contract or ice thereof, and an additional bond in an amount equal to fifty percent (50X) of the contract price for said work shall 6e given to secure the payment of claims for any materials or supplies furnished far the performance of the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, or any work or labor of any kind done thereon, and the Contractor will also be required to furnish a certificate that he carries compensation insurance covering his employees upon work to be done under contract which may be entered into between him and the said City of Rancho Cucamonga for the construct?on of said work. No proposal will be considered from a Contractor whom a prnpn<al form has not ueen issued by the Ciiy of Rancho Cucamonga. Contractor shall possess a Class "A" License (General Engineering Contractor) in accordance with the provisions of the Contractor's License Law (California Business and Professions Code, Section 7000 et. seq.) and rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto at the time time this contract is awarded. ~~ The work is to be done in accordance with the profiles, plans, and specifications of the City of Rancho Cucamonga on file in the Office of the City Clerk at 9320 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Copies of the plans and specifications will be furnished upon application to the City of Rancho Cucamonga and payment of (30.00 said (30.00 is nonrefundable. Upon written request by the bidder, copies of the plans and specifications will be mailed when said request is accompanied by payment stipulated above, together with an additional nanreimbursable payment of f15.00 to cover the ,.,,,t cf ~aiYrg charges and ovzrhead. The successful bidder will be required to enter into a contract satisfactory to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In accordance with the requirements of Section 902 of the General Provisions, as set forth in the Plans and Specifications regarding the work contracted to be done by the Contractor, the Contractor may, upon the Contractor's request and at the Contractor's sole cost and expense, substitute authorized securities in lieu of monies xithheld (performance retention). The City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, reserves the right to re,{ect any and ali bids. By order of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Dated this day of , 19 PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, this day of 19 ATTEST: y er ~I --- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT s;~ DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer Br: Linda Beek, Engineering Technician SUBJECT: Release of Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement for Parcel 3 of Parcel Map 6544, located on the northeast corner of Sixth Street and Utica Avenue, submitted by The Second R.C. Group, a Limited Partnership It is recommended that the Council adopt the attached Resolution releasing Parcel 3 of Parcel Map 6544 and authorizing the Mayor to sign said release and the City Clerk to record same. Background/Analysis A Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement was approved by City Council on June 6, 1985, and recorded on June 21, 1965, as Document No. 85-150299 in the office of the San Bernardino County Recorder, State of Cal it orni a. The Agreement was for tonstruttlon of the median island in Sixth Street. Construction of said median is no longer a part of the General Plan. Respe fu y submitted, RHM:LB:sd Attachment RESOLUTION N0. () D -J~~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RELEASING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM PARCEL 3 OF PARCEL MAP 6544 'dHER£AS, the City Coand i of lire City of Rancho Cue amonga adopted Resolution No. 85-163 accepting a Real Property Improvement Contract and lien Agreement from The Second R.C. Group, a Limited Partnership; and WHEREAS, said Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement was recorded in Official Records of San Bernardino County, California, on June 21, 1985, as Document No. 86-150229; and WHEREAS, said Real Property Contract and Lien Agreement is no longer required. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby release said Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement and that the City Clerk shall cause Release of Lien to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, California. ~~ ~3 +~ ~° a n + '~ 1 ~ e ~.....,. 4 ' ' ... i I ~~ ..+d'~` l ~~ I ..- `~ ,~ ..,. ?RQTECT SITE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~a~xn~ra nn~ox 5 g iZ w ~p~~~ N li L'm: PARCEi. 3, PARCEL MAP 6544 +~aLGi RELEASE OF LIET7 ~~ nrmv ~~c n ~ wa.~e~ n..n ...~.~.~, . STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer OY: Linda Beek, Er~ginzariny Tzchoician ~. ~- SUBJECT: A Partial Release of a Reai Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement releasing Lot 2 of Parcel Map 8901, located on the east side of Center Avenue, north of Foothill Boulevard, submitted by Kelbert, a Partnership RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Council adopt Lhe attached Resolution releasing Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 8901 and authorizing the Mayor to sign said release and the City Clerk to record same. BACKOROUN D/ANALYSIS A Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement Has approved by Council on February 4, 1987, and recorded on February 21, 1987, as Document No. 87-059282 in the office of the County Recorder, San oer'nuruinu i,uun iy i,eiii urnia. Tirc uyreaueni nn> iur wiu i~u~6iun ui iiie median island in Foothill Boulevard adjacent to Parcel Map 8901. The developer has paid the sun of f16, 248 for parcel 2. Parcel 1 is not being released. Respectf 1 submitted, /~ RMM:LB: attachment 5 RESOLUTION N0. 8 0-Jv~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, PARTIALLY RELEASING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM KELBERT, A PARTNERSHIP WIiEREAS, Lha City ivuiiGii of the pity Gf RaiiChu vuGaTNnga au'Jpteu Resolution No. 87-046 accepting a Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement from Kelbert, A Partnershio;and WHEREAS, said Real Property Inryrovenent Contract and Lien Agreement was recorded in Official Records of San Bernardino County, California, on Fehruary 23, 1981 as Document No. 81-059282;and WHEREAS, a portion of said Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement is no longer required. NOW, THEREFORE, 8E IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby release Parcel 2 of Parcel Map 8901 from said Real Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement and that the City Clerk shall cause Release of Lten to be recorded to the office of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, California. W dYRCN ~~ urn .vr _. M^ rWma ~I`` yu" 6~ ~6 /~~ Y• soa W ' fi. ~ ~ II~ r e~ Lisa:.. _~... ~."~,,. C Y k Id ~+ /` ~ 7 ,~ /y .~, 41 yJ ) / + . ... ~ _/, .'.. . v V N CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGWEERWG DIVIBI0N PARCEL T, PARCEL MAP 890 TITLE: a~Ee, ~ ~< < ~ PN ~~ EXFIiBPf: - CITY OF RANCHO CtiCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer SY: Steve M. GS1ltlard, public Nc;ks I;ap~:ta~~~~ ~~ SUBJECT: Release of Maintenance Bond for Tract 10047 located on the south side of Hillside Road east of Archibald Avenue I RECOMMENDATIdI: It is recoawended that the City Council authorize the City Clerk to release the Maintenance Guarantee Bond. Background/Analysts The required one year maintenance period has ended and the street improvements remain free from defects 1n amterials and workmanship. DEVELOPER: The Pennhtil Company 13891 Newport Avenue 1250 Tuei,i n, vn iauw Release: Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) 534,700. Respectful) ~bmitted, . ~ I / i / %~ RHM:SMG. TJ~ - CITY OF RANCHO CL'CA;YIONCA STAFF REPORT GATE: May 18, 1988 TD: City Council and City Manager ~ FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer BY~ ldi chael 0. Long, tr_ Public Works Inspector j SUBJECT: Accept the Haven Avenue and Fourth Street Traffic Signal Improvement Project as complete, release bonds and authorize the City Eng?neer to file a "Notice of ~ Completion" and approve the final contract amount of (118,426,85. ~ RECgMENMTION: It is recommended that the City Council accept the Haven Avenue and Fourth Street Traffic Signal Improvement Project as complete, authorize the City Engineer to file a "Notice of Completion", and authorize the re tease of the Faithful Performance Bond in the amount of 6117,57.6.00 and accept the 10% Maintenance Bond in the amount of 511,751.60 for one year, and authorize the release of the retention !n *_fie amount of 611,842,69 and the Labor and Materials Bond in the amount of 558,758.00, 35 days after the recordation of said notice if no tlaim5 have been received. Also, approve cne i in^1 c.,~~.r ___ _.._~~^* ^f 5118.426.85. BACKGROUND/ANALYtiS The subject project has been completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The final contract amount is 6118,426.85 which includes 1 minor change order for additional striping and sandblasting. Respectf submitted, t. °y-~MBtrdTG~-._.. Attachment cc: Purchasing 5 RESOWTION N0. $~ ~~~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR HAVEN AVENUE AND FOURTH STREET TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for Haven Avenue and Fourth Street Traffic Signal have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. ~" j\j I ~~ - C[TY OF RANCHO CtiCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell N. Maguire, City Engineer BY: Steve M, Gilliland, Public works Inspecto~~,~~, SUBJECT: Release of Bonds and Notice of Completion RECOMMEMMTIOM: The required street improvements for DR 86-20 have been completed in an acceptable manner and it is recommended that City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond in the amount of 548,000. Background/Analysis DR 86-20 - located on the northwest corner of 6th Street and Rochester Avenue DEYELOPER: Lithonia H1 Tek 9000 Rochester Avenue Rancno Cucamonga, CA yii3v Release: faithful Performance Bond (Street) ;48,000 Respectful ubmitted, ^CR~'Jn Attachment W / RESOLUTION N0. 0~ ~~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCSL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR DR 86-20 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE NORK NHE°..EAS, tt~e construction of puGiic improvea~enis fiar O'n 86-20 have been completed to the sattsfaction of the City Engineer; and NNEREAS, a Notice of Coyletion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NON, THEREFORE, be 1t resolved, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Englneer 1s authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. (~~ ~(/ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer RV• $t e.e w Gillii ~ ~ !- any, Public iiurks inspector-~p SUBJECT: Release of Bonds and Notice of Completion , RECOMENDATION: The required street i~irovements for OR 85-45 have been completed in an acceptable manner and it is recommended that City Council accept said improvements, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond in the amount of E14,000.00. Background/Analysis DR 85-45 - located on the northeast corner of Haven Avenue and Acacia Street DEVELOPER: G.N. Utman Company 3b:,i omruuree, ~aucn lower, Suite 6U2 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Release: Faithful Performance Bond (Street) 514,000.00 Respectful ibmitted, _ ~ RHM: SM&:-sd-'~ u th arhmoni ~~ RESOLUTION N0. ()~ ~ ~~~° A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY 6F RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR DR 85-45 AND AUTHORIZING THE FIL [NG OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE WORK WHEREAS, the construction of public improvements for DR 85-45 have been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOW, THERE FgiE, be it resolved, that the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. DATE: T0: i FROM: ~ BY: SudiECT: - CITY OF RANCHO CL'CAMONGA STAFF REPORT May 18, 1988 City Council and City Manager Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer Steve M. G11111and, Public Norks Inspector ~1G Reiease of Bonds and Notice of Completion AEC01/ENOATIOM: The required street improvements for Tract 12650-2 have been completed in an acceptable manner and it is reco~aaended that C1ty Council accept said improvements, accept the Maintenance Guarantee Bond in the amount of 526,700, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond in the amount of 5267,000. Background/Analysis Tract 12650-2 - iocated on the east side of Haven Avenue, north of H111side Road DEVELOPER; The Deer Creek Company 8480 Utica Avenue Rancno Cucamonga, ~.n yiis~ Faithful Derforawnce Bond (Street) 5267,000 Resp tfu submitted, ~ / c RHM:S :1f\G Attachment Accept: Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) f 26,700 Release: S. Y$.. ~-F' RESOLUTION N0. ~ D ~ ~'-~ / A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RAlICHO CUCAMONGII, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 12650-2 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE NORK NHEREAS, tho coostracti o^ of pabNc ia~roveaer~ ~ fcr Tract :2650-2 have Deen completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and NHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NOM, THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the ~•ork is hereby accepted and the City Engineer 1s authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. `E~ --- CITY OF RANCHO Ci;CAMONGA STAFF REPORT GATE: May 18, 1988 " T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell M. Maguire, City Engineer 8Y: Steve M. 6liliiand, Public Norks inspectq~~ ~~'i `~~J i SUBJECT: Release of Bonds and Notice of Completion RECONEMOATIOM: The required street improvements for Tract 12830 have been completed in j an acceptable manner and it 1s recommended that City Council accept said improvements, accept the Maintenance Guarantee Bond in the amount of (73,925.00, authorize the City Engineer to file a Notice of Completion and authorize the City Clerk to release the Faithful Performance Bond in the amount of (739,222.00. Background/Analysis Tract 12830 _ located on the crest side of Beryl Street, south of 19th Street I unre~urcH; citation auiiaers 17731 Irvine Boulevard X201 Tustin, CA 92680 Accept: Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) f73,925.00 Release: Faithful Performance Bond (Street) (739,222.00 Respectfull ltted, ~v' L . '..1/FF~rI/-~~t RNM: SMG `,1h----- Attachment RESOLUTION N0. ~S ~ 308 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT 12830 AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING Of A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE NORK NY.EREAS, the consiructi an of public improvements for Tract ie83D 'nave been completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer; and WHEREAS, a Notice of Completion is required to be filed, certifying the work complete. NON, THEREFORE, be it resolved, ihai the work is hereby accepted and the City Engineer is authorized to sign and file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder of San Bernardino County. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT HATE; Mey IB, 1988 R0: City Council ~ ~1 FROM: Beverly Authele City Clerh/ r pager SUBSECP: Destruction of City Da c;mente ~~ 9 ~ n LLI T. Oi ~O F", ~ I;z Jh li> 1477 RE OJI".leNA4TI0N: It ie recommended that City Council npprwe the Resolution granting authoriz etion to destroy records es listed on the attached lint. llnder the authority of Gwerrsent Code Section 34090, n department head nay de etroy certain city records which are Mo years old under him charge ae long ee such destruction ie first approved by the city attorney end city council. A/sG urdez the same Government Code Section, authority is Rranted to destroy records which have been ^icrof ilmed. ^nder consideration et this time ere eome Administration Records rhich ere over hro years old which need are no longer required to DQ dept ana mesa co ix destroyed; and some Planning end Engiraer ing Records which have been microfilmed end the or iglnals can be destroyed. attach. ~~ 309 RESOLUTION N0. 88-+~-~' A RESOLUTIUN OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCRO W CAI~NGA, CALIFORNIA, AUINORI2ING 1HE DES1RU CfION OF CITY RECDRBS AND DOWPffiNTS WH ICA ARE NO LONGER RHgll 1RED AS PROVIDED UNDER GOVERNNBNT OODE SECTION 34050 WHEREAS, it has been determined that certain City recarde under the charge of the follw ing Ci[y Departdent are no longer required for public or private purposes: ADMLNIETRATION WtffiREAS, it hen been determined that destruction of the shove-mentioned materiels ie necessary to conserve etorege apace, an reduce staff time, eapence, end conf union in handling, and informing the public; and WiIEREAS, Section 34090 of the Gwerrment Code of the State of California author iz ea the head of a City depardent to destroy arty City records and documents which are war two years old under hie or her charge, without. making a copy thereof, after the same are no longer required, upon the epprwal of the City Council by reaol ution and the written consent of the City Attorney: end WHEREAS, is ie therefore deli reble to destroy said records se listed - uw ,. ~ ~ ~.<w ens ......~ - yf.l: ..C~~ , .C. J:G--eL. .._.....~ making a copy thereof, which •ere war two years old; endV WHEREAS, ee id records hwe been approved for destruction by the City Attorney. NCW, THEREFORE, 17IP. CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANa1C CU CAPDkGA GOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That approval and euthoriz etion ie hereby given to destroy those recor de described es Exhibit ^A" attached hereto and made a pert hereof. SECTION 2: That the City Clerk ie authorized to allnw exam ins tion by and donation to the Department. of Spe ci el Collections of the University Research Librerq, University of California, or other 4istor ical society A.. r: r.. :1 n[ a.n _.de A_n .i Mri in w~fiihi• x1N _.. ig^ated tr, ...._ _.._ _ .._ ___ _ attached heretoyand made enpert hereof, ezcept those deemed to be rnnf identinl. SECTION 3: That the City Clerk shell certify to the adoption of this reeol ut ion, end thenceforth end thereafter the same shall be in full Porce and effect. !~ RECORDS INVENTORY WORKSHEET DEPARTMENT Rdministration FILE CAE. NO.NlA DRAWER N0. N/A LOCATION Storage SHELF CASE N0. N/A SHELF N0. N/A PAGE NO. u!^ OTAFR_N/p PREPARED BY/DATE 6ecky Eberhardt VOLU!ffi (CD.FT.) N/A INCLUSIVE DATES~t/A SERIES TITLE(S) b DESCRIPTION OF CONTENTS RE4ARKS: 1170-04 Refuse papers - 1980 -1964 1205-00 Cable T. V. Franchise Background paDErs 1983-1985 1180-10 Complaints b inquires Ice Cream Vendor Problem 1982-1983 1150-05 Humane Society Papers 1983-1984 0702-04 Election ballots for Hobilehome Parks Residents Committee (1984) APPROVED FOR DESTRUCTION BY DZSPOSITZON OF RECORDS; ~' ITY ATTORN pate: -12-g(f DESTRUCTION ~ ~ ~~ ~~ J ~_~ ~~ .:~ ;- __ ,,~, ~ ~~ ~' S ~ 1 `y-i ~ :.~, i~~ _ :~ ~~~~ ~~ ~~ F ^ S ~ -r--_ ~r } ~ ~ 3 T [YMMRUK C ~~~~ ~ (. • .Mb.~ `w~ . OMWOR M1d4~1~ 1 ~ .I1NR ~.,~,.~.__ : ~ . . ~FT~ M ww~lw~~.~n ~ RB588-DEBT RESW.UTION ND. 88-J~+~ A RESOLIITION OP TkiE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANLI[0 COCAIDNGA, C4LIIORNTA, AUIRORI'LING 9LE DESTRU CTILLN OP CITY RENRDS AND DOQ7ICNIE WItIQi NAVE BE&7 HI CROPILMBD AND ARE NO LONGER RHQDIRHD AS PROP IDED UNDER GOVERNlBNT CODE SECT E)N 34090 WHEREAS, it hes been de tetmir~ed that cerra;n e;.y rccorde under the ~f.ergo o. ,...~ I~iiov ing Oity Department have been microfilmed: ENGINEERING AND PLANNING DIVISIONS WHEREAS, it hes been determined that destruction of the shwa-mentioned materials ie neceeeary to conserve eterage ape ce, an reduce staff time, expene°, and confusion in 6endl ing, and inforning the public, and WHEREAS, Section 34090 of the Gwertaent Code of the Stau of California euthoriaee thx destruction of airy City records and doc:sente which have been microfilmed upon the apprwel of the City Council by resolution and the written consent of the City Attorney; and WHEREAS, it ie therefore desirable to destroy said recarda ea listed in Eahibie "A" and exhibit "e" attached hereto and rade a part hereof; and Attorney. WHEREAS, maid rem:da hays been appzwed for destruction by the City NOW, DIERE[gRE. TH6 CITY rrninrrr ne ~.~_..~ ~... ~~ n,;nulu W [iIIDNGA DDES .-.ua viva ns RILLOGIS: SECTION 1: That approval and eutboriaetion ie hereby given to destroy those records described ae 6ahibit ^A" and Eah ibit ^B" attached hereto end made a part hereof. 56CTION 2: ThaC the City Clerk is authorised to allow ezaninstion by and dorm tion to the Depar dent of Special Collections of the University Research Library, University of California, or other hietor ical society designated by she City Council, eery of the rernrde de ecr abed ;n Exhibit ^A" and Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a pert hereof, except those desed to be conf ids nti el. SECTION 3: That the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of This reeol ut ion, and thence Enr tF e.^.d thane>I Eer the same ehal be Ln fuii force and _ff«.. PASSED, APPROVED, end ADOPTED this * day of LNy, 1988. 'rn/ ~/` Resolution No. 88-*** Page 2 ERN IB IT A REWRDS FOR DESTRU CPION DE PARTFENT Engineering PREPARED BY/DATE Authe lei(5-18-88 RETENTSON SHELF N0. DISPOSITION OF RRfY.1RIt$ N.i^-^~<~-eC SERI85 TITLE(S) S DESCRIPTION OP CONTENTS: Tract Mape BO% TR 9280 To 1R 9 298 1R 9280 TR 9287 TR 92$8 TR 9290 TR 9295 TR 9297 iRt 9298 BOIC TR 9109 co TR 9 137 TR 9109 TR 9110 TR 9116 TR 9117 TR 9121 TR 9131 TR 9134 TR 9135 TR 9136 TR 9137 B07I TR 8426 To TR 8 699 TR 8426 TR 8429 TR 8440 TR 8435 TR 8467 TR 8468 TR 8469 TR 8470 TR 8516 TR 8519 TR 8520 TR 8521 TR 8552 TR 8578 8579 TR 8583 TR 8608 TR 8610 TR 8610 TR 8611 TR 8649 TR 8668 TR 8681 TR 8682 TR 8683 nnv mo o_c_cc _ _ V TR 9656 TR 9657 TR 9658 TR 9659 TR 9665 TR 9819 TR 10024 TR 10033 TR 70035 TR IOOnS TR 30046 TR 10047 TR 10064 TR 10076 TR 10088 TR 10157 TR 10231 TR 10246 TR 10277 TR 10363 TR 10414 TR 11144 TR 11345 TR 11415 TR 1.434 TE 11452 TR 11460 TR 11461 TR 11474 TR 11700 TR 17933 TR 12039 TR 12041 TR 12476 BOR TR 9250 to TR 9 274 TR 9254 TR 9255 TR 9256 TR 9260 TR 9262 TR 9264 TR 9265 TR 9267 TR 9268 TP. 9269 TR 9274 BOA TP, 9015 to TR 9 099 TR 9015 TR 9016 TR 9025 TR 9034 TR 9035 TR 9036 17t 9038 TR 9074 TR 9075 TR 9076 TR 9080 TR 9083 TR 9083-1 TR 9083-2 TR 9083-3 TR 9083-4 TR 9063-5 TR 9083-6 BOR TR- fi728 to TR 8 949 TR 8731 TR 6752 TR 8796 TR 8805 TR 8806 17t 8829 TR 8876 TR 8884 TR BB92 TR 8915 TR 8918 TR 8921 TR 8922 TR 8928 TR 8930 TR 6935 BOA TR 9200 to TR 9 245 TR 9212 TR 9223 TR 9224 TR 9226 TR 9240 TR 9245 Resolution No. 88-*** Page 3 BOA PM fi051 to PM 6260 PM 6206 PM 6228 PM 6246 PN G260 PM. 6290 PM 6270 PN 6051 PH 6070 PM 6051 PN 6076 PH 6085 PM 6092 PM 6103 PM 6114 PM 6125 PM 6175 PN 6194 BOR PM 3260 to PM 4805 PM 3260 PH 3359 PM 3383 PM 3413 PM 3713 PM 3976 PM 4370 PM 3976 PM 4029 PM 4067 PM 4141 PN 6125 P!! 4251 ,,, PN 4281 PH 4293 PH 4320 PH 4345 PM 4370 PM 4433 PM 4463 PM 4499 PM 4511 PM 4594 PM 4657 PH 4693 PH 4731 PN 4735 PM. 4733 PM 4744 PH 4749 PM 4762 PM 4767 PM 4773 PM 4783 PM 4768 PM 4804 PM 4805 BOR PN 4806 TO PM 5431 PM 4820 PM 4837 PM 4666 PM 4869 PH 4875 PM 4881 PH 4907 PM 4908 PM 4912 PM 4929 PN 4957 PM 5033 PM 5015 PN 5044 PM 5051 PM 5066 PM 5126 PM 5130 PM 5144 PN 5157 PM 5176 PM 5179 PM 5239 PM 5269 PM 5260 PM 5285 PM 5297 PM 5325 PM 5356 PM 5378 PM 5441 PN 5499 PM 5505 BOA PM 5535 to PM 6011 PH 5515 PM 5525 PM 5533 PM 5545 PM 5558 PM 5563 PM 5608 PM 5639 PM 5671 PM 5684 PM 5687 PM 5697 PM 5703 PN 5733 PH 5760 PM 5767 PM 5786 PM 5792 PM 5795 PM 5809 PM 5819 PM 5632 PM 5891 PM 5892 PM 5893 PM 5900 PM 5981 PN 5922 PM 5996 PM 5997 PM 6005 PM 6011 Al14 9N OtU in. nv n+nn PN 9150 PN 9153 PM 9157 PN 9165 PM 9171 PN 9176 PM 9179 PM 9180 PM 9181 PM 9187 PM 9188 PM 9189 PM 9393 PM 9194 BOA 1R 9582 to 1R 9586 1R 95 BZ 1R 9582-1 1R 9582-2 lit 9583 RR 9584 lR 9584-1 lit 9584-2 1R 9584-3 1R 9585 7R 9566 TR 9587 1'R 9588 TR 9590 1R 9591 1R 9591 1R 9595 11t 9596 HOA TR 6243 to TR 8398 1R 6243 1'It 6245 1R 6364 1R 6447 Tlt 6609 71l 6760 TR fi831 1R 6846 11t 6914 TR 6939 1R 6988 1k 6993 1R 6995 1R 7007 1R 7020 1R 7023 IR 7072 111 7104 1R 7115 T[t 7139 1R 7169 3R 7176 1R 7181 1R 7184 1R 7186 1R 7218 Tit 7219 T4 7245 1R 7290 IR 7292 1R 7292 1R 7371 1R 7441 1R 7560 1R 7561 'S 6v 1'n iib3 'ix 7cvg 19 7632 ~, '706 in 7630 iR 7654 TR 7866 1'R 7913 17t 7936 1R 7939 1R 7962 13i 7963 1R 7964 11t 7966 IA 7967 1R 7968 1R 7964 1R 7970 11t 7971 1R 7978 'iR 8024 lR 8054 1R 8085 1R 8089 TR 8112 SOR lR 9424 to 11i 9436 2R 9424 1R 9426 1R 9427 1'A 9429 1R 9460 iR 9432 1R 9433 1R 9434 1R 9435 1R 9436 Reeol ution No. 88-ifs Psge 4 BO8 TR 9602 to TB 9655 1R 9602 1R 9626 1R 9637 1R 9619 11l 9628 1R 9629 1'!t 9630 1R 9637 1R 9634 1R 9636 1R 9637 1R 9638 1R 9640 113 9647 1R 9648 TR 9649 TR 9650 1R 9652 17t 9653 1R 9654 1R 9655 808 1R 9351 to 11t 9370 1R 9351 17t 9352 1R 9352-i 1R 9352-2 7R 9355 1R 9356 1R 9358 1R 9366 1R 9369 Ili 9370 808 3'R 9539 to TR 9569 1R 9539 1R 9540 Tlt 9546 1R 9554 2R 9555 1R 9555-1 YR 9555-2 1R 9555-3 11t 9556 11t 9567 17t 9569 BO8 1R 9480 to TR 9525 7R 9480 14 9483 TR 9484 SR 9501 1R 9505 1R 9518 Tft 9539 SR 9520 1R 9521 1R 9522 31t 9524 T8 9525 HO8 TR 8955 to 17t 9009 1R 8955 1R 8956 1R 8958 1R 8961 11l 8962 1R 8973 1R 8977 17t 8979 1R 8981 1R 8988 1Il 9002 1R 9003 1R 9006 Tit 9009 808 1R 9402 to 1R 9423 1lt 9102 1R 9403 1R 9405 Tit 9406 17t 9407 TR 9409 1R 9419 31t 9420 ZR 9421 17t 9422 11t 9422-1 17t 9422-2 1R 9423 BOA I'R 9371 to 79t 9401 8i 9371 1R 9377 TB 9378 1R 9379 TR 9380 1R 9383 Sit 9382 1R 9387 7B 9388 1R 9396 11t 9397 1R 9398 TR 9401 HOR TR 9325 to 17i 9350 11t 9325 TR 9329 TR 9333 1R 9337 Tg 9341 1R 9342 1R 9343 1R 9344 TR 9345 1R 9348 1R 9350 ]W8 1R 9450 co 1R 9479 1R 9450 2k 9451 1R 9454 17t 9458 1R 9469 1R 9472 TR 9475 171 9479 BOR T8 9300 to TR 9324 11t 9302 1R 9305 1R 9306 TR 9313 1R 9314 TR 9315 TR 9316 7R 9318 1R 9319 1R 9320 1R 9322 Tg 9324 Reaol utior. No. 88-*+~ Page 5 ELHFtlIDIT B RHtORDS POR DSSTRD CP ION I~PARTFSNT Planning PRSPARHD HY/DAT6 Authelet/5-18-88 R8IENTION SRRLF -Tg P(fR TTION n9 Pc_riioyS vi~__~_1.-.eu' SER18S TITLBS (S) 6 DSS QIIPPION OP CONTRNTS: County Plot Plan Rev iewe PP 81-81 PP 89-80 PP 81-88 PP 90-65 PP 82-63 PP 91-56 PP 82-82 PP 92-87 PP 83-82 PP 92-89 PP 84-69 PP 93-b1 PF' 64-88 PP 93-70 PP 85-71 PP 93-73 PP 85-73 PP 93-85 PP 66-74 PP 93-86 PP 86-81 PP 93-89 PP B6-87 PP 94-71 •' YY 99-/2 PP 87-66 PP 94-80 fP 87-86 PP 94-BB PP 87-87 PP 95-71 PP 88-73 PP 95-72 PP 88-79 PP 95-73 PP 88-80 PP 95-80 PP 88-86 PP 121-94 PP 89-65 - - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT Date: May 18, 1988 To: City Counci} and City Manager From: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer 8y: John L. Martin, Associate Civit Engineer SubJect: Set Public llearing for June 15, 1988 for the adoption of a ~ Resolution of Necessity to condemn portions of three real ! estate properties (APN 202-061-15, 202-111-06, 202-111-16) in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, located along the south ~~ side of 19th Street, east and west of Amethyst Avenue ' intersection for the purpose of providing right-of-way for j ultimate street improvements. RECOMMEMDATION• Staff recommends the setting of a Public Hearing for the adoption of a Resolution of Necessity to acquire the subiect right-of-ways by way of a condemnation or Eminent Domain action. BACK9tDUMD/ANALYSIS• On April 20, 1988, the City Council reviewed and approved the Environmental Review and issued a Negative Declaration by virtue of a Resolution No. 88_245 fnr rwo a,,,~.ti,,.. ,n.4 ra___. rroJect. - ~-- ---^ °~•~_~ oe~onei.ruc[ion !t was noted in the report of Apr11 20, 1988 that right-of-ways would need to be acquired to complete the intended Improvements. Staff has had appraisal reports prepared and offers have bean made in the exchange of right-of-ways for street Improvements. As of this date, negotiations to acquire such right-of-ways continue without success Tn getting the right-of-ways exchange or purchase agreement executed. Although efforts continue, it is felt necessary to proceed with right-of- way condemnation to avoid further delays in constructing such improvements currently on hold. Since this project was scheduled for construction this Macy 1988, the City staff reca~end4 that Council di rlCt SLdff La nrnronA vi ~~. ...~-s.n_ Public Hearing for the adoption of Resolution of Necessi ~ ~FYY1O of the Eminent Domain action or condemnation, such hearing to beescheduled~ CC5R May 18, 1988 Page 2 for June 15, 1988. A simultaneous oraceedings pertaining to the 1411 Act "Ordering of Construction of Pubiic Improvements" will also be scheduled for the sane meeting to follow the Public Hearing for the Resolution of Necessity. Resper~tfu X submitted, ' .. ~~~~p.r~ C RHM:JL . Attachment ~~ -- CITY OF RANCHO CtiCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 To: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer DY: Judy Aeos ta, Jr. Engineering Aiae SUBJECT: Approval to Annex Tract No. 13644, iocated on the east side of Hermosa Rvenue and the south side of Vista Grove Street, to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 as Annexation ~ Ne. 29 and setting the date of public hearing for June 15, 1988 RECOMMEN011TIDN It is reconmended that City Council adopt the attached resolutions approving the Engineer's Report for Annexation No. 29 and setting the date of public hearing regarding the City's intention to annex the above described tract to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2. pnalysfs/Background Attached for City Council approval is a resolution declari na the Citv's intent co annex iracc No. 1sba4, located on the east side of Hermosa Avenue and the south side of Vista Grove Street, to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 as Annexation 29 and setting the public hearing date for June 15, 1988. Also attached for Council consideration is a resolution giving preliminary aDProva1 of the Engineer's Report for the sub,~ect annexation, q letter fran the developer requesting the subJert annexation is on file in the Eng7neering Division. Respec s bmitted, r ~ ~ :sd Attachments ~9 RESOLUTION N0. 0 u ~ II A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR ANNEXATION N0. 29 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 2 WHE.°,EAS, ~ May :3 :9P,.°, thz City Council of Liie City of Rancho Cucamonga directed the City'Engineer to make and file with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as required by the Landscaping and Lig"ting Act of 1912; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has made and filed with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as called for pursuant to said Act, which report has been presented to this Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, said City Council has duly considered said report and each and every part thereof, and finds that each and every part of said report is sufficient, and that said report, nor any part thereof, requires or should be modified in any respect. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: SECTION 1; That the Engineer's Estimate of the itemf zed costs and expenses o saa work and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in said report 6e, and each of them are hereby, preliminarily °V y(~w~ anu wui illlleu. SECTION 2; That the diagram showing the Assessment District referred to and desc r~- i~ed~n said report, the boundaries of the subdivisions of land within said Assessment District are hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 3; That the proposed assessment upon the subdivlsions of land in sai Assessment District in proportion to the estimated benefit to be received by said subdivision, respectively, from said work and of the incidental expenses thereof, as contained in said report is hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 4: That said report shall stand as the City Engineer's Report for t-die purposes of all subsequent proceedfnas, and pursuant to thn ,.n w:.~.., _. propac,... ,..,.. ~~.. 1- ~b CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 Annexation No. 29 for Tract No. 13644 SECTION 1. Authority for Reoort This report is in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting F1ct of 1972), SECTION 2, General Description This City Council has elected to annex all new developments into Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2. The City Council has determined that the street lights to be maintained will have an effect upon all tots within said developments as well as on the lots directly abutting the street lights. Mork to be provided for with the assessments established by the district are: The furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operating and servicing of street light i~1~.ro':culClt; a. .J-a' ai,l ee :o m siiumi un iiie Liyi~cing District Altos Map ywhlch is on ft le with the City Engineer. Improvement maintenance is considered of general benefit to all areas in the District and cost shall be assessed on a Der unit basf s. SECTION 3. Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications for street lighting have been prepared by the developers. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Division. Reference is hereby made to the subject trac4 map or development plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the street lighting areas. The plans and specifications for street lighting improvement on the individual development is hereby made a Dart 1s rn;~ .,n,,...,, .~.,.. .,,.._.. -.-~- -- -~~~ ~~~~ =x.=11. a~ if laid plans and specifics were attached hereto. Detailed maintenance activities on the street Lighting district include: the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement, providing for the illumination of the subject area. SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for street lighting improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers, Based on available data, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will be as indicated below, These costs are estimated only, actual assessments will be based on actual cost data. Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 is comprised of all '^d••str'a' ^~°-2ria' and r.stitut Tonal prujec is throughout {he City. It has been determined that~one acre of land in industrial, commercial and institutional areas derives the sane benefit as two assessment units in residential zones. The estimated total cost for Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 is shown below: 1. S.C.E. Maintenance and Enerav Cost: amp Size• Lamps YTD No. of Lamps Annex No. 29 New Lapp Total 5800E 1,345 13 1,358 9500E 4 0 4 *M igh Pressure Sodium Vapor Tut al total qnn ual Lamp Size Lam s Rate Mo's Mai nt. Cost 5800E 1,358 X E 8.93 X 12 $145,523.28 9500E 4 X E10,16 X 12 = 487.68 Total Annual Mai nt. Cost = $146,010.96 2, Total Assessment Units: YTD Assess Units before this annexation = 5,000 Assessment Units this annex per page 4 24 Total Assessment Units 5.024 3. Cost per Assessment Unit: Total Annual Maintenance Cost E146 010.96 E29.06/year/unit No. o Un is n str ct -5,`D'I4- Assessment shall apply to each lot or parcel as explained in Section 6, SECTION 5, Assessment Diagram Copies of the proposed Assessment Diagrams are attached to this report and labeled "Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2", Annexation No. 29. These diagrams are hereby incorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6, Assessment Improvements for the District are found to be of general benefit to all units within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each unit. When units are based on acreage, assessment wf 11 be 2 units per net acre. SECTION 7. Order of Events 1, City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of City Engineer's Report. 2. City Council adapts Resolution of Intention to annex a District and sets public hearing date. 3, City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and determines to form a District or abandon the proceedings. 4. Every year in May, the City Engineer files a report with the City Council. ... C.=.~ ~=m iu uune, i.iie i,ii.y i.umn.ii cunuuccs a pubiic nearing ana approves, or modifies and approves the individual assessments. E7(HIBIT "A" Properties and improvements to he included within Annexation No. 29 to Street Lighting Maintenance District 2: Assess. No. of Lamps to be Annexed o~ ~r A~ UT- 3iS.,C~ 35~~~ •'o,u~u~ cc,u7UL c~,7uDL TR 13644 --- 24 13 --- --- --- --- ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGH'TlNG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. Z ANNEXATION NO. Z9 r ~ ~~ T ~-Yi i`i n ~ ~ ~ ~.~n ....... '1 .i ~ .'n ~.m• .....~r~ { Y . din ~% . ~ . i _ A 2 , l ? ~ . ~ + ~.. 6 -5 ~ ~ ~ w y ~. -- _. .. ._re t ... ,. ~~ , e .. 9;~ ._ ~ ~ a P, I' '~_.... _ ~1 v . r ^ qq , ;,Y~ a ;, L:4v I ~ 9 m ~ ~ _ _ _~..r.. ~ , „ II f 1 i1 t, 6 [ " p ,.. ~ ',, J ~+ ~ i~ 'i ~ ~ 3~ ~x _ F `- '"" ..44 `ri:~ ~ ~ 9 ~ ~ ^.~ 'N {F~'~ _ r J I°'I __ ~ .I . ~ ~. ~ ' ~ p ~ ~ Z2 i~ ~ i] ix p 'ice J ~~..w ~ I __ \ 1 J y ~ ~ • ~y Y3 ,.. _ .. I ~ i-KSP. M.R .. ,m~~~z; CITY OF RANCHO CUCAI[ONOA s~_ COUNTY OF 8AN BRRNARDINO ~; `~^~' ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~~ ~ N RESOLUTION N0. ~ o `~~~ A RESOLUTION OF THE C[TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY CF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEXATION TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION N0. 29 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 2; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING PCT OF 1912 AND OFFERING A TIME ANO PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of P. ancho Cucamonga, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15 of Lhe Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, as follows: SECTION 1. Descri tion of Work: That the public interest and convenience require an i is a inten ion of this City Council to form a maintenance district in the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the maintenance and operation of those street lights the boundaries of the proposed maintenance district described in Section 2 hereof. Said maintenance and operation includes the cost and supervision of any lighting and related facilities in connection with said district. SECTION 2. Location of Work: The foregoing described work is Lo be located wi_ i"`F n roadway r gj~ of=way enunerated fn the report of the City Engineer and more particularly descrf bed on maps which are on file in the office of the City Clerk, entitled "Annexation No. 29 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2", """ Livn vi naaoaumnL U15 LrIll: IhGL brie coot emplate~~orTc,~in Vt ~e opim on sa ty ounc is of more than local or ordinary public benefit, and the said City Council hereby makes the expense of the said work chargeable upon a district, which said district fs assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and which district is described as follows: All that certain territory of the City of Rancho Cucamonga included within the exterior boundary lines shown upon that certain "Map of Annexation No. 29 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2" maps is on file in the office of the City Clerk of said City. SECTION 4. Report of Engineer: The City Council of said City by Resolution No. *~Fias approve t e report of the engineer of work which report inriti_atey, t,",e ,5^nunt of t"ic prvpnSed a5ie5inieii t, Lilo di5criCt 'oaundarY• assessment zones, titled "Engineer's Report, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2" is on file in the office of the City Clerk of said City. Reference to said report is hereby made for alt particulars for the amount and extent of the assessments and for the extent of the work. G ~/ RESOLUTION PAGE 2 SECTION 5. Collection of Assessments; The assessment shall be col lecte admit die same t me an n t e same manner as County taxes are collected. The City Engineer shall file a report annually with the City Council of said City and said Council will annually conduct a hearing upon said report at their first regular meeting in June, at which time assessments for the next fiscal year will be determined. SECTI~ S. Tune and r"lace of Hearin Noi ice is hereby given that on June 13,T56i1, at t e our of pm in t e City Council Chaffers at 9161 Base Line, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, any and all persons having any objections to the work or extent of the assessment district, may appear and show cause why said work should not be done or carried out or why said district should not be farmed in accordance with this Resolution of Intention. Protests must be in writing and must coot aln a description of the property in which each signer thereof is interested, sufficient to identify the same, and must be delivered to the City Clerk of said City prior to the time set for the hearing, and no other protests or objections will be considered. if the signer of any protest 1s not shown upon the last equalized assessment roll of San Bernardino County as the owner of the property described in the protests, then Such protest must contain or be accompanied by written evidence that such signer is the owner of the property so described. SECTION 7. Landscaping and Lightin Act of 1972: All the work herein proDas~e -s Fall be done and cam roug n pursuance of an alt of the legislature of the State of California designated the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. SECTION 8. Publication of Resolution of Intent ton: Published notice shall be m~uant to ct on o e overnment ode. The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the Cfty Clerk shall cause the same to be published 10 days before the date set for the hearing, at least once in The Daily Re rt, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of On ar o, a ornia, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. ~~ ~~ ------ CITY OF RANCHO CCCA~IONGA STAFF REPORT GATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russ all N. Maguire, City Engineer eY: Judy Acosta, Jr. Engineering Aide j SUBJECT: Approval to Annex Tract No. 13644, located on the east side of Hermosa Avenue and the south side of Vista Grove Street, to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 as Annexation No. 47 and setting the date of public hearing for June 15, 1988 I I RECDMENDATI011 It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolutions approving the Engineer's Report for Annexatf on No. 47 and setting the date of public hearing regarding the City's intention to annex the above described tract to landscape Maintenance District No. 1. Ana tys i s/Background Attached for City Council approval is a resolution declaring the City's intent to annex Tract No. 13644. located on tM Pact cidP ~a HPrmn<a Avenue and the south side of Vista Grove Street, to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 for Annexation No. 47 and setting the public hearing date for June 15, 1988. Also attached for Council consideration is a resolution giving preliminary aDProval of the Engineer's Report for the subject annexation. A letter from the developer requesting the subject annexation is on file in the Engineering Division. Resppctf submitted, /~ \ R/M:J •sd Attachments ~$ RESOL'JT ION NO. ~g~3r~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL Of CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR ANNEXATION NO. 47 TO IAN DSCAPE MAINTENANCE 0[STRICT N0. 1 WHEREAS, nn May 1?, 199A the C?ty C.. '- 1 0` the City of Rancho Cucamonga directed the City Engineer to make and~file with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as required 6y the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has made and filed with the City Clerk of said Gity a report in writing as called fur pursuant to said Act, which report has been presented to this Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, said City Council has duty considered said report and each and every part thereof, and finds that each and every part of said report is sufficient, and that said report, nor any part thereof, requfres or should b2 modified in any respect. NOW, THEREFORE BE I7 RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: SECT ION is That the Engineer's Estf mate of the itemized costs and expenses o s~-- a~ work and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in said report be, and each of them are hereby, preliminarily Tfl f1 /'I,V PA ~nrl nrtF {.,wnA SECTION 2: That the diagram showing the Assessment District referred to and descr-i~e~in said report, the boundaries of Lhe subdivisions of land within said Assessment District are hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed, SECTION 3; That the proposed assessment upon the subdivisions of land in said Assessment District in proportion to the estimated benefit to be received by said subdivision, respectively, from said work and of the incidental expenses thereof, as contained in said report is hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed, SECTION 4: That said report shall stand as the City Engineer's Report for a purposes of all subsequent proceedings, and pursuant to the prvp'ii eu IJLf II.L. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 Annexation No. 47 for Tract No. 13644 SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972), SECTION 2. General Description This City Council has elected to annex all new subdivisions into Landscape Maintenance District No. 1. The City Council has de*_ermined that the areas to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within Tract No. 13644 as well as on the lots directly abutting the landscaped areas. All landscaped areas to be maT ntained in the annexed tracts are shown on the recorded Map as roadway right-of-way or easements to be granted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. SECTION 3, Plans and Specifications The plans and landscaping are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Divisfon. Reference is hereby made to the sub3ect tract map or development plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the landscaped areas. The plans and specifications for landscaped improvement on the individual development is herebv made a Dart of this report to the cams extent ac ;9 caid nlanc anA specifications were attached hereto. SECTION 4, Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for parkway improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on historical data, contract analysis and developed work standards, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will equal thirty (E.30) cents per square foot per year. These costs are estimated only, actual assessment will be based on actual cost data. The estimated total cost far Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 including Annexation No. 47 is as follows: Existing Anrex ~:ew District No.47 Total Landscape Area 1,186,336 4,630 1,190,966 No, of D. U. 9,757 24 9,781 Per Lot Annual A55essment 1,190,966 % E.30 5357,289.80 E357,289.80 536.53 9, 781 Assessment shalt apply to each lot as enumerated in Section 6 and the attached assessment diagram. Where the development covered by this annexation involves frontage along arterial or collector streets, which are designated far inclusion in the maintenance district but will be maintained by an active homeowners association, these assessments shall be reduced. SECTION 5. Assessment Diagram A copy of the proposed assessment diagram is attached to this report and labeled "Exhibit A", by this reference the diagram is hereby incorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6, Assessment Improvements for the District are found to be of general benefit to all lots within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each unit. Where there is more than one dwelling unit per lot or parcel of assessable land, the assessment for each lot or parcel shall be proportional to the number of dwelling units per lot or parcel. The City Council will hold a public hearing in June, to determine the actual assessments based upon the actual costs incurred by the City during the previous fiscal year which are to be recovered through assessments as required by the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. SECTION 7. Order of Events 1. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of City Engineer's Report. 2. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to Annex to District and sets c~..~~c ~~..ar-~~y ;..~. 3, City Council conducts pu611c hearing, considers all testimony and determines to Annex to the District or ab andnn the proceedings. 4. Every year in May, the City Engineer files a report with the City Council. 5. Every year in June, the City Council conducts a public hearing and approves, or modifies and approves the individual assessments. Properties and improvements to be included within Annexation No. 1 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 47: M4 [NTA IN ED AREA TRACT D/U 3fiNE T TURF R UND COVER Sg-FE --fit 13644 24 Comm pity Trail --- 4,630 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. ANNEXATION N0.47 ~ry / ~ ~ .n.. __ _...w Ymw[yfiKCl ~ ~_ ~.. n ryry HTi f~KCi , ~..uew.-=~ ~y.a:[ -i. „ Ys-^= ...~ ~ ~., ; ~ ~~ ` ' I ~ 3 5 ~~ ,~ __ e ~ e ~. ~ _,_ ~ 91 ,d ~ ~ 1~ is ~~ \ '' E i ___ / S ~ 5 {{{{. N " v~• fj { [ ~ p 3 ~ ~ C 11 { 91 P • 22 ~ I :.YiIL ~ W$ 12 T 4 ~ 21 _ . J 9 . ] .~., ~ ' 'h...5. JLL1R.! ~ ' ~ y__wS6>!L_mw,5__ `~~c1,~'., CITY OF RANCHO CUCAiYIONGA w ~ ` ~J '~ ;~ ' EN(;INEERING DIVISION ~~ 6 ~ VICINITY b1AP im 11 RESOLUTION N0. ~ ~ - ~I A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL Of THE CITY Of RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA DECLARING ITS INTENTfON TO ORDER THE ANNE1(ATI ON TO LANDSCAPE MIIINTENAN CE DISTRICT N0. 1, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION N0. 47 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAP iNG AND LIGHTING ALT Of 1972 AND OFFERING A Ti ME AND PLALE fOR MEANING OBJECTIONS THERETO NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, as follows: SECTION 1. Description of Work: That the public interest and convenience require aia-ft~EFe ini;enfion of this City Council to form a maintenance district in the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the maintenance and operation of those parkways and facTliites therean dedicated for common greenbelt purposes 6y deed or recorded subdivision tract map within the boundaries of the proposed maintenance district described in Section 2 hereof. Said maintenance and oiler atfon includes the cost and supervision of any sprinkler system, trees, grass, plantings, landscaping, ornamental lighting, structures, and walls in connection with said parkways. SECTION 2. Location of Mork: The foregoing described work is to be ~ocateg witnin roadway rigght-of-way and landscaping easements of Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 enumerated in the report of the City Engineer and more particularly described on maps which are on file in the office of the Citv Clerk, entitled "Annexation No. 47 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1" - SECTION 3, Descri tion of Assessment District: That the contemplate wor , in a op n ono sai y ounc is of more than local or ordinary public benefit, and the said City Council hereby makes the expense of the said work chargeable upon a district, which said district is assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and which district is described as follows: All that certain territory of the City of Rancho Cucamonga included within the eYtar;nr bQUndary i Ines shown upon that certain "Map of Annexation No. 47 to landscape Maintenance District No. 1" heretofore approved by the City Council of said City by Resolution No. *, indicating by said boundary lines the extent of the territory included within the proposed assessment district and which map is on file in the office of the City Clerk of said City. -I SECTIDN 4. Report of ~E~n~i neer: The City Council of said City by Resolution No. +~Tias apDrove3 etli report of the engineer of work which report indicates the amount of the Proposed assessment, the district boundary, assessment zones, titled "Engineer's Report, gnnexati on No. 47, Landscape Maintenance District No. 1" is on file in the office of the City Clerk of said City. Reference to said report is hereby made for all particulars for the amount and extent of the assessments and for the extent of the work. SECTIDN 5. Collection of Assessments: The assessment shall be collecte at t e sane time an in the samo manner as Ccurty taxes are ^ollacted. The City Engineer shall file a report annually with the City Councii of said City and said Council will annually conduct a hearing upon said report at their first regular meeting in June, at which time assessments for the next fiscal year will be determined. SECTION 6. Time and place of Hearinq: Notice is hereby given that on June 13;~`at a our o~ 7r3 .if~the City Council Chambers at 9161 Base Line, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, any and all persons having any ob,iections to the work or extent of the assessment district, may appear and show cause why said work should not be done or carried out or why said district should not 6e formed in accordance with this Resolution of Intention. Protests must be in writing and must Contain a destription of the property in which each signer thereof is interested, sufficient to identify the same, and must be delivered to the City Clerk of said City prior to the time set for the hearing, and no other protests or ob,}ections will be considered. if the signer of any protest is not shown upon the last equalized assessment roll of can Bernardino County as the owner of the property described in the protests, then such protest must contain or be accompanied by written evidence that such signer is the owner of the Property so described. Seuiiun i. La~ndsca~inq~an~d~Li htin Act of 1972: All the work herein propo- s~shall a on6 d e and Carrie t roug in pursuance of an act of the legislature of the State of California designated the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. SECTIDN 8. Publication of Resolution of Tntention: Published notice shall be maw pursuan o ec on o e overnmen ode. The Mayor shat? sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shalt cause the same to be published 1D days before the date set for the hearing, at least once in The Dail Re ort, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of 6n ar o, a ornia, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, i Kai ~~ ---- CITY OF RANCHO CCCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer 8Y: Judy Acosta, Jr. Engineering Aide SUBJECT: Approval to Annex Tract No. 13644, PM 9504, CUP 87-04 and DR 86-32 (Lot 5, TR 12176) (various locations throughout ii the City), to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 as Annexation No. 45 and setting the date of publ+c hearing for June 15, 1988 i, RECOMENDATION It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolutions approving the Engineer's Report for Annexation No. 45 and setting the date of public hearing regarding the City's intention to annex the above described pro,lects to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1. Analysis/Background Attached for City Council approval is a resolution declaring tha rtrv~c intent to annex Tract No. 13644, PM 9504, CUP 87-04 and DR 86-32 (Lot 5, TR 12116) (various locations throughout the City), to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 as Annexation 45 and setting the public hearing date for June 15, 1988. Also attached far Council consideration is a resolution giving preliminary approval of the Engineer's Report for the suh~att annexation. Letters Fran the developers requesting the subJ ect annexation are on file in the Engineering Division. Respe 1 ~ubmftted, '~ ~ Y>--~-'--~---~ RHM:J :sd f-~ Att p[hman rc ~6 RESOLUTION N0. 0 ~ ~~I~ A RESOLUT SON OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR ANNEXATION N0. 45 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1 wHEREAS, on May 18, 1988, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga directed the City Engineer to make and file with the Cfty Clerk of said City a report in writing as required by the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972; and NHEREAS, the City Engineer has made and filed with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as called for pursuant to said Act, which report has been presented to this Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, said City Council has duly considered said report and each and every part thereof, and finds that each and every part of said report is sufficient, and that said report, nor any part thereof, requires or should be modified in any respect. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: SECTION 1: That the Engineer's Estimate of the itemized costs and expenses o sa work and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, toot ained in said report be. and each of them era hnrnhv nrnlim;nar;fv approved and confirmed. ~ ' SECTION 2: That the diagram showing the Assessment District referred to and desert e n said report, the boundaries of the subdivisions of land within said Assessment District are hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 3: That the proposed assessment uDOn the subdivisions of land in sar ssessment District in proportion to the estimated benefit to be received by said subdivision, respectively, from said work and of the incidental expenses thereof, as contained in said report is hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 4: That said report shall stand as the City Engineer's uopnrr fpm- ..c 'l "'bs _ _ - .~• Doses ,, a. ~.. equert procxdincs. and Gui`5 udrlT in the proposed district. // r,I TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for Street lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Annexation No. 45 for Tract No. 13644, Parcel Map 9504, CUP 87-04 and DR 86-32 (Lot 5, TR 12176) SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is in compliance with the requirements of Rrticle 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. General Description This City Council has elected to annex all new developments into Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1. The City Council has determined that the street lights to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within said developments as well as on the lots directly abutting the street lights. Work to be provided for with the assessments established by the district are: The furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance. ooerati na and servicing of street light improvements on ma,lor streets (arterial and certain collector streets) as shown on the Lighting District Altos MaF which is on file with the City Engineer. Improvement maintenance is considered of general benefit to all areas in the District and cost shall be assessed on a per unit basis. SECTION 3. Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications for street lighting have been prepared by the developers. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Division. Reference is hereby made to the subject tract map or development plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the street lighting areas. The plans and specifications for street ligh}in ny~;;ant Cn the ndi"iduai de'lel OpTTi2~t ii hereby ~ndde d Gdrt of this report to the same extent as if said plans and specifics were attached hereto. Detailed maintenance activities on the street lighting district include: the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any Improvement, providing for the illuninatton of the subJect area. SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for street lighting improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on available data, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will be as indicated below. These costs are estimated only, actual assessments will be based on actual cost data. Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 has been demarcated into Lwu zones. Zone i is comprised of street light improvements on major streets for residential improvements (single family, multi-family, condominiums and apartments) throughout the City. Each dwelling unit in this zone will be assessed as one assessment unit for the operation of the District. Zone 2 is comprised of all industrial, commercial and institutional projects throughout the City. It has been determined that one acre of land in industrial, ca~mercial and institutional areas derives the same benefit as two assessment units in Zone 1. The estimated total cost for Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 is shown below: 1. S.C.E. Maintenance and Enerer Cost: amp Size* Lanps YTD No, of Lamps Annex No. 45 New Lamp Total bnuuL 46U 0 460 9500E 520 4 524 16, OOOL 16 0 16 22, OOOL 4 0 4 27,500E 17 0 11 *High Pressure Sodium Vapor Total Total Annual Lamp Size Lamps Rate Mo's Maint. Cost 5800E 460 X E 8.93 % 12 = E 49,293.60 9500E 524 % $10.16 X 12 = 63,886.08 16,000E 16 X E12.08 % 12 = 2,319.36 22. GOOi. a X Eta,na ,r, 12 664.32 2i, 500 i/ X 515.31 X 12 - 3,123.24 Total Annual Mai nt. Cost = E119,286.60 2. Total Assessment b'ni ts: YTD Assess Units before this annexation = 16,955 Assessment Units this annex per page 4 65 Total Assessment Units 17,020 3. Cost per Assessment Unit; Total Annual Maf ntenante Cost = E119 286.60 = 57.00/year/unit No. of Units in District ~6- Assessment shall apply to each lot or parcel as explained in Section 6. SECTION 5. Assessment Diagram Copies of the proposed Assessment Diagrams are attached to this report and labeled "Street Lighting Maintenance District No. I", Annexation No. 45. These diagrams are hereby incorporated within the text of this report. SECTICN 6. Assessment Improvements for the District are found to be of general benefit to all units within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each unit. When units are based on acreage, assessment will be 2 units per net acre. SECTION 7. Order of Events 1. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of City Engineer's Report. 2, City Council adapts Resolution of Intention to annex a District and sets public hearing date. 3, City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and determines to form a District or abandon the proceedings. 4. Every year in May, the City Engineer files a report with the City Council. 5. Every year in June, the City Council conducts a public hearing and approves, or modifies and approves the individual assessments. EXfIIBIT "A" Properties and improvements to be included within Annexation No. 45 to Street Lighting Maintenance Ci strict 1: Assess. No. of Lam s to be Annexed Dr rf e~ n.,:• - --- ~ ~_ ./L 1 ,WUL L .WUL C/. 7U L Zone 1 TR '_3644 --- 24 --- d --_ ___ ___ Zone 2 PM .9504 pcl 1 ,83 1,6 --- --- ___ ___ pcl 2 .48 .9 --- --- ___ ___ --- --- pcl 3 2,64 5.3 --- -__ ___ ___ pcl 4 .62 1.2 _-_ ___ ___ ___ --_ --- Dcl 5 2.38 4.8 ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ pcl 6 4.27 8.5 -__ ___ ___ --- --- pcl 1 ,91 1.8 --_ ___ __- _-- ___ pcl 8 1,02 2.0 --- ___ ___ --- --- pcl 9 .64 1,2 --- ___ ___ pcl 11 _87 1.7 _-_ 15.95 32,0 ___ _ _ (lights previously annexed) CUP 87-04 pcl 2 .60 1,2 _-_ ___ ___ --- -'- pc1 3 '.. 95 3.9 --- ___ ___ ___ ___ pcl 4 1_29 2,6 --- ___ ___ 3.84 7.7 _-_ ___ -- DR 86-32 (lot 5, ro iii /c1 r.n ~., -~.,~~ ..,a 1,2 ___ ___ ___ TOTAL 20.38 65.0 _-- 4 ___ ___ ___ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1 ANNEXATION NO. 95- ~_... _~- ~:__~_r.-_.:_.~~ -rT ~ ..,, ... .~~,_. .... b.. ~,,. ao z ~ ~, y? ~;_ _ , i 'a, .. e 6 R> ;~- ~' omc .C. ~~°° '' i ' ie. ~~y ~~ e i. ~ ~ ~~.W-'. ~ W~r-.-..._.,.' ~ ........~ ,,..~ ,, .9i ~, ~ .-.4w._.K~_.. - ~9 ~.~ u- a f---- 5 ~' ~ ~~ ._._.. z~ 'VSI`• '~_~. j ~~ -~ I_ zz ij-__ ~s. _. ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE BISTRICT N0.1 ANNEXATION NO. 4~ uP 87-04 I ~ {{""ppqq~~~ I ~,~~OI`~O 1 ~ r I 40~f0~ Y f~/ ~~ 1'3~'Irt. yA-sU~ X' ~~) hA.l~ HNl A r ~ !~() •.77 Y:YK HIGHLAND AVENUt %1 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0.1 ANNEXATION NO. 45 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. Z ANNEXATION NO. ~I S ~~ ,~4 ~`~ .?~e,~` TERRA VISTA VILLAGE v u=, w .+RI J~ '~ BASE LINE ROAD RESOLUTION N0. (J D ~` 5° A RESOLUTION OE THE C[TY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CU CNMONGR, CALIFORNIA DECLARING ITS YNTENTI011 TO ORDER THE ANNEXATION TO STREET LIGHTING M4INTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DESIGNAT [NG SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION N0. 45 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING RNO LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 ANO OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING 08JECT IONS THERETO NON, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, pursuant to the provisions of the landscaping and Lighting Act of 1912, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, as follows: SECTION 1. 6escri ption of Work: That the public interest and convenience require a~itis tt e n ention of this City Council to form a maintenance district in the City of Ranchu Cucamonga for the maintenance and operation of those street lights the boundaries of the proposed maintenance district described in Section 2 hereof. Said matntenan ce and operation includes the cost and supervision of any lfghting and related facilities in connection with said district. SECTION 2. Location of Work: The foregoing described work is to 6e located wit'~iin roadway rig t-o -way enuner ated in the report of the City Engineer and more particularly de<rr;hon rr m,~< ~ti.w. ~ ~ o+lc +- tFc office of the City Clerk, entitled "Annexation No. 45 toYStreet Lighting Maintenance District No. 1". SECTION 3. Descri tion of Assessment District: That the contemplate- ward-, in t e opinion o sai C ty Counci is of more than local or ordinary public benefit, and the said City Council hereby makes Lhe expense of the said work chargeable upon a district, which said district is assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and which district is described as follows: All that certain territory of the City of Rancho Cucamonga included within the ext ertor boundary lines shown upon that certain "Map of Annexation No. 45 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1" or, file ir. the office o. the C;ty Elerk of ..ups _ said City. SECTION 4. Re ort of En ineer: The City Council of said City 6y Resolution No.~`Fas approve a report of the engineer of work which report indicates the amount of the proposed assessment, the district boundary, assessment zones, titled "Engineer's Report, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1" is on file in the office of the City Clerk of safd City. Reference to said report is hereby made for all particulars for the amount and extent of the assessments and for the extent of the work. RESOLUTION PAGE 2 SECTION 5. Collection of gssessments: The assessment shall be collected ag ile same ime an in t e same manner as County taxes are collected. The Cfty Engineer shall file a reDOrt annually with the City Council of said City and said Caun cil will annually conduct a hearing upon said report at their first regular meeting in June, at which time assessments for the next fiscal year will be determined. ccrr rrw 5, ri;~ and Place of Hearin Hot ice is hereby given that on June 13-I?;89-at ie our o pm in a City Council Chambers at 9161 Base line, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, any and all persons having any objections to the work or extent of the assessment district, may appear and show cause why said work should not be done or carried out or why said district should not be formed in accordance with thfs Resolution of Intention. Protests must be in writing and must contain a description of the property in which each signer thereof is interested, sufficient to identify the same, and must be delivered to the City Clerk of said City prior to the time set for the hearing, and no other protests or objections will be considered. If the signer of any protest is not shown upon the last equalized assessment roll of San Bernardino County as the owner of the property described in the protests, then such protest must contain or be accompanied by written evidence that such signer is the owner of the property so described. SECTION 7. Lands ca in and L1 htin Act of 1912: All the work herein propose s all a one an carr a roug n pursuance of an act of the legislature of the State of California designated the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. SECTION 8. Publication of Resolution of Intention: Published notice shalt be ma~rsuant to ec on a overnment ode. The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published 10 days before the date set for the hearing, at least once in The Dail Re ort, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontar o, a ornia, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. ~o~ C[TY OF RANCHO CliCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 TD: City Council and City Manager ~~~CCCJJJ FRDM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer RV; .J I~Ay 4rnc4a, .in. Gr g:mm~ing AiAo SUBJECT: Approval to Annex CUP 87-04 and DR 96-32 (lot 5, TR 12176) (Commercial/Industrial) to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 as Annexation No. 20 and setting the date of public I hearing for June 15, 1988 ~, RECDR1FJ1011TIQ1 It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolutions approving the Engineer's Report for Annexation No. 20 and setting the date of public hearing regarding the City's intention to annex the above described project to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3. Analysis/Background Attached for City Council approval is a resolution declaring the City's intent to annex CUP 81-04 and DR 86-32 (lot 5, TR 12116) I I•..~n--t.l/~-J.~~t..t-1\ a 1 J Y e a n: ~~..+~• .~. '~ r~. .. ~ ~ ~ u~... 1 VI Annexation No. 20 and setting the public hearing date for June 15, 1988. Also attached for Council consideration is a resolution giving preliminary approval of the Engineer's Report for the subject annexation. A letter from the developer requesting the subject annexation is on file fn the Engineering Division. Respect ~ii~ mi tied, ~. ~ ~ RHM:J Attachments /D~ RESOLUTION N0. 8 g '3 /~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVRL OF CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR ANNEXATION N0. 20 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE OISTRI CT N0. 3 WHEREAS, on May 18, 1988_ the Citv Council of the City of Ran rhn Cucamonga directed the City Engineer to make and file with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as required by the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has made and filed with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as called for pursuant to said Act, which report has been presented to this Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, said City Council has duly considered said report and each and every part thereof, and finds that each and every part of said report is sufficient, and that said report, nor any part thereof, requires or should be modified in any respect. NON, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: SECTION i; That the "engineer's Estimate of the itemized costs and expenses o~sar'~work and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in said report be, and each of them are hereby, preliminarily r,.~o.~ ~„a ~,..,s:.,~on SECTIOR 2: That the diagram showing the Rssessment District referred to and descr-din said report, the boundaries of the subdivisions of land within said Assessment District are hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 3: That the proposed assessment upon the subdivisions of land in saw Ad ssessment District in proportion to the estimated benefit to be received by said subdivision, respectively, from said work and of the incidental expenses thereof, as contained in said report 1s hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 4: That said report shall stand as the City Engineer's Report for t-imposes of all subsequent proceedings, and pursuant to the ur-u ui~ied iii vir i[r. / ~~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 Annexation No. 20 for CUP 81-04 and DR 86-32 (lot 5, TR 12176) :ECTI D!: 1. Authority for Reoort This report is in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. General Description This City Council has elected to annex all new developments into Landscape Maintenance District No. 3. The City Council has determined the areas to be maintained will have an effect upon all the developments as mentioned shove. All landscaped areas to be maintained in the annexed developments are shown on the recorded Map as roadway right-of-way or easements to be granted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. SECTION 3, Plans and Specifications The plans and landscaping are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Division. Reference is hereby made to the subject development plan and the assessment u idyl au iw Lilc cna,.1. iul.a i.l ufl ul 1.Ile lallupl.o peu ar'fap. Ille pIU110 Ullu specifications for landscaped improvement on the individual development is hereby made apart of this report to the same extent as if said plans and s pecif icatians were attached hereto. SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred by the District for parkway and median improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers and or/by the City. Based on historical data, contract analysis and developed work standards, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will equal thirty (5.30) cents per square foot per year. These costs are estimated only, actual assessment will be based on actual cost data. landscape Maintenance Di;tri ct No. 3 has been demarcated into two zones. Zone I ..d n.......i u.., oono ,.~ n _ e n " '^°prl$ ^f ~c rluy ~ +a, C'npi i"cu 'f u ydr Cej i, tvtdijilg u,u57 square„feet.~~The district was formed in October 5, 1983, for the maintenance of landscaping a detention basin and storm drain within the project. This zone will be assessed on per lot basis for the maintenance costs within the pro,]ect boundary only as stipulated in the Engineer's Report for the formation of the District. I I Zane 'c is comprised of all other projects that are being annexed or will b2 annexed to this District. All lots or parcels within Zone 2 will be assessed on net acre basis for the maintenance of landscaped median islands on Haven Avenue from 4th Street to Deer Creek Channel, Foothill boulevard and 4th Street fram west to east City limit, Milliken Avenue and Rochester Avenue, from 4th Street to Foothill Sou levard, 6th Street from Haven Avenue to Rochester Avenue and median islands on other major divided highways and some parkways within the Industrial Specific Pian Area and Foothill Boulevard overlay area. The estimated cost for Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 including Annexati or. No. 20 is as follows. Zone 1 Existing District Total estimated maintenance cost E2,070 Assessment units 8 Total cost - assessment unit for year and month E~010_ E258. 75/year or E21.56/mo./lot Zone 2 Existing Annexation New District No. 20 Total Talai coi.imoleu mmuai maintenance area - Sq. Ft. 0 0 0 Assessment units, acres 380,634.5 4.43 380,639 Total cost r assessment unit for year and month 0 x E.30 -38b,3b~S EO/year 0/mo./acre Assessment shall apply to each lot as enumerated in Section 6 and the attached assessment diagram. SECTION 5. Assessment Diagram A copy of the Groposed assessment diagram is attached to this report and ' "r ~ A" ~~ chit 'i efei eiiie the didyr am is hereby incorporated within~the~text of this report. SECTION 6. Assessment Improvements for the District are found to be of general benefit to all lots within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each parcel for Zore 1 and shall be equal to the next acreage for each lot or parcel in Zone 2. The City Council will hold a public hearing in June, to determine the actual assessments based upon the actual costs incurred by the City during the previous fiscal year which are to 6e recovered through assessments as required by the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. SECTION 7. Order of Events 1. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of City Engineer's RapcN. 2. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to Annex to District and sets public hearing date. 3. City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and determines to Annex to the District or abandon the proceedings. 4. Every year in May, the City Engineer files a report with the City Council. 5. Every year in June, the City Council conducts a public hearing and approves, or modifies and approves the individual assessments. ~~2 Properties and improvements to be included Hithin Annexation No. 20 (Zone 2) to Landscape Maintenance District Na. 3: PROPERTIES PROJECT ACREAGE rpo aj_ru (pcls 2, 3 & 4 of PM 5803) pcl 2 .60 pcl 3 1.95 pcl 4 1.29 3.84 DR 8b-32 (lot 5, TR 12116) .59 TOTAL 4.43 IMPROVEMENT gREAS TO 8E ANNEXED IN ANNEXATION N0. 1 A~~o Sq. F~t• Haven Avenue 0 Foothill Boulevard 0 Milliken Avenue 0 4th Street 0 Rochester Avenue 0 6th Street 0 1 ~ `~ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT Nq. ANNEXATION N0. 87-04 ~ I `I i .....{ k ., ~,~ ®' ~~. 1 ~,~ ~~~ r,.su. u• ~ m •.n uc.rn ~r ~.~.,,~ ~``~`^ CITY OF RANCHO CUCA,~IOINCA ~r` 3r ~ '~ _j ,~ ENC;INEERING DIVISION A T u~ 6n VICINITY MAP Il\~11 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. j ANNEXATION NO. 10 "~ t'D`^ CITY OF RANCHO CUCA,~IONCA ^ s,~' i 3i ,, ., *~aWv~,-~u,`~c. iz ENGINEERING DIVISION w T ~~.. ~~' VICINITY MAP 1\~II RESOLUTION N0. gp ~~U A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEXATION TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 3, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION N0. 20 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 3; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1912 An0 OFFERING A TIRE AnD Pi.AC'c FO"n HEARING "uo,icCTi DtiS THERETO NON, THEREFORE 8E IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, as follows: SECTION 1. Description of Nork: That the public interest and convenience requ re and~is eth~nEentf-on of this City Council to forni a maintenance district in the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the maintenance and operation of those parkways and faciliites thereon dedicated for common greenbelt purposes by deed or recorded subdivision tract map within the boundaries of the proposed maintenance district described in Section 2 hereof. Said maintenance and operation includes the cast and supervision of any sprinkler system, trees, grass, plantings, landscaping, ornamental tight ing, structures, and walls in connection with said parkways. SECTION 2. Locatlo~of Nork: The foregoing described work is to be 7v~uLcd ~~~n~n ~oaunny riyn ~-ur-eay gnu iantis capiny easanencs or Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 enumerated in the report of the City Engineer and more particutariy described on maps which are on file in the office of the City Clerk, entitled "Annexation No. 20 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3", SECTION 3. Descri tion of Assessment District: That the contemplate~woTin the opinior~sa~i - ty ounc-is of-more than local or ordinary public benefit, and the said City Councii hereby makes the expense of the said work chargeable upon a district, which said district is assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and which district is described as follows: All that certain territory of the City of Rancho Cucamonga included within the exterior boundary .,._ . -upon that cert aiii "Map of A~i,iexation No. 20 ~~ to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3" heretofore approved by the City Council of said City by Resolution No. *, indicating by sa1A boundary lines the extent of the territory included within the proposed assessment district and which map is an file in the office of the City Clerk of said City. SECTION 4. Re ort of En ineer: The City Council of said City by Resolution Naas approve t e repor of the engineer of work which report indicates the amount of the proposed assessment, the district boundary, assessment zones, titled "Engineer's Report, Annexation No. 20, Landscape Maintenance District No. 3" is on file in the office of the City Clerk of said City. Reference to said report is hereby made for all particulars for the amount and extent of the assessments and for the extent of the work. SECTION 5. Collection of Assessments: The assessment shall be -' -Ct eu~i~ >o'n2 inic dna iii t e SamE diai~ri0r a] %UUnty tdxei dre collected. The City Engineer shall file a report annually with the City Council of said City and said Council will annually conduct a hearing upon said report at their first regular meeting in June, at which time assessments for the next fiscal year will be determined. SECTION 6. Time and Place of Hearin Notice is hereby given that on June 13~J8$,-at t e our o n t.e City Council Cham4ers at 9161 Base Line, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, any and all persons having any objections to the work or extent of the assessment district, may appear and show cause why said work should rrot be done or carried out or why said district should not be formed in accordance with this Resolution of Intention, Protests must be in writing and must contain a description of the property in which each signer thereof is interested, sufficient to identify the same, and must be delivered to the City Clerk of said City prior to the time set for the hearing, and no other protests or objections will be considered. If the signer of any protest is not shown upon the last equalized assessment roll of San Bernardino County as the owner of the property described in the protests, then such protest must contain or be accompanied by written evidence that such signer is the owner of the property so described. SECTION 7. Landscaping and L~i ghtin Act of 1972: All the work herein propose -shall be done and carr~d t~ n pursuance of an act of the legislature of the State of California designated the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. SECTION 8. Publication of Resolution of Intention: Published entice shall be maw pursuan o ec on a overnmen Code. The Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the City Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published 10 days before the date set for the hearing, at least once in The Dati Re ort, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of n ar o, a ornia, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. I ----- C[TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 TD: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer ~~. Judy nCe it a, J~. Eiig iiicci iiiy A-i u'C SUBJECT: Approval to Annex CUP 87-04 and DR 86-32 (lot 5, TR 12176) (COmnercial/Industrial) to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 as Rnnexat ion No. 16 and setting Lhe date of public hearing for June 15, 1988 RECO!lffNDNTI011 It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolutions approving the Engineer's Report for Annexation No. 16 and setting the date of public hearing regarding the City's intention to annex the above described project to Street Lighting Maintenance District Mo. 6. Analysis/Background Attached for City Council approval is a resolution declarfng the City's intent to annex CUP 87-04 and DR 86-32 (tot 5, TR 12176) Cuunier~iaii inuus Lriaij iv S~reei ~iyncing maintenance uiscricc No, o as Annexation I6 and setting the public hearing date for June 15, 1988. Also attached for Council consf deration is a resolution giving preliminary approval of the Engineer's Report for the subject annexation. A letter from the developer requesting the suh ject annexation is on file in the Engineering Division. Respe p submitted, "~~~,_ `1~HM: Attachments 0 RESOLUTION N0. ~ D ~ 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVRL OF CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR ANNEXATION N0. 16 TO STkEET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE OISTRI CT N0. 6 WHEREAS, r,., to 143E, th£ C"° Council ^f the C",. ^f Par eha Cucamonga directed the City~Engi neer to make and file with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as required by the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1912; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has made and filed with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as called for pursuant to said Act, which report has been presented to this Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, said Cfty Council has duly considered said report and each and every part thereof, and finds that each and every part of said report is sufficient, anJ that said report, nor any part thereof, requires or should be modified in any respect. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: SECTION 1: That the Engineer's Estimate of the Itemized costs and expenses o sa work and of the incidental expenses in connection therewith, contained in said report be, and each of them are hereby, preliminarily uy y~i ~rw uirv wiu ii uc u. SECTION 2: That the diagram showing the Assessment District referred to and descri6e~n said report, the boundaries of the subdivisions of land within said Assessment District are hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed, SECTION 3: That the proposed assessment upon the subdivisions of land in sar ssessment District in proportion to the estimated benefit to be received by said subdivision, respectively, from said work and of the inti dent al expenses thereof, as contained in said report is hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 4: That said report shall stand as the City Engineer's Report for t purposes of all subsequent proceedings, and pursuant to the oa ~:...:,.. props.,......, a.r ..... 1 1 1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 Annexation No. 16 for CUP 87-04 and DR 86-32 (lot 5, TR 12176) crrrr n,N t, A;;r hcrity for Peoor*. This report is in compliance with the requirements of Art icie 4, Chapter 1, D~I vision 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 19721. SECTION 2. General Description This City Council has elected to annex all new developments into Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6. The City Council has determined that the street lights to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within said developments as well as on the lots directly abutting the street lights. Work to be provided for with the assessments established by the district are: The furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operating and servicing of street light improvements on local streets as shown on the Lighting - ~ ci, niiaa i;ay wiii~ii is wi i lie wiin iiie i,i iy uiy ineer. Improvement matnten ante is considered of general benefit to all areas in the District and cost shall be assessed on a per unit basis. SECTION 3. Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications for street lighting have been prepared by the developers. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Division. Reference is hereby made to the sub,}ect tract map or development plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the street lighting areas. The plans and specifications for street lighting improvement on the individual development is hereby made apart of this report to the same extent as if said plans and specifics were a<r anon ee. e~,. Detailed maintenance activities on the street lighting district include: the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement, provlding for the illunfnatton of the subject area. I~~ SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for street lighting improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on available data, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will be as indicated below. These costs are estimated only, actual assessments will be based on actual cost data. Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 is comprised of all industria i, commerciai and institutional projects throuahoui the Ciiy. It has been determined that one acre of land in industrial, commercial and institutional areas derives the same benefit as two assessment units in residential zones. The estimated total cost for Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 is shown below: 1. S.C.E. Maintenance and Energy Cost: No. of Lamps Lamps Annez New Lamp Lamp Size* YTO Na. 16 Total 5800E 47 --- 47 9500E 2 3 5 *Nigh Pressure Sodium Vapor l otal Lamp Size Lamps Rate 5800E 47 X E 8.93 9500E 5 X E10.16 total Annual Mo's Mai nt. Cost % 12 = $5,036.52 X 12 = 609.60 Total Annual Maint. Cost 55,646.12 2. Total Assessment Units: YTO Assess Uriits before this annexation 444.5 Assessment Units this annex per page 4 8.9 Total Assessment Uni is 453,0 3. Cost per Assessment Unit: Total Annual Maintenance Cost f5 6~ = 512.46/year/unit No. o n s n s r c Assessment shall apply to each lot or parcel as explained fn Section 6. `zl SECTION 5. Assessment Diagram Copies of the proposed Assessment Ciagrams are attached to this report and labeled "Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6", Annexation No. 16. These diagrams are hereby incorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6. Assessment Improvements for the District are found to be of general benefit to all units within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each unit. When units are based on acreage, assessment will be 2 units per net acre. SECTION 7. Order of Events 1. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of City Engineer's Report. 2. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to annex a District and sets public hearing date. 3. City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and determines to form a District or abandon the proceedings. 4. Every year in May, the City Engineer files a repert with the City Council. 5. Everv vear in June. the City Council conducts a public hearing and approves, or modifies and approves the individual assessments. i~a EXHIBIT "A" Properties and Improvements to be included within Annexation No. 16 to Street Lighting Maintenance District 6: Assess. No. of LamDS to be Annexed o ~n;c~f e~.o,,.o 'PI~~7F- S~frti~6RiRir-~~X7P1TTll -YSifr 7TL'lS7f[ CUP 87.•04 pcl 2 ,60 1.2 --- --- --- --- --- pcl 3 1,95 3.9 --- --- --- --- --- pcl 4 1.29 2.6 --- --- --- --- --- 3.84 7.7 --- --- --- --- --- DR 86-32 (lot 5, TR 12176) .59 1.2 TOTAL 4.43 8.9 3 --- 3 ~ ~3 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIC,HTINQ MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. (o ANNEXATION NO. /(o e~-o4 I i - + II I S,~i`~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCA1tON(}A .~~' COUNTY OF 8AN HBRNARDINO 3TAT$ OF CALIQ+ORNIA ~ ~ T a~ ~ 1~I Im ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. (o ANNEXATION NO. /(~ ~,si`~~;^ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAYONOA ~ -3 ;~~~ COUNTY OF SAN BSRNARDINO y; `"~' ~ BTATS OF CALII~ORNIA --~,- - N RESOLUTION N0. (~ g - ~~~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CU CAMONGA, CALIFORNIA DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNEXATION TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 6, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID ANNEXATION AS ANNEXATION N0. 16 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 6; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND OFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING UBJECT IONS THERETO NOM, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, as follows: SECTION 1. Description of Work: That the public interest and convenience require an tt is t e n ention of this City Council to form a maintenance district in the City of Rancho Cucamonga far the maintenance and operation of those street lights the boundaries of the proposed maintenance district described in Section 2 hereof. Said maintenance and operation includes the cost and supervision of any lighting and related facilities in connection with said district. SECT iON 2. Location of 'dark; The foregoin^y described wcrk is to be located dt'~Fitn roadway r g -o -way enumerated in the report of the City Engineer and more particularly described on maps which are on file in the nff iro of thn rite flar4 entitlad "A.nnexatinn No. 16 to Street Liahtino Maintenance District No. 6". SECTION 3. Des cri tion of Assessment District: That the contemplated~~ in t e optn ono sai Ctty Counct is of more than local or ordinary public benefit, and the said City Council 'hereby makes the expense of the said work chargeao le upon a district, which said district is assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and which district is described as follows: All that certain territory of the City of Rancho Cucamonga included within the exterior boundary lines shown upon that certain "Map of Annexation No. 16 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No, 6" maps is on file in the office of the City Clerk of said City. SECTION 4. Report of Engineer: The City Council of said City by Resolution No. ~ Fas approves L~report of the engineer of work which report indicates the mnount of the proposed assessment, the district boundary, assessment tones, titled "Engineer's Report, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6" is on file in the office of the City Clerk of said City. Reference to said reDOrt is hereby made for all particulars for the amount and extent of the assessments and for the extent of the work. I ~~ RESOLUTION PAGE 2 SECTION 5. Collection of Assessments: The assessment shall be collecte ad t CFe smne time an in t e same manner as County taxes are collected. The City Engineer shall file a report annually with Lhe City Council of said City and said Council will annuaily conduct a hearing upon said report at their first regular meeting in June, at which time assessments for the next ffscal year will be determined, SECTION 6. Time and Place of Hearing: Notice is hereby given that on June 15, T48~at a n~~r c. ?~T r ;;, tie C i Ey Counci 1 Chambers at 9161 base Line, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, any and all persons having any objections to the work or extent of the assessment district, may appear and show cause why said work should not 6e done or carried out or why Said district should not 6e formed in accordance with this Resoiution of Intention. Protests must be in writing and must contain a description of the property in which each signer thereof is interested, sufficient to identify the same, and must be delivered to the City Clerk of said City prior to the time set for the hearing, and no other protests or objections will 6e considered. If the signer of any protest is rat shown upon the last equalized assessment roll of San Bernardino County as the owner of the property described in the protests, then such protest must contain or be accompanied by written evidence that such signer is the owner of the property so described. SECTION 7. Landscapin and_Lighting_Act of 1972: All the work herein propose s all~e done and Carr a roug n pursuance of an act of the legislature of the State of California designated the Lands capi rg and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. SECTION B. vun i+~.r{_.; _f ~~,;,l ui.iun of incentton: Published notice sha11 be ma ed pursuant to ect an~ o e overnment ode. the Mayor shall sign this Resolution and the Citv Clerk shall attest to the same, and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published 10 days before the date set for the hearing, at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of On ar o, a i ornia, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. \~ -- - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May I8, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager I FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer BY: Jady Acosta, Jr. Engineering Aide ~~ i SOBJECT: Approval to Annex Parcel Map 9504, located at the northeast ~ corner of Haven Avenue and Base Line Road, to Street Lighting Mai nt enante District No. 4 as Annexation No. 8 and '~I setting the date of public hearing for June 15, 1988 RECgMEMDATION It is recommended that City Council adapt the attached resolutions approving the Engineer's Report for Annexation No. 8 and setting the date of public hearing regarding the City's intention to annex the above described parcel map to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4. Analysis/Background Attached for City Council approval is a resolution declaring the City's rncenc co annex rarcei nap Y7V4, iocacea ac cne norcneasc corner or raven Avenue and Base Line Road, to Street Lighting Maintenance District no. 4 as Annexation 9 and setting the public hearing date for June 15, 1488. Also attached for Council consideration is a resolution giving preliminary approval of the Engineer's Report for the subject annexation. A letter from the developer requesting the subject annexation is on file in the Engineering Division. Respect submitted, ' / RHM:J Attachments ia~ RESOLUTION N0. ~~ -,3~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOF2N IA, OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR ANNEXATION N0. 8 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 4 WHEREAS, on May 18, 1988, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga directed the City Engineer to make and file with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as required by the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has made and filed with the City Clerk of said City a report in writing as called for pursuant to said Act, which report has been presented to this Council for consideration; and WHEREAS, said City Council has duly considered said report and each and every part thereof, and finds that each and every part of said report is sufficient, and that said report, nor any part thereof, requires or should be modified in any respect. NOW, THEREFORE NE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: SECTION 1; That the Engineer's Estimate of the itemized costs and expenses obi work and of the inct dent al expenses in connection therewith, nnn, •t nnA t.. ...SJ ...... ~.~~ l J L ~~ •L ~~.. ~~.. ~...r_. ., , ii.. w.... o~ .n..m w c nci wJ, y~ v i unnml I I) approved and confirmed. SECTION 2: That the diagram showing the Assessment District referred to and descriTie~in said report, the boundaries of the subdivisions of land within said Assessment District are hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 3; That the proposed assessment upon the subdivisions of land in sated Assessment District in proportion to the estimated benefit to be received by said subdivision, respectively, from said work and of the incidental expenses thereof, as contained in said report is hereby preliminarily approved and confirmed. SECTION 4; That said report shall stand as the City Engineer's Vpnn n! inn ftip n ni ell •.I.n nn..n nL n .. Jt .. J y::rpni+..+ ~, u ~ ~ auvac YU n yi ubccu I Ilya, GIN pUf iU arll tU the proposedVdistrict. ' ` 11 - I ~ I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4 Annexation No. B for Parcel Map 9504 SECTION 1. Authority for Reoort This report is in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972), SECTION 2. General Description This City Council has elected to annex all new developments into Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4. The City Council has determined that the street lights to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within said developments as well as on the lots directly abutting the street lights. Work to be provided for with the assessments established by the district are; The furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operating and servicing of street light improvements on local streets as shown on the Lighting District Altos Map which is on file with the City Engineer. Improvement maintenance is considered of general benefit to all areas in the District and cost shall 6e assessed on a per unit basis. SECTION 3. Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications for street lighting have been prepared by the developers. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Division. Reference is hereby made to the subject tract map or development plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the street lighting areas. The plans and specifications for street light'ng im„prnyamunf nn tho inA7Ytd~ai AnYel~~ent 15 hereby °ade a part of this report to the same extent as if said plans and specifirations were attached hereto. Detailed maintenance activities on the street lighting district include: the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement, providing for the illumination of the subject area. 130 SEf.T ION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for street lighting improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on available data, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will be as indicated below. These costs are estimated only, actual assessments will be based on actual cost data. Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4 is comprised of street light improvements on local sheets for ail residential and non- residential projects throughout the Terra Yista Vista Planned Community. The estimated total cost for Lighting Maintenance District No. 4 is shown below: 1. S.C.E. Maintenance and Energy Cost: No. of Lamps Lamps Annex New Lamp Lamp Si ze* YTD No. 8 Total 5800E 394 0 394 9500E 88 0 88 16,000E 5 0 5 22, OOOL 1 0 1 27 500! 2 0 2 *Hi gh Pressure Sodium Vapor Total Total Annual Lamp Size Lamps Rate Mo's Maint. Cost 5800E 394 % E 8.93 % 12 E42,221.04 9500E 88 % E10. 16 % 12 = 10,728.96 16, OOOL 5 X E12. 08 X 12 724.90 22,000E 1 % E13.84 X 12 = 166.08 27,500 2 X E15.31 % 12 367.44 Total Annual Maint. Cost E54,208.32 2. Total Assessment Units: YTD Assess Units before this annexation = 1,100 Assessment Units thfs an nex per page 4 32 Total Assessment Uni ts 1,732 3. Cost per Assessment Unit; Total Annual Maintenance Cost = E54~.32 E31.30/year/unit No. o n sin s r c , Assessment shall apply to each lot or parcel as explained in Section 6. 13i SECTION 5. Assessment Diagram Copies of the proposed Assessment Diagr ems are attached to this report and labeled "Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4", Annexation No. 8. These 6iagrams are hereby incorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6. Assessment n ay ..oa rm va:e^a° f^ t!~ Dist^ ^t ,., .. f^ ^d t^ be ^f ec:f: ben all properties (residential a.id~non-residential) within the District~inV accordance with the following relationship: Single family residential projects: 1 Dwelling Unit = 1 Assess. Unit Multi-family residential projects: 1 Dwelling Unit ~ .OS Assess. Unit Non-residential projects: 1.0 acre = 2.0 Assess. Units SECTION 7. Order of Events 1. City Council adopts Resolution of Prelfminary Approval of City Engineer's Report. 2. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to annex a District and sets pu611c hearing date. 3. City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and determines to form a District or abandon the proceedings. +. crny year in viay, iiie vi iy oiyi neer hies a reparc wi cn the Lliy Councii. 5. Every year in June, the City Council conducts a public hearing and approves, or modifies and approves the individual assessments. l `32 EXHIBIT "A" Properties and improvements to be included within Annexation No. 8 to Street Lighting Maintenance District 4: Assess. No. of LaZmp's to be Annexed Vrn icrf ar ~L~~h [av~ ~.[iw~~ lU~WVL LL~UUOL L/~JI~U'!L pM 9504 pcl 1 .83 1,6 --- --- --- --- --- pcl 2 ,48 .9 --- --- --- --- --- pcl 3 2.64 5,3 --- --- --- --- --- pcl 4 .E2 1.2 --- --- --- --- -__ pcl 5 2.38 4.8 --- --- --- --- --- pci 6 4.27 8.5 --- --- --- --- --- pcl 7 .91 1,8 --- --- --- --- --- pcl 8 1.02 2.0 --- --- --- --- --- pcl 9 .64 1.2 --- --- --- --- --- pcl 10 .48 1.0 --- --- --- --- --- pcl 11 .87 1.1 --' °- --- --- --- TOTAL 15.95 32,6 --- --- --- --- --- (Note: Street lights for this project were previous lY annexed to the District per Annexation No. 28.) ~~3 ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGFITING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0.4 ANNEXATION NO. 8 0 . l: {1~ ~. {~ 4 ^Wy /~~4` F TERRA VISTA VILLAGE ',, ~.~~_ ,~ BASE LINE ROAD a U ~ ~ S 000 LJmenS W LL. ..~ ~ ~-lb,oao l~neny ~a . i •, S, ~ ~,. i ~ ~ iwG:1~ L =: Y~ > Im CITY OB RANCHO CUCAI[ON(iA ` COUNTY OF SAN BBRNAADINO ,/~` 3fATE aF CALIFORNIA _ ~T ^ RESGL UTION N0. Q 0 ~ ~ ~ a A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CIl'Y OF RANCHO CU CAMONGA, CALIFORNIA DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE ANNE %ATION TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 4, AN ASSESSMENT DISTRICT: DESIGNATING SAID ANNE%ATION AS ANNEifATION N0. 8 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 4; PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND pFFERING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OBJECTIONS THERETO NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, being Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, as follows: SECTION 1. Description of Work: That the public interest and convenience require an lt3'is t~intenY?cam of this City Council to form a maintenance district in the City of Rancho Cucamonga for the maintenance and operation of those street lights the boundaries of the proposed maintenance district described in Section 2 hereof. Said maintenance and operation includes the cost and supervision of any lighting and related facilities in connection with said district. SECTION 2. Location of Work: The foregoing described work is to be located wl'~fh~ln roadway rigs-way enumerated in the report of the City FnnlnPPr anA mnra narf inil~r ly duerrlhed n .~h:,.~, _ - - office of the City Clerk, entitled "Annexation~N O. 8 toyStreet`Lt ghting`~ Maintenance District No. 4". SECTION 3, Des cri tion of Assessment District: That the contemplated work, in t e open ono sal lty ounce is of more than local or ordinary public benefit, and the said City Council hereby makes the expense of the said work chargeable upon a district, which said district is assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and which district is described as follows: All that certain territory of the City of Rancho Cucamonga included within the exterior boundary lines shown upon that certain "Map of Annexation No. 8 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4" id us i5 i,n fiie in the nff iro of rho r~r ty Clerk of said City. SECTION 4. Report of Engineer; The City Council of said City 6y Resolution N- o. ~ Tias appr~-{ e~i re Port of the engineer of work which report indicates the amount of the proposed assessment, the district boundary, assessment zones, titled "Engineer's Report, Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4" is on file in the office of the City Clerk of said City. Reference to said report is hereby made for all particulars for the amount and extent of the assessments and for the extent of the work. 3~ RESOLUTION PAGE 2 SECTION 5, Collection of Assessments: The assessment shall be collecte ad t t>e ame time an in t e same manner as County taxes are collected, The City Engineer shall file a report annually with the City Council of said City and said Council will annually conduct a hearing upon said report at their first regular meeting in June, at which time assessments for the next fiscal year will be determined. SECTION 6. Time and Place of Hearin4: Notice is hereby given that on June 13, ~St768,-at the our o pm n e City Council Chambers at 91 Gi Base Line, in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. any and ail persons having any objections to the work nr exta;,t of the assessment district, may aDPear and s hnw cause why said work should not he done or carried out or why said district should not be formed in accordance with this Resolution of Intention. Protests must be in writing and must contain a description of the property in which each signer thereof is interested, sufficient to identify the same, and must be delivered to the City Clerk of said City prior to the time set for the hearing, and no other protests or objections will 6e considered. If the signer of any protest is not shown upon the last egual ized assessment roll of San Bernardino County as the owner of the property described in the protests, then such protest must contain or be accompanied by written evidence that such signer is the owner of the property so described. SECTION 7. Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972; All the work herein propose s all done an cattle t roug m pursuance of an act of the legislature of the State of California designated the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1472, being Division 15 of the Streets and 4ighways Code of the State of California. SECTION 8. Publication of Resolution of Intention; Puhli;!;.d in,c~ce shall be ma--de pursuant to ection n ,,,,. er•nment Eode. The Mayor shall sign this Recni~„~t iJG wiu one City Clerkshall attest to the same, and !".c City clerk shall cause the smne to be published 10 days before the date set for the he arin9, at least once in The Dail Re ort, a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of On ario, a i ornia, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. 1f ORDINANCE N0. 345 AN ORDINANCd OF TNB CITY COUNCIL OP THB CITY OP RANCRO CJ(MMONGA, CALIR)RNIA, APPROVING pHpELOI?D;NT WDB AMENDN.BhT N0. 88-03, AI£NDING SECTION 17,08.040 PERTAINING TO DEVHLOPI~NT STANDARDS IbR THE LUN-t6DIUM RES IDBNTL4L DISTRICT WHEREAS, on the Y3 th day of April. 1988, the Planning Comaiesion held a duly advertised publ is heating pursuant to Section 65864 of the California Goverment Code and rernmnended to the City Council adoption of Develo}aent Code Amendment No. 88-03; and WHERHAS, on the 4th day of Maq, 1968, the City (buncil held a duly edverti wed public hearing purauent to Section 65864 of the Cal ifornie Goverment Code to consider Developaent Code Aaendaent No. 68-03. SECTION 1: Title' I7 of the Rancho Cucaaonga Municipal Code is hereby eaended by adding Table 17.08.040-H and Table 17.08.040-C ae attached hereto and incorporated by reference. SECTION 2; Title 17 of the Rancho Cucaaanga Municipal Oode is hereby emended 6y adding Table 17,08.n4n-CS and Tahla 17.C8.C40-C2 es attached hereto end incorporated 6P reference. SECTION 3; Thie Council hereby finds and r.rrl aa.. ..... _ __-: _.. t_ ,...,~..... i~na peen rev aeaed in compl ience with the Cal ifornie Emi.romentel Quality Act of 1970 end hereby concurs with the Negative De cl oration po aced with ceepe ct to the ptoj act. SECTION 4: The provieione of this Ordinance No. 345 shall not apply t.o those reaidenti al subdiv ieione Therein a Tents rive Nap hoe been approved prior to the effective date of this Ordinance: provided no material amendments or ezteneionn nre made to each prey iouely approved Tentative Mapa. For the purpo ee of cal cal sting those provieione which ere the aubj act of this Ordimnce, those atendarde effective ae at the tine of approval of such Tents rive Napa shall apply. SECTION 5: The Negot shell sign thin Ordimnce and the Citq Clerk shell cause the same to be publ iebed with In fif ceen (IS) days after iu paapge at least once in The Daily Resort, a nyape,:.r cf eQi2 raY ci PCni arinn pni`3l ahem 't ..,.- City of Ontario, Cal ifornie, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. I Ordinance No. 345 Page 3 The following tables supplement those etande rde set forth in the prev ioue tables, £or development of eLow-Medium Residential product. TAELE 17.08.040-C1 LOA-t~DIUM ENTER PLOT PROIU Cf OPTIONAL DEYP.LOP!ffiNT STANDARDS Minimum Net Average 5,500 Minimum Net 5,000 Lot Dimeneione: Minimum Nidth SC (at required front setback) Setbscke: Front Yard Average 25 Front Yerd F7lnimt® 20 Interior Side Yard 5/30 Reat Yard 15 Projects may al eo be filed under the Lao-Meditm Innovative Product Optional Dweloyment Stendarda provided they meet the follao ing objectives for innovation: 1. Provide high design quality throughout the project; and 2, Provide creative design solutions which eddrees the critical conce me of neighborhood compatibility, denei ty tran ei tion, end design quel ity; and 3. Promote an attractive etreetecepe end diecourege monoionou6 arrears dom ins tad by aephal t/concrete, garages, end care; and +. Greece veil-de ei gned space, perticul arly uea ble yard apace. ~~ Ordinance No. 345 Page 4 TABLE 17.08.040-C2 LOW-M80IUM INNOVAT198 PRODU Cf OPPIONAL DEVBLOPMeNT STANDARDS Lot Area: Minimum Net Average 4,000 Minimw Net 3,500 Lot Dimenaione: Minim:m Width 45 (at required front set back) Setbacks: Pront Yerd Ninlstm 20 Interior Side Yard 0/30 Rest Yerd 35 ~~ Ordinance No. 3h5 Page 5 B. Basic Deveiobment Standards. The following table, TetJie 15.08.040-8 sets forth mtntmum development standards for resJdential develoom ant projec[s filed up to C;e mid-point of the penmi[ted density range. TRBLE 17.08.00-8 BASIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS N'fl :wet ReRwee0) VL 4 LN t NH lut Am: ., -.- rr _. r,iY i.;u) r4M v 4 N/E ear R(D°~Wn{UmY' ~ m L]'- VPN Wb .>'= aPb ne c:a:: ~ R N o tl .. n YWmum D°eWK I'NI Sii~ . se,,•'if ::• ~.~i. I~OMaRr IN l.~ I.C!l.lfl! ;ct Dimeroiom: .. - r'a.t. Wes. i0evQ. N '. 3 YiR - .-. ,ava. .., m! s3 rvv s ... ... '• r! iu n .-.-:e:~- iJ 3Y iJ fY vR 9tR - - r•s:: !0 iv N v i Rla ......i. lflr~. ::a.;. Haq. r d n/R ... ., raq is •r.. n my s! e ... .. .. L7 N/A .. ~ .. ., .i 5,50 3 I! 50') R 4tR s .... .! tl .0 104 ~ 3 NCR Renctnhu~9wl Einq SRWraIieRU. , i N/R .. b IS 4ngnl ..imivnns u » u 4t ll[ »t Dare saw Reawree: • .. :Jac '.a J!Y/n/R .Ja .~I ausN .I~.., u!n!< !Of ), ~ IN .. 15x aen,.~..:- .., ..o I N;e RNRNSelC n• xs. l7.!!A!!-t .a~^scNi"4 ` ! 4e1NelE :<-iec. Ir.OL0a0.F ~ . . - ~ a'ste ' B. Basic Development Siandflrds. The tollowing table, Table 17.08.040-8 sets forth minimum development standards for residential development projects filed up to the mid-point of [he permitted density range. TABLE 17.08.840-8 BASIC DEVELOPAfENT STA2IDABDS iN/R=Not RegwrM) YL L LM • NH • Loc Arce Nlvmum Yet Avere;e ...,na japy e,uuU R({, v,R R/R bLtnmum Yet 20,000 },IiR i,000 iR,RM V;R R(R xumbe. of DweUitw UNU° Ly ;p (:bp Up m 4 .p b Dp tm ,^ .¢<a per .arm 2 1 fi 19 fl NDtimum Dw<llirtg DNt 5¢e i:ngle bmlly Eeteen<tl ..woJmgs Only I,OMNhR t,blq(ee •' Lot Dimetgatw 4m:mUm tvldte 90nvg. ~• 50evg. A N;R RIR V 'epuvetl (root t':y '14 Y(ty 11 very fi setonONl \Dn. cerner let'xldtn 100 b i0 K NIR 11/R \hnlmum Oepltl 130 !N 9V 1» x/R R(R 4lmmum Ronugn 30 q ]0 q N/R WR tD from Woperty b^.et Vm. nag lot frontage ]0 M 3G • .V/R M/R fL wont prpperp",:va 9e1MeW:p Front Yard°~° lEevg. RTneR. ]1evR. 7fbF NrR R)t4 very ;i rPdy!S ..+ r YfT LS .., e: i~.:a Y.vE ,~ k! 2E n .vrR R/R \terlor lice turd :ali 3/lY ip0 d/R V R N(A R<er vnm iu m Is ed ....... rv'= IIOlS ~„= ts~/R~ ud id Lsd/>4 Site epen:drv inwe:un;Gnu \ecnsary Wdg.l Rmdent:eE Dwld:ng sepvetlev: Fvonl ;a Font Nr.Y N/R 25 Y ]C SO ulna: +~R N/R 10 1L ti 13 xngDt L;mtultmu a tR ]s ILL aof a51 ~t Co.ae{e 23L NA i0v !/f 50'b SP% •.le..T'°m el Dpen 9pece Regdred: Pnvet< Open Space 20001 V,R IOMlR(R ]00'1 i0 IfR/t!I !i0/100 15H100 fUpuntl PIOer Upper ivory L'gdl :pm m:., uae ipnro' v N 141 NrR Rlf )ov xf L'seple Orrr bnea n9~ ~ aae !!~ .~o Of Reveepon~NeUPeNtty v N R(R x N 14gNM0 per gee. l 4.OR.NOi{ WMUeping ^ f 4 RpWwe per Sec. t'1.H.01p-F Fsrp,n,a; sand nrroan:v for .. ondnry ctreeb end ertenm°. 15 mil (r rn rte taro face pn punlrc or DnvnM atreeb. ~I v: \nneD: ~ ,' .eu panuent lp Seflmn li.Ud,Ofi O-11 ~ n f .:dp~ V.:d II; .rnt in 11., L a 1.4 diwnet. n a•s I^ce f r~ .dnnmr rrdm'en nutpmn hr Rvn;e door npemra, ' I,r+ ~I " ~ rot nl tI. v I, L..Ir:¢t (ar mul tiple (emdy d MIILnR1. Pori nrlr• n nnJ :nl Prlnf al!<nl lreca. t A v ~Py pr:nenrd ~;wmnnR te<s tnnn VDU ayarr lent nR nNUUe )Te eDPrnvel of a Co 9 ndmonel L's< Y:..~- •. p^r nra.:n I I.CJ.e JO. 76- (10/19/84) C, Optional Development Standards. The following [able, Tebie 17.OS.O~i O'C sets forth minimum development standards for residential development prefects filed up to the maximum density permitted by the density range. TABLE 17,08.1140-C OPTIONAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS (N/R = Na IA~ar L LN r ee a N:vmum ert9 Nu fIC SAC N/N Nr R NIR fgrossl fat Na [~ 1 • . ...; M1i0. M/N f m,mmum net/ Numh<oE OwcAap ONN° tbb Up :a Lpb Up to vN t6 (permitted per eerel ~ A N :J w YjNryUm Dw<IN,IS OnIl 31[+ 31n11e LmRY d<teenld _ ewellings only 1~M t,wiw[II i,01101fi Lot Dimmdma ~y Mmwum w1d11: •, • t . ,•w e/R 1VR i~ requlr<d front . ~~ fetps¢kl N1mmu.m D<PtD 6YLIIOt<egmr•,0 m]Ingle Opby6WrflNmu N/P. NjN $Htw:LTO Loesl Street QNII I16eti J1 evg QRe( 96<3 S3 I e'RSSS very:i rr1313 Prtva! Street or b6eII IS 6vq° 36 5° 0° Dnvewey wll3f rary s Cornrr 51/• TvC i1w .. O Y/R N/R ITenDf Slde YVd 61103 Il43 N.fl N/N At lnt<rlor 143 IS's ID6/36 20e'id f0al3d site aoanderv IDwelLne L'n~,r neeessory dleg., Re<i4ntiJ aWldu,e Seyere;rmlf: f root to From >• ss N/a .v fl N/R omer III :0 N/a Y0. N/R keil(1t LIm D+Aill,v K .t5 i6° IOC 63° Caen SPww Rsquirod: Pnvele Opln 3pece IOM/11!11 1001150 1331130 150 100 1361[00 IGfound Floorv Upper Story L'n1:1 Common Op<n Spett° !% IDE 3393 15w 16R (minlml:m el u]eDle Open 9pee!e pfi 15N 6113 loa 1N IDnvnte end eqm-lDm Lnulim NeUPe¢:Sty N/Il Requlre0 66rnrNr[ m Secvoq 1),OO.OIOG f+nmaWW q flegwred prNNn[ b 9eebnn ;!!,$4.° Pram YW LenM p~nb iw6meM ....-., 63clmr: u.D6.366-E erlerty CasferreArm aJR Required OerNwn< b 9ec11an 1t. W.06PN n. ES<Wdmi ,nnL -. snfy for seepnduy iveeu end ertene3, ~ b. As aNSUfetllfo ul4 Te re eurD let<an publlC Dr pnvnt<N eelt Refer IC ff E!e If.OA.OJII. V (qr eddltlon]I sll Dn¢k In(Drm<Ilon. Wm1t I•ll Dry ml~n 100 feet of VL Dr L Dutnet (ef mule Dl e fgmlly dwtlLn gf. d. AdA 17!elt ,f edioeenl to ~L, LOr LM dI3tflCt. !. LCp, loon l6lPt1:r0T gseM D(]Id¢w<LY w11111n COnCOmInIYm lO4nllqus<Df nD°ft TPni rl gYllP] eulo•+nuc gerege doer opaners. Gnege seloecn a 10' minlm um ,f ode lntr } gnfege .ue per aPet, ]~ 1 f.o i..lu-L w1Pn angle femdV eeucA<d~]emrAet6e11ed development. PtrITPIPf :nnJ]Cnplnq An d Inl[Plgr slritt lrPP1. g, \ V ogle Ie'nlly v'a+pllyd dwelling IH] ll,en 9011 sgVL•e f¢el well fegDrte lM nDpMVeI of a cgndll lonni a]• permu p!r 5<ebon I LdJ. USU, n. ZPfO ml ene dweuings Dermrtled per Section IL01,0/0-O. 1. Pefar tq rWN If.03.060C16rr0 TWN If.01,01PC1. -71- (10/19/;41 OROINAN(T: N0. 346 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO W CAM)NGA, CpLIR1RNIA, ADOPTIhT: THRRA VISTA COMMINITY PLAN ANNNDt~NT 88-02 TO *DDI PY THE LGW-MEDNM AND MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPI~NT STANDARDS TRe City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does ordain as follow e: SHCTION 1: The City Council hereby finds and determines the f of low ing: A. that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, follow ing a public hearing held in the time and mennar pr seer ibed by lam, recommends that the Community P1 en test emendmen[ hereinafter described, end this City Council hea held a public hearing in the time end memnr prescribed by lsm and duly heard and considered said recommendation. H. That this Community Plan test amendment is consists nt with the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. C. 'East this Community Pi an test amendment ie mnsiatent math the Development Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. D. This Community P1 en text amendment mill have no significant em irotmental impact ae prw ided in the Nege Live Declaration filed herein. SECTION 2: The Terre Vista Community Plan test, Part V, ^Residentiel bevelopment Standards, Low-Medium Density Re eidentiel,^ commencing on Page V4, ie hereby emended, in pert, to read ee attached, SECTION 3: The Terre Vista Community P1 en text, Part V, ^Reside ntiel Development Standards, Median Denei [q Rae identi al,^ commencing on Ysge V-5, is hereby ®ende d, in part, to reed es attached, HH LTION 4: TTe prw iei ona of this Ordinance No. 346 shall not apply to those reeidenti al eubdiv ieiona wherein a Tentative Map has been approved prior to the effective date of this Ordinance; prw ided no metarial oendmente or ezteneione ere made to each previously approved Taniativa pLps. Por the purpoce of calculating those prw ieiona which ere the eubj act of this Ordimnce, those eiendards affective as at the time of approval of ouch Tents rive Meps shall apply. 14 ~- Ordinance No. 345 Page 2 SECTION 5: The Mayor ehail sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be publ iehed within fifteen (15) days of tez its passage et least once in The Deily Report, a nev epaper of general circul eti on publ iehed in the City of Ontario, Cal ifornie, end circulated in the City of Rancho Cuceuonga, Cal ifornie. I ~~ Ordinance No. 346 Page 3 Lor Medium Density Residential tend designated ae Lor Medium Density Residential ie intended for residential development that ranges from 4 to 8 dvel lings per groos acre. The folleering regal etions apply: o Ueee pe[m it~ed: (a) Single family detached duel lingo including, but not limited to, patio homes, zero lot line hones. and mobile homes. (b) Single faily attached duel lingo including, but not limited to, duplexes, [ripleze s, fourpl axe c, end tornhomes. (c) Cluster housing. (d) Community facilities ee specified bel ov. (e) Accessory uses ae specified above. o Site develoiment standards for center plot development: (a) Building site area: 5,000 eq. ft. minvta, 5,500 sq• fit. average. (h) Front, aide, and rear buildi^.g setback: Ae indicated in Table 7-1 an3 Piguree D-1 through 0-4. (el Gwrwe. and mrmrt ee ibacka: Aa indicated in Table 0-2 and Fi¢ure v-s. (d) Other accessory building se [backs: Prom major arterial highray e, se ondary arterial e, and collector roads, setbacks are the same ae those for main boil dingo. From local streets, adjoining residential lots and other onditlona, se tbacka are the same as chose for main boil dingo except Chet en nccs sooty building say encroach into airy required Bide or rear ae tback to a distance of 3 feet miniaua from the property line, provided the •eceeaory building doeB not occupy sore then s0 percent of the required rear yard. (e) Building Bite ridth: 50 feet minima, provided thec the building site width on cal-de-sacs and knuckl ea shall be 20 feet minimua. (c) ..lildicg a.._ overage: c~ ••+sea. (g) Building height: 35 feat aaxL:a, o Site development standards for cluRex dtvel opeent: (a) Building site area: 1 acre minima. 144 Ordinance No. 346 Page 4 (b) Pront, Hide, and rear setbacks: Ae indicated in Table 9-3. (c) Setba ckc for uncovered parking are ae Follw e: 30 feet average, 19 feet minimum from face of curb of major arterial highrey; parking areas lees then 30 feet from curb must be screened by berm a, lands taping, and/or structural elmente 30 inches minimum in height. 17 feet minimum from face of curb of secondary arterial or collector road. 30 Feet minimum fram face of curb of local public street, subj ec[ [o easements. Etom other co ndi tione, no minimum. (d) Building site width and depth: As pe tm icted by required ee [backs. (e) Building site coverage: 60% maximum. (f) Building height: 35 feet maximum. (g) Private open apace: 300 eq. ft. minimum. The above site development standards apply to the building ei te, which ie the cl aster develop:ent ae a rhole or a designated portion of it. They govern the rel ationehip of the cl aster development to edj oining property and tm adjoining etreeta and open spaces. Nithin the cluster development, the rel ationehip of boil dings to one another, to property lines, end to other feaiurea, such ae open spaces end pr ivete etreeta, ie goverrnd by the prow isione of the Uniform Building Code. T.".a above trail ^_e [backs, hwever, ere appl iceble with ir. [he development if a masterpl armed trail occurs interior to the Bite. o Site development standards for innovative development: (a) Buii ding site area: 3.500 eq. ft. minimum, 4,000 eq. ft. average. (b) Fron[, aide, and rear se tba aka: Ae indicated in Table V-3. (c) Buil di rg site ridth and depth: As permitted by required ae tbecks. (d) evil ding site coverage: Aa permitted by required ee tbecka end private open apace. (e) Building height: 35 feet maximum. (f) Private open apace: 700 eq. ft. minimum. T};e e>_.;.e deyeta~g*1t erandsrds aaply to oxoiecte rhich aie deemed innovative. Innovation in single family development means providing treat{ve design solu[i one rhich address the cri[ical concerns of neighborhood compatibility. density tram air.{on, and design quality. Innovative ptoj acts are chsracteria ad try en attractive sireetacape rhich is not monotonous, nor is she street ace ne dominated by eaphal t/concrete, garage e, end care. Innovative design means finding exeatlve rays to create rel l-designed apace, particul erly aphis yard specs. A di scueeion of innovation end veriatq is co ntairxd {n the AEaide ntinl Oeaign Gui del inee section. ~QS Ordinance No. 346 Page 5 Medium Density Residential Land designated ne tiediua development that ranges from regulations apply. o Dsee permitted: Deneiiy Residential is intended for residential 8 to 14 dvellinga per gross ecr e. 1fie following (n) -rg_' c f~3:y dctachcd hollicgs :-.d cd. :g, Est ao...e.ied is patio homes, zero lot line homes, and mobile homes. (b) gingle Emily attached dwellings including, but not limited to, duplexes, tripl eaec, fourpl e:e e, end torrihomea. (c) Cluster housing including, but not limited ^o, mul tifmily dwel'_inge. (d) Community fecil itiee ea ape cif ied helve. (e) Accessary uses a^ specified above. (Text toniinued on Png¢ Id) l4~ Ordinance No. 346 Page 6 H pp~ Z~ 3 I W '+ O a 0O J L ~~ YU4 6 W N O _J m POI > S A A C C Y r O 'Y W W W Y Y N q ~p ~ i W A M G A N Q p~ c C C M N L yl L Y G B f 3 P P Y y C i c ~ IF P IF ~ W W IF IF W Y Y IF V v V ~O ^ N In 17 c9m W Y" ~? IF y- 0. N N nMm In o a Inn o P P Y > A A C C Y V u O O U W V- Y M N a i '~ L Y ' ~ O N ~ wn n W N C C C L' N Y ~ ~ t N 01 OI N C 2 c MM V V M ~iY{! ~ ~ ~~ WIF 0. IF IF V~ 4 1V Y ~ ~ 00 O 1~ O M W f~ W~ w .-I N M~M In O Oa Ina O 01 PP > ~ 7 1 ~ A A C C U W y O + I F P W _ V N yN ~ m M CI L W L N i~ O N ., cc a ce c A u IF 61 In d ~ ^ ~ ~ ~ i 4w (i y C TC LL w W W W W A M ~ W M r N~ Y pp p N N m ~~ pp m p Nb N mMe~ Y'1 2 OC Inn O A N ~1 L W a Y ...I L L ~ O W 4 ' ~ N L ~ 61 y Vi ~ ! N O Y a L ~ 0141 N J d I n In C A FOI C N N C ~ N W 1 ~f M O p ~ K a ~ ! O i N > N P a a Yi u~ ~ ~ ~ y 6 V C L O U a O L ` f i t 6 L ~ N p C U W ~ y O N L O H N W L C al Y T ~ n 8 { ~ u s ~ p O ~~ U y p q JNZ {~ p 6 LL -~I N VI ~ J 4 K N I- O i ~~ Ordinance No. 346 Pege 7 W E x W O O V W CD ... G ~-1 S S mW Q V C W H a W 4 m Y u a In y L L y a e1e o 1~j~ y ~ w~ N ~ O ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~"I N L r" y L OI C \~Y q O O O Ol ~ y d ~ ~ ~ q C ~ + q m u N ~s 9 o { ° U r ~i w ~ a N b v i a ~ c Y SI S '~' ~ c ~ ~ Y !'~ a ' g ,~ a ru o~ M O o ~ ~ ~ O 1~ N M• W d 0 4 MUy A ~ N Opp ~ y 0 Ol N N d ~ N p ? p y v pp ~~ Y 1 S d y +` 17 ~ y V q O d d U O OI w e q V .Ve iY v G G L O. ~ V~ L O d L O O ~ ~ A ` q ~ y + V' Nyy j yy VI ~ NNd W y U a y V ~ OI q~ N « N O. Y qq 4 ~ ~ ~ o d i c ~ ~ W H .y ~-1 W N q L p O O L ~ L W q V0 L O o V v C - YI ~ d C q «NYl P y O N ~ DI I Q ^ E C~1 N y ~i a I,,,~ q ~ q 01 L M q L ~ O M W OI ~ U ` O L y I A .. S~ G5 iJ. ~ ONt L ]] ~~ W G NH N pqq q ~ V K V ~ ~ yy H r y N i(1 W Cr ~ c u ~ c .r« e e i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~L ~ ~~ a o d ~ O O r d d A ~ 4 m i V d u U ~ p S M qq ! q d O = U O G M ` C ~ N r7 O "~~ ~~ ~~ ~f ~~ ~~... ~.. ~~ a~rnnnnnnR ~ ,~ 1 j Ordinance No. 346 „ ~t /li Page 9 /~ V a • ~ s W LL• ~ F W GI s ~ ~ N W W m ~~~nn~ 7 "' '' ~- ~ ~ . ~ r W. Ordinance No. 346 Pe gE 10 ~~ .~~ )~ 1 ~~ 15 ~~ irlF~ I C ' F J s J N I 2{~! W 6 ~~ 1 W LL I W Ordinance No. 346 Page 8 N S C 4 N yNy Y V 6 mW 6 F- y n °Qd a 4 coo d q q N C~ y C C C N O 1 C Y U r UI r rY ~ A Y f. Yn w l T ~p a C N Y W L 6 L y A c L N L a O J L p p L S L .-~ ~ Y D L N N d N L Q ~ p. A U p p p p ~ C T ~ p A cyy L c 0 EE ~ a ^ ^ O ' P~ ~ y^ C^ ^CII y ~ C b ~ W N N O q V a ~']A A A I9 ~ L S C: C r d~ D M W W w y E Ul V~.. C g o G! L ~ V q` 01 C W N b O O O NN N.N.. O W W ~C O T y M y O i U T y' N N N O U N ~ d > L ^ q N ~ W~ U d L N G l L M yy g d~ d M w p C M y }~ N 3~ U N ^ N c g ^ u ~ M ~ ~ q L y O c ~ y y yg gV ^ O~ yL ~ M~ _C C C N N LC O q N~^ q h ^ Y Y N ^V~~ Y N yy Mn- ca+ A7 W W~ a~'+ ~ w OV a c 7 a RL V y+ g°~« a ~~ ~~ L L q L q L q q + q c a W ~ ~ NSy~F ~L C p G V Y pp p T l p pp L p qq .y ~y gg C y o O ~ ~ c A U p p L p ^ Y ^ Y L Y ^ l ~ L c yY O O O L i L L N L N q O V N$ N W Y ~ ~ N d N !! W 0 ee 8 E ~ yy qq yy N~ NF r yy q~ NMO a L t..l c ! . ~ ~ CU Nc0 AA~ O a"1 67 y OTC W N ~ ~ ~ C~ V M N~ O~ L p ~ O O O NI N ~ h' $ Ay ~ p ucq r~iY ~ y/ r C O ~, Or ~ 5 V.^m r pp ~ +~ C 7 v W .~. N q ~ i Y A W O _U C A C W A p A 01 O pV. L O N N y L N N p ' 31 ~ ~ ~ a ~'a t w Q'a '~ yy ~' ~ ~ N q ~ , . a L~ W L> C L U °1 pI N M 1 D % i d rT d Nw e L C ~ L j N p C p A' A C Ny^ OI N ~[ N p O S O OL L1^~0~~ A l. O yOp J O W p 0 T.l ~ q 7 T L G U O N c N A Or 1 a L P L y L .~ q Y ' I N L n: 1-- ` Oay ~OtY Y w ~O Lbp N y } N C q L gW 0•p 0 MC ~ o OYd ~ L M q ~ L O m ~ p U iKV q Y W O~ O V 9 y N ~ d N O V C G y~ C M y L M N pq qty C q A O M d N 1~1 N C C U C r A L^ L y N N C .9 VV q d W O C N q{,~ q C 11{, q ! ~ W L C O L = A ~ Y I L'MY W N~p W L O~ N A 41 ~ N S 2 p Y L n Oa ~ N ~ O N p O N e n R ~ Y ~ 4q s •~ ~~ ~g~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ a ordinance No. 346 Page 11 N 4 a s J M ,ii~ V I ~~ ordinance No. 346 Page 12 N S O E J H O W W O mt i~ mW f Q OC N U a LL 41 F- N O J m Y u a' L d 1 C y ay Ny C N A M ~~i Y O 4 O O U t !c~ 3 a+ a > a N N C C O r YY VFW . Y WY YY ~ M 10 i ~ L t7 < M w ~O A 6 N 0. C C C V N L N S E E i rn Y~ C i ~ VY WY. Yid IrW 4~ w MYY WwW Y ~+ w~ ~ ~ ~N N '7SG ~ ~ Y G j ~ j M ~ .-. N N tnMM h O .-~a tGa 0 01 OI > i N N C C N V O O WW YN MY ~ ~ O M L L n e in w ~n w N p N 6 CCC ~ N ~ N ^ • • C ) ) C • ~ O IV IV WW W 0.w0. ~ ~ 00 O1~ O Mm ~ ~ ~~ ~ titi .r N I7~~ UI O OL 10C O }1 q A T O O Y Y WW YY YN _ w w W w lZ0 N q 10 q N N N ~ ~ C C C } ~ N ~ N iv ° n se se Y YV Y YYV O. w v W~ W~F 4. 1HWW Y Mr - 1+v Y ti a mmmm ~F J d ~L+ 0.r 1H 'a . i N N ~ f~ 1~'f N pp S O L t0 L O N L r N W yyv 6 ~ L f N n Y Y d d .- ~LC d w .Y V N O d O L ~ O L N O h '• +a N~ q~Y M I MV J U N NNLW d M Pf Q y^ VVVVVV g J O C O CNL N ~ y ~ YC Oy ~ d y a y G d U A Y N ` ~ ~ p J W r~ O D L O Y 6 6t 1 1 V I E ~~ap 1NU Y~+ & 6 a a1 .. ` p J<Z Us3 y ry q gJ Ni ~ p ~/1 i LL t 1- 1- O ~ S 3 ti Ordinance No. 346 Page 13 Y U e Y C q L Ny ^y y W ` M • M y P W r- ~a f N V N q L O 1 4 O q ¢ ~ ~ O a u , et S Y ` ~ M q v p 2 ~ O y ~ y L ' _ ~ M { q J m v N C c v c ~ u~ 1 ~ ~ o W oo Nab NV Y.N q Q .d yL ~ N C if l r ~ d L C d L r yy B O. ~ C o ~ {may ~ N ~ yy- Y ^ d ~ ~ Y a q Lu Y W yy yj W V q VCV Y V C p O p ~ •L') O V ~ ~ ~ p LTJ ~ Y N _ F ~ ~ Y. V- M O C N Mt O OV O. i N N C ~ C ~ Y N V V ~~ >C ~ U L Y r Y M q > ~ U ~ K W ae LM ~ N q n w W 6 O. VI q •~ U L G W O J ~ W, C O q + ~ N~ ~ a W N Y ~ U C G k W W N V~ M N Y t~ ~ O = QQ N C« L V O ~ Y L N > I ~ C ~ q L O 1y N ~yy Y O L ~ ~ O N ~ c7 2 C ai V N ~ti c W C q O w O N N OI ~ O D d Y ti y G^ Y~- i ~1~ 'd e W l L ~ q m C A L }} ~{ L i~ O U O. O M W ^ O V i F' I y~ T ~ T~ ~~ Y A " S ~~ 'y C S N tl ~ ~ C U p(~ y^y^y^N ~ N q _~ y~ V ~ L ~ q C C U C 6 ~ I C ~ N N C C y W V y y y y q M C U y y ~ 'O •^ f N T W ~ p C I qq `Wy~ W p W L r U CG ~ ~~ G ^ 1 O n i °'~ N 17 q' 15 4 Ordinance Nc. 346 Pe ge 14 Medium Density Residential (Continued from Pege 5) o Site dwel opeent etenderde for innwacive single f®ily development: (a) Building Bite area: 3,500 eq. tt. minimum, 4,000 eq, ft, average. (b) Pront, aide end rear building setbacks: As indicated in Table V-3 and Figures V-I through V-4. (c) Carage an.. wrpvrt ae~wc'as: As indi ce tad in 1'a ble V-2 and Pigure V-6. (d) Other accessory building setbacks: Prom major arterial highways, secondary arterial e, and collector roads, setbacks ere the same as those for main boil dings. Prom local streets, adjoining residential l ote and other cn nditione, ae tbacke ar¢ the same ae those for main boil dings ezce pt that an accessory boil ding may encroach into a:ry required Bide or rear ee [bat's toe di stance of 3 feet minimum from the property line, prw ided the acts seory building does not occupy more than 50 percent of the required rest yard. (e) Huil ding site width and depth: Aa petmitced by required setbacks, prav ided that the building site width on col-de-sate and knuckl ee shall be 20 feet minimum. (f) Building Bite coverage: Aa oe xm it tad b9 required se ebnc!a and pavate open apace. (g) Building height: 35 feet mezimum. (h) Private open apace; 300 eq, ft. minimum, The above site development etenderde apply co proj acts which are deemed innovative. Innovation in single Family development means prw iding creative design solutions which addr see the crib cel coots me of neighborhood temps ti bil ity, density tranai [ion, end design quality. Iniwvetive projects ere characterized by en attractive etteetscape which ie not monotonous, ner ie the stree [scene dominated by aephal t/concrete, ga rage e, and ca ra, Innwetive design means finding creative ways to create vel l-designed ape ce, perti col arty uea ble yard apace. A di acuaeion of innovation and ver iety ie contained in the Resi den[i al Design Guidel loss oe coon. o Site Bevel oilmen[ standards for cl ueter develoiment: r_, ,o, .,..__.. ng a..e sass: i acre minimum, (b) Pront, aide, and rear ae tbacke: Ae indite tad in Table V-3, (c) Setbncke for uncovered parking ere ea £ol low e: 30 feet average, 19 feet minim[[ from face of curb of major arterial highway; parking areas lean than 30 feet from curb moat he ecreenad by barma, t~i I ~ J Ordinance No. 346 Page 15 lends taping, and/or structural elements 30 ?nchea minimum in height. 77 feet minimum from face of curb of aem ndary arterial or collector road. 10 feet minimum from face of curb of local public street, subi act to easements. From other mnditi one, no minimum. (d) Building ei t¢ ridth and depth: Ae permitted by required setbacks. (e) Building site coverage: Ae permitted by required setbacks and private open apace. (f) Building height: 35 feet mezim~n. (g) Private open apace: 300 eq. ft. The above site development standards apply to the building site. which is the cluster Bevel o}ment ae a Thole or s designated portion of it. They govern the relationship of [he cl aster development to adjoining property and to adjoining streets end open spaces. Within the cluster development, the Tel etionship of buildings to one another, to property lines, and to other features, such ne open spaces and private streets, is governed by the provisions of the Uniform Building Code. The above trail cetbacka, borever, ere eppl iceble uithin the development if a maser-planced trail occurs interior to ffie site. Medium High Dena ity Residen[ial Land de eignateE ae Medium High De natty Residential is intended for residential developmen[ that rsngee from 14 to 24 duel lingo per gross acre. The fol los ing reaul ations eDOly: o Ueee pe rm it tad: (e) Mul tifem ily dorel l inge, including, but not limited to, spar went proj act e, condom inium proj act a, end cooperative apartment proj act e. (b) Single family attached dwellings. (c) Community fecal sties ae ape cif ied blow. (d) Ac ceesory asst ae ape cif ied above. o Site development standards: (wl Ani1d(no site wrea: I were minimum. (b) Building ee tbacW : Ae indicated in Table V-4. (c) Garage, carport, and accessory 6uil ding se tbneka: As indite tad in Table V-4. (d) Se tbecke for uncovered parking: As indicated in Table 0-4. J iP Ordimnce No, 346 Page 16 (e) Building ei[e width and depth: Ae permitted by required ee tbseka. (f) Building nice coverage: Wo maximum aubj act to Development Review procesn. (g) Building height: 45 feet maaimtm. (h) Building separation: Buildings 35 feet or lees in height: 10 feet minimum. Boil dingo greater then 35 Feet in height: 15 feet minimum. 2be above Bite development standards apply to the building site, which ie the development ae a whole or a designs tad portion of it. 'fiey govern the rel ationehip of the development to edj oining property and to adjoining streets and open apace e. Within the developaent, the above etenderdn govern building separation and setbacks from maatet~planned trsil e. Otherriae, riehin the development, the rel etionahip of boil dings to one another, to property lirroe, end to other features, such as open spaces end private etreeta, ie governed by the prov isiona of the Uniform Building Code. (High Density Residential development standards dincussed on page U-18) 15`7 ORDINANCL' NO. 347 AN ORDINANCE OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RAN WO CU CAMDNCA, G1L IfbRNTA, ADOPTING VICTORIA COMMUNITY PLAN A!ffiNDtffiNT EH-03, TO lDDI FY TNH LOW 18DNM AND MRDIUM AESIDHNTLAL DEVELOYI~@NT STANDARDS The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, Cal ifornie, does ordain ae follora: SECTION 1: The City Council hereby finds and determines the following: A. That the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, folloving fl public hearing held in the time and manner prescribed by law, recommends that Community Plan tezt amendment hereinafter described, and this City Council bee held a public 6eering in the time and manner prescribed by law and duty 6eerd end considered said remmmendetion. B. lfiat ibis Community Plan tezt amendment ie conaietent with the General PL an of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. ... ..... t~ :,.o. with the Devel oiment Co dew of~ the City of Rancho Cucamonga. D. This Community Plan teat mmendmen4 will have no significant e:rv ironmental impact ae provided in the Naga live De cl aretion filed herein. SECTION 2: The Victoria Community Plan tart, Pert III, Section I, Regul atione and Standards for Development, diagrme "Typical Garage Se tbacka^ on Pages. 204, ie hereby amended, in pert, to read in text and gr aphice ea attached, SECTION 3: The Victoria Community P1 en teat, Pert III, Section I, Reguleti one end Standards for Development, subsection "Residential Develo}aent _..- _ .~__~ _~._ y ..... .. , wvcu...e vv .ate ... .^ uvwer mmende d, in pert, to reed ae attached. SECTIUN 4: The Victoria Community Plan teat, Part III, Section I, Regul atione end Standards for Development, eubcection "Residential Development Standards Hediw De nei[y Residential", commencing on Pege 224, is hereby mmende d, in pert, to reed ae a[tsched. J Ordi~nce No. 347 Page 2 SHCTION 5: The prwiniona of this Ordi~ncc No. 347 shall not apply to those residential subdivisions wherein a Tentative Map bas been approved prior to the effective date of this Ordinance; prw ided no material amendments or esteneione are made to ouch prep iously approved Tentative Maps. For the purpo ae of calculating those provisions which are the subj act of this Ordinance, tho ae standards effective as at the Lire of approval of such Tentative Mnpe shall apply. SECTION 6: The Mayor shell sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the sane [o be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least once in The Daily Report, a newspaper of general circulation publ iehed in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. 'I (Set Ordinance No. 347 Page 3 TYPICAL GARAGE SETBACKS rnoM cuAS oNLV vnaM tuns nro w~ux (a0 f1alW RLR) ~Idv\ ~}Yll(fL !1~ ~ ~ wi I I ~ I F~ M~ =--L Jirs ,~wq d /Ga~yl /b I,ql dr.iAir wa. Ao.r re a/wIG ~Wic r~fYr l ~~ soa ssnr wills Ordinance No. 347 Page 4 RES IDENTW, DSVII,OPN6NT STANDARDS (continued) 3. Lop-Medico Density Residential ("GM" Land Use Plan designation): Land designated as Lap-Media Density Reside oriel ie intended for residential development that has a range of four to eight dwel lingo per adj oared gross acre. 'fie fol lop ing regulations ere applicable to these erase; e. Uses Pe rnitted; detached or attached residential dwellings not exceeding eight dw el lingo per adj oared gross acre, including, but rtoi limited to: (1) Singly f®ily attached drel lingo. (2) Single family attached dpel lingo, including, but not limited to. dupl ezea and tripleu e. (3) Cluster Housing. (4) "Zero lot line" homes. (5) Community Facilities ne ape cif ied an page 241. b. Accessory Uses Permitted: a~ o.' the follow ing urea and street urea, (ll Cerages and carports, in compliance pith the Bite development era.,Aa rd" nrw ided herein. (2) Pe nces, walla, and trel line e. (3) Swimming pools with a minimum 5 foot high fence enclosing pool. (4'~ Acce aeory ones and structures necessary ar coat omarily incide ntiel to a principal use ae permitted by the Rancho Cucamonga Zoning Ordinance. c. Sire Development Stendarde: (1) Single Family Center Plot dwel lingo. (a) Building site area: 5,000 eq. ft. minim:e, 5,500 sq, ft. aaer8ra. (b) Building Bite vidtht 50 feet minimuo. It ie intended chat site rridthe will vary according to lot size. (c) Building cite coverage: verlea according to lot size, see typical lot plane, pp. 214 - 223. (d) Building aetMcb: varies according io lot size, sea typical lot pl any and cable. l~- F saT ~~ t ~~a' r~ S ~~~J TI'~'I~rII Y 1 I I~ 4^1~~NV ea ~a . ~ s ~ ~ S W ~~6 7 i Y~ WV V N ~ ~~S ~O YC ~qy ~O C4 8~t L~ ii N ~V ~4 i~ zs rr ~r Nn N~ N I L 0 .~. ~a :a :Y V N q !1 T^ I ~y L U yLp C • ^ C V O W L ^ 4 1~ ~/ V a = ~ ~ Ordinance No. 347 Fege 5 << ~: 'w N C 4 C ^ C C ^ f N ~ C ~ ~ F :: I r: ~ N a ~: ,. ^ N N ~ N . N ~ N .Ni N C C C C 1 ` V , W ~ 1 W/ R RI I ~R~ J ~ R ~^ ~ y C _ ~ ~ y P I ~ ~ r r w lu ~ 1 K 3 0 ~ ~ i a Q o O 4 ~ ~ O Y ~ W R u K ^ i 8 ~ E N O ~ ~ C a M y 4 I ~ 1 My Z I LL Y y G `O I U o y 4N ~~ I ~ ~ {_~ V wN y € ~ G ~ 3 C V ^ 3 Y ~yq y ~pOW YC X Y ~~ ~ W t ' ?~ _V p~~ N J4 YtlS O Y ~ V ~ M y~ Y ^ O y ~ C K ` Y ~ s p H S ~~ Ordinance No. 347 Page b (e) Building height: 35 feet maximum. (2) Cluster housing. (e) Building Bite area: 2 acres minimum. (b) Building Bite coverage: 30I maximum. (c) Building sz [becks; gee diagrams for typical boil ding ae cbacks, pp. 214 - 223. (d) Building separation: See diagram for typical building separation distances, pp. 214 - 223. (e) Building height: 35 feet, maximum. (t) Building site width end depth: As permitted by required se tbecks. (g) Private open apace: 300 aq. ft. minim:n. (3) Innovative housing. (e) Building site eras: 3,500 sq. ft. minimrm, 4,000 s9• ft. average. (b) Building site coverage: As permitted 6y required setbacks end nrivate onen snecz. (c) Building setbacks: See diagrams for typical building ee [backs, pp. 214 - 223. (d) Building height: 35 feet maxi.m:a. (e) Building cite ridth and depth: Ae pe tm it fed by required setbacks. (f) Private open apace: 700 eq. Pt. minim:m. The above Bite development standards apply to proj seta which ere de®ed innovative. Innovation in single tam ily development means prw iding creative design solo[ ions which address the critical concerns of neighborhood temp! N bill ty, d!n!i ty tr!rei ti en, !nd de lig! quali*_y. Innwntiv! pro; a^_t! nre cherecteriz ed by an attractive atreetampt which ie not aorwtorroua, nor ie the street ace ne dominated by ssphal t/concrete, gsrage e, and es re. Innovative design means finding creative wepa to crests well-designed apace, particularly usable yard apace, ~~3 Ocdinence No. 347 Page 7 'lM' LAND USA nw+nwn kN aix« soon a.r. - eooo a.t. lypky e~ W xS00 rt rt a A r ~t "~ rrya(^~YA~ ar /waL rnidwuiL~, ary is9oy~ »~: c..ys ,n ~,.ys ntbW ,namn4~ j J4kymd !fr-+a~Ae-~.~d. 5//c Fi' Min 11 flrmya.d. rs(c inw4Mw ..~--~- xagtntgg rLds~~acr porNrr r~u,a~n«w~ cryxears eF rrty,War/rsd m mriw~rnity trawl . w~runuwiy maG,r~srnw - xr aAd~76ad ram p4aa.y vrarw I ~~ 211 ~} i 1 1 1 1 1 I'~ Ordinance No. 347 Page 8 sooo-sooo s.F. nor centp plot i 1 rsw.~...o- sh,~ i i 70W N !d! rwF 6o err url .nwa Nasi+w.w Co'rmx• 60% cfaras wWrirpe~wryLiKJ (~,5 ~,s Ordinance Nc. 347 Page 9 sooo-eooo s.F. DoT :..woaua. Sw~jm~ Oar oas rte. ~a(t.w,o~p~s rilc Rry+* d/y aun I~- Sp T ''JIB r ~~ M1 y -~-=-~, p~ / YL,pt: ~/ !/4i ~di~iJL' ~/~ YUYiY/~ ~ ~Nastlnlell. ~;olsrc9r eo%o~ave..irhli.pyw~/du+ l ~~ sie ,. .. Ordirence No, 347 Page 10 'LM' LAND USE "~'~"~ Ne w•~ iN~ •.I. 1...••ily MNM ~•bM••~ N . ft M, ~~~p.~y ~ rkgnary ~~ ~ qR.}•ou uJl awotm. ~~~sra 6 ~ nrrc pr,~. i!i•r °~ awwe'wi~ ~~y°R ~tr!°°a"d'.yij~ert kr~ / SW~~ru 1vOytl ~iartp~Jtfqu;•Jraryyr~ l ~~ j("~ ~. Q~`T ~ O A ~ ~~ rY hp•}•s ~ bf dwabp.. ~.qw~ pWie Raa., ',~~ Ordinance No. 347 Page 11 it00 t.F. LOT SIN-N~Mr MwtNWo No~et flas~~ ~~..~..,. I V//%/iL F~ ~ -_ _ ~~ J(rwrd. SR ~ NYva/a I ~., ((o 'LM' LAND U IaYYnwn is .;eon .. :xo - we - 9a. ryper sa ^ tc ' Annfcsr ,.vareismd. wwnr rrgafird as dsHnwv viriMt Frew y.da Ima.r, m~fy wfL, aas prrz ~ ~~ e ' o.u w aNI4a. i ~' i ti.. rte, _. ., ` n I i 1 t ~~~ ~CKIq)? (O !~~~ y0119 01Y fL1AL/I00 .L16 .Y~af81t rr^iNNNIIIN Dp1{ T~ t(IV ~•~ ~ ~MI/flfl~~ Oaf cI n10/Y (Na~illf nui:d ar uk ~wtnavl ~m'iari wabu ..ivw. eri 'r" -f-' IDTQ Pal by A6K~9~[r, IailYlalOR I.5 fJrfJ pf! .i~vaSs. to 'vpkal viuage Sukuc Smnpwiy qC/^., SWcyud. c;i, nuia. lo(t Mfwna. bwLluyf ~ ,fir et'T!~'.~inii. . - ~.r-... _. - ._. ~ - 219 Ordi ~ance No. 347 Yage 12 ~~ ~~ o ,. « ..~ ...,.. r- y Ordinance No. 347. Page 13 35C0 ~99~S.F. LO4 saro-lot-Yne 1A7 5~,1w"e.7E~ K,~I ~5~~ ~.wYrc~WSi/e tl ~~ bb o~ ~ ~ i I d lsfbatr~ '~i i F '~-nM~wn..e._ ~re,ng ..fi.N;~fit rw~es Naurnww Crnmar 00% ofaa~ «nduu jndprrry Gi.u ~~~ 240 Ordinance No. 347 Page 14 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMBNT STANDARDS (continued) 4. Medium Density Residential (^M^ Land Uae Plan designation): Lend de signs tad ae Media Density Residential ie intended far residential development that ranges from 8 to 14 duelling unite per edj oared gross acre. The follwing regulations are eppl iceble for these areas: e, llcee Permitted: detached or attached residential dseil inge not exceeding fourteen 3,ell inga per adj oared gross ecr e, including, but not limited to: (1) Single fan ily drellirtge - attached or de teched, including, but not limited to twnhouces, tripl ezec, fourpleze e, and condominiae. (2) Cluster housing. (3) Coavnity facilities, page 241. b. Site Development Standards: (1) Cluster housing. (a) soil ding site area: acre airima. (b) Building site coverage: Aa permitted by raquir¢d se [backs end private open apace. (c) Building se [backs: See building ee tback diegtane on the follwing page for typical ae tbncka. (d) Building separation: (i) building 35 feet or leis in height, 10 feet minima. (ii) boil dings war 35 feel in height, IS feet minima. (e) Building height: 40 feet mazLa. (f) Building site ridth sad depth: As permitted by required ae [backs. (g) Private open apace: 300 aq. ft. minima. (2) Innwatlve single tinily housing. (a) Building site eras: 3,500 sq. ft. minima, 4,000 sq. ft. average. I~ Ordinance No. 347 Page 15 (b) Building site coverage: Ae permitted b9 required setbacks and private open space. (c) Building setbacks: Bee building setback dingraae on the fol loving page for typical ee tbscks. (d) Building separation: Boe building ee tback diagrme on the fol for ing page for typical setbacks. (e) Building height: 35 tact mezimsm. (f) Building site ridth and depth: As permitted by required setbacks. (g) Private open apace: 300 sq• fC. minimum. The above site level opaent standards apply to proj acts rhich are deemed innovative. Innovation in single foxily development means providing creative design aol utfons rhich addreae the critical concerns of of neighborhood compatibility, density transition, and design quality. Innovative proj acre are characterized by nn attnciive atrsetscapa rhich i• not mo:rotonoua, nor ie the street scene dominated by asphalt/concrete. garages, and cart. Tnnwative design aeane finding creative my to create veil-designed spice, particularly usable yard apace. ordinance No. 347 Page 16 I a ~~ a O a ; ~ ~J ~ i ^- .- - ,~ ~ saw ~r~ j m ~ ~I ~~ i ~ ~ I Y ~til~ ~-- ~ a ~~ w a t ~ < ~ ~W LJ ~ s w r •--r -- w ~~: 3 ga I. 0 x w y~ ~~ Z ~ ' I i I I 3Q! ~Ri ~,i it I; g II ~ ~ ~i i '~ Q 9 r r i €~ ~~ ~~ n i ~C ~ ~` "Q1 Fri ~' i ~~ Y i I ~ V b r i N ~ a ~ a a Q a ~ i i i H f i , '! ~ a ~ ; i '.~' O ~ =F~ ~ ~ S s~ ~ ~ s W g p 9 ~ _ w 7 .d. 3 '~ a i a N F W O ~s H ~' g W ~ ~~ J M ~ ~ ~~ ~ y5 i y ~ 13 1y 1 (~ i J ~ "l3 ~ ~ ~g w S Y 8 A yy i 6 ~ a ,~' ' k s ~ ~ QOS y a5y W ~ F~ r~1R 3 j D OrdiMnce No. 347 Pege 17 •M• ura use nerve b.eea eowN,e,,,e 10 - 14 eweYYq uMb / een ~~ U~ a s1 p +rR ~ +w> '4 '~ xwlout iW e5s ~~wO.9 aw nc~ a~wc d % a~~`nrcy"w µ. ~~o lwru6yl re r ~i Via' wm~°""w'~y a.s r~roonb. ~, ~ apa~r a/ po~tiy pn~ua ax14w janor ~4rm.~ qua ~plawt w.roiaL w MMSr naiar , f p,.E„y .,,s. Maiw auy m irr i~syel Ltwganfx pewrac a~ir~y ~ 4n~' °Pkw,~'P^ee Mar mw~ ~ Yw7~~ ~ ~~7 aRa+tx w~IAL ~leii/q{. QM1i~ ~1tI~19/1t, wM,~iL~fllef[b YILJfI T ~u M. .i.:. b . "9 '""~+, plawlat arau, ,myyorrs bw.7a~irr„ Gauge .farGa~Ac rd 7yPa/ Gmye Sse'wak Srmdorr krax bw ow haG nada a (Jaler r~fr aaw, py~yls :elwru'ty wark .WGuwr ~ w., ~ ~ 4 twY~Kf G) ,a.,gw ,..~N a! sse 4 (~ afar/ aNt 1u4 oe(y Ordinance No. 347 Page 18 •M• uNO usa nr b~GA towMow~ 10 - t 7 aweMino rtlb / we Rno~l~sawi me*Iwr iwcpa~dmr +~ o~au m ~~!~u' a"~'sti pvlrw9. the mtt y(on ~ ~nakc cidinbuG iwio ~y py~. y~ meJp~r ~a N tMe Mwie mtde .Lry(fy le/bwr w .rnrlYi~s. Bii7dtwF ~JP~J ~c a a. )a.dler,}r raaW. owcwens '"%Q a+ areyN mtev. 4~f Sauw. pvksly Tnul. n~tar mewso ¢. Prk ' ~~ ~;- Spr4G (e'.e,mys arnry¢ at amy 9/vd' Z]7 Ocdina~ce No. 347 7-r ~ 3~ ~._ !~ eaaou. -~ 77u (a.yi.z u snm'~a/al...a »ak roved ~`~^9. daigivd ar ax imy~6 ~pvrrr4 o1c 4 wut bMLuy. Grwbriy f+nnaa. qu ~£iMaL aalar a+A~ehs Q~or iy a.e..rr..uy ,o,.~.e. FEdertnan.~ BPy~ Mul v~.w. +~ ~~~°A%~ ~y pb+~ny afmie. m fnu7dl~tr Wab May rawcc NKil+iry m Vma, ua.Z, apw.rpxc wrna- '~/ x~e ORDINANCE N0. 348 AN ORDINANCE OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANa10 Qi GlDNGA, CALIMIRNIA, ADDING ARTICLE 10.50 TO TITLE 30 OP THE RANCHO WCAlDNGA MINICZPAL WDE TO PROVIDE FDR 1RE ESTABLISHlLNT OF PERMIT PAP.RING DISTRICTS THH CITY COUNCIL OF TRH CITY OP RANCHO WCAISINGA DOES ORDAIN AS RGLLtyi15: SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding en Article, to be numbered 1C.50 and coneieting of eectione to be numbered 10.50.010 through 10.50.140. incl ueive, which said Article reads ae follars: ARTICLE 10.50. PREPERHNTIAI. PARKING DISTRICTS Sec. 10.50.010. Def initiona. Ae used in this Article, the following terms shall hwe the following meanings: "Engi seer" means the City Engi Hasa of the City of Ranchc C•_cnmonge. ^Perm it Parking District" means an area estebl iehed by resolution of _ __ __..~ _...w .C .e.^.1..r ~,..,a avnly to ell vehicles ezcept .~~ ___ _ vehicles which heve~been ieaued a parking permit pur anent to this Article end vehicles ezempted by Section 10.50.100. ^Resident" means a pe reon who lives in a dwelling unit located within a Permit Parking Dietr ict. ^Merchent" means a person who operates a bvsinese within a Pezn it Perking District. 'Gus et^ means atq pe recn vial ting or intending to visit a resident or merchant residing or working in a Permit Parking District. Sec. 10.50.020. De eignation of Permit Parking Di sir icte. 'h,o Ci ry Cnuncii may eetubl ish Pe ..W it Peking Dietritt! F,y resolution. Any such reeol ution shall d¢signate the boundaries of the Permit Parting Dietr ict end shall ape cify the nature of the perking limitations which apply within the district to operetore of vehicles other then vehicl ee rhich have been iaeved a pe rniC purswnt to this Article, or ahich ere ezempted from thin Article pureuent to Section 10.50.100. Ordinance No. 348 Page 2 Sec, 10.50,030. Minimum Size. Petro it Parking Di etricte shall contain at least four (4) blocks or et least one (1) mile of curb frontage. 3e c. 10.50.040. Pe tdtione. p gednn~e c m.rrhante ma tition th Ci FY t•_~ge£il oP __t{F e staDl ieh3fi8 bf a Per~iit geraing Dr e~ric~. „ny nu~iL pe d~s.a..a .ed the boundaries of the proposed dietr ict and shall be signed by at least seventy five (75%) percent of the residents or merchants residing or working within the propo eed district. Such a petition shell be filed with the Engineez who shall prepare. a report to the City Council on the proposed district, including the Engineer's recnmmendationa regarding the eata6l iehment thereof. The Engineer shell fotvard hie report together with the petition to the City Council. Nothing in this section shall be mnetrued to limit the authority of the City Council to establ iah a Pernit Parking District in tfie absence of such a petition. Sec. 10.50.050. Signs. Upon the establ ieMent of a Permit Parking District, the Engineer shall cause appropriate sigma to be erected in the district. indicating thereon the perking limitation appl icaDle to the di strict and the eaempt ion Yherefrom o. vehicles with perm it a. Sec. 10.50.060. Exempt ion for Permit Nol dare. The parking limits tions impo aed within a Permit Parking -l strict pursuant to this Article shell not apply to vehicles for which a perking permit pertaining T.o that di sirict hse been issued pursuant to [hie Article, prw ided the permit ie di epl eyed in the manner prescribed in Section 10.50.090. No such permit shell reserve erry particular parking place within the district to the holder of the permit. Each such permit eh all be vel id only for the Permit Perking District for which it ie i9aued. Sec. 10.50.070. Ie nuance of Perm ire. Appl ica bona for perm ire to park within a Permit parking District may De made by any resident, merchant or employee of a merchant residing or working within such di err ict. Such appl icatione eh all be filed with the Engineer or his designated representatives. Unl see othenr ise prescribed by She reaol ut ion ~_'°hlish ing •he district, not mate then three (3) Hermits (ezclueive of gue et parking perm it e) shall tw issued to reside nta of arty single da ell ing unit. Arty person aggrieved by the decision of the Engineer may appeal such de cieion to the City Mane gar, whose decision on the matter shall he final. Sec. 10.50.080. Gus et Parking Pernit a. Unl see othetw lee prescribed in the reaol orlon establ iehing s Pemit Parking Die[rict, each resident holding a perking permit shall 6e entiti ed to Ordinance No. 348 Page 3 receive guest parking permit forme from the Hngineer, Such resident, unless modified by reool ut ion. may issue a guest parking permit to arry guest of such resident by noting such resident's name and address on the form, dating and signing the form end identifying the vehicle for phich the permit ie issued by license nrmber on the form. Seth such guest permit parking permit shall be valid until 12:00 room of the dny fol los ing the date of issuance. Any vehicle for which a guest parking penit has been issued shall be exempt from the erkirg licitsticne vhilw corked 300 feet or closer of residence being visited v ithin the district during the period for which it is valid, provided each permit ie diepl eyed in the manner preacr ibed in Section 10.50,090. Sec. 10.50.090. Di epl ay of Pe mite. (e) A perking pe rnit issued p~reuan[ to this Article (other than e guest perking pe tm it) shell be permanently affviced io the lover driver side of the inside of rbe rear vindov of the vehicle for phich it vas issued, (b) Guest perking permits shall be displayed face up on the driver front dashboard of the vehicle for which it was issued, Sec. 10.50.100. E:eept Vehicles. The fol lea ing vehicles are e:oampt from the parking restrictions applicable co elry Permit Parking District: (1) Repair, maintenance, refuse collection, utility, fuel, delivery end service vehicles being used in the course of bueiueea. (2) Vehicl ee orned or operated by airy goverrmental agency, or contractor of a goverrmental agency, being used in the mar se of business. (3) Emergency, life euppori end health care vehicl ea being used in the course of buei*:ees. Sec. 10.50.110. Authority of the Engineer. The Engineer ie authorized io establ ieh rules and procedures and to produce sign e, forme end other materiels mace see ry or approprlete to impl eeent the prw ieione of this Article. Sec. 10.50.1'20. Permit Fee e. ,e ity ^'1 n; r_ee i.~ri nn; eatahi ieh fees for pzauft appl ice ti one under thi¢^Ar title. Sec. 10.50.130. Dieeol ution of Petm it Parking Districts. 1'he City Council may. by resolution, ternlns to end dissolve any prev Sously eetebl iehed Permit Ysrking District. 1~ 1 Ordinance No. 348 Page 4 Sec. 10.50.140. Perml Prwieione. (a) llnleea exempted by the prw isione of this Article, no person shall stand or perk a motor vehicle in airy Permit Parking District in violation of arty parking reetrictione established pursuant to this Ariicl e. (b) No person atoll falcely represent himself or herself ae eligible fur - parking pe = .. fnr^-iet fsl es inFeresrion to the Hngineer nr tie representatives in an eppl icetion for a perking permit. (c) No person who tae been issued a parking permit shall ttereaf ter allow the use thereof by arty other person. (d) No person shell copy, produce, create or use any facsimile or counterfeit perking permit. SHCTTON 3: If arry section, subsection, sentence, cl ease, phraee or portion of ibis ordinance is for arry reason held to be irrvel id or umm~atitu- tional by its decision of any wart or competent juriadictios, such decision shall rrot affect the validity of the remaining portions of thin ordirmnce. the City Council of the City of Raneto Cacemonge hereby decl Brea thst it would hive adopted this ordirmnce and each •e ction, subsection, een[ena, clause, pbraae or portion thereof. irrespective of the fnct ttat any one or more eectione, subsections, sentence e, cl nuees, ptreseq or portions be declared irrval id or unconstitutional. SHCTION 4: The Mayor stall sign ilia Ordinance and the City CLerk shall cause the same to oe puui iehau wi~uu~ :1 :c .. Cs) _cyc a°7ov '_t^ ^_°-°°"° at least once in The Deily Report, a newepeper~of~general circulation publ lehed in tte City of Ontario. California, and circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. I V lam' C[Tl' OF R?NCHO CCCAMONG~ STAFF REPORT ~? DATE: May 4, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager '~v -~ FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer BY: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION APPROVING TIME ~ ERTENSI ON FOR TENTATIVE TRACT N0. - CRISTIANO - A cus om o rest en a su ivision o o s on ''~~ approximately 85 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (less than two dwelling units Der acre), located on the east side of Haven gven ue north of the Hillside Drainage Channel (Deer Canyon Orive) - APN 201-121-24 I. REC01lENd1TI0N: Staff recommends that the City Council sustain the Planning Commission's action and approval of a time extension for Tentative Tract 12332. II. ABSTRACT: The reasons stated in the appeal of the Planning Commission action are: 1. The lack of adequate "secondary" access, and 2. The street design in the project. A copy of the appeal letter is attached for your reference, following Exhibit "E". III. BACKGROUND: Tentative Tract 12332 (containing 204 lots on 141 acres) was initially approved by the Planning Commission on May 11, 1983. Phase I (Tract 12332-1) containing 53 lots was recorded in August 19Aa ann the streere for that phase were constructed shortly thereafter. Individual custom homes are currently being constructed on a lot by lot basis. The original Tentative Tract Map was allowed to expire by the Developer. A resubmittal approval for the remaining 151 lots was approved by the Planning Commission on February 12, 1986 for an Tnitial period of two years. The applicant requested the first of three possible one year time extensions (until February 12, 1989), and received approval by the Planning Commission on March 9, 1988. 1° I CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 12332 - CRI STIANO MAY 4, 1988 PAGE 2 The time extension was submitted to the Planning Commission on January 27, 1988, and was continued until March 9, 1988 to allow staff time to prepare a response to concerns expressed by homeowners within the first phase of the Tract. The concerns are summarized as follows: Street design within the prcj ect including: 1. The reduced width of the east-west collector streets, 2, The humped design of some street intersections, 3. An apparent inconsistency between the street layout within the first phase compared to the balance of the tract, and 8. Additional "Secondary" access IV. ANALYSIS: A. Street Design: 1. Street Nidths: The homeowners requested that the main collector streets within the Tract be increased from the approved width of 32 feet to the City lnnal ctreet ct an dares of 7F fnnr The streets which are 32 feet wide are shown by a dashed line on Exhibit "C". All other streets are 36 feet wide. The streets which are 32 feet wide and posted for no parking on both sides will provide better traffic flow than 36 foot wide streets with parking, because there .s a wider travelled lane width and less "side friction" caused by parked cars. This parking restriction should not cause a parking deficiency, because no lots front on these particular streets. The other streets are sufficiently wide for parking on both sides, and the lots are large with long driveways. 2, Humped Intersections: The homeowners expressed concern for the apparently exaggerated hump on the downhill (south) leg of the streets intersecting with the main (east/west) collector streets. These hoops were installed as a drainage control measure. For the developed Phase of the Tract (TR 12332-1), the design provided for the containment of drainage within the east/west collector streets by preventing it from entering the col-de-sac streets. This was accomplished by raising the entrances to the ~2 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 12332 - CRISTIANO MAY 4, 1988 PAGE 3 cui-de-sacs, which, in conjunction with the steep street grades, resulted in the exaggerated humps. The conceptual grading plan for the rest of the project does not propose this same design and shows a more gradual intersection slope. 3. Street Layout: One resident expressed the opinion that the street layout for the undeveloped portion of the tract is inconsistent with the existing portion in that the existing portion consists of short cul-de-sacs where the other portion has a rather long loop street. The question then becomes, does this difference make the two portions inconsistent or does it add an acceptable amount of variety. The Planning Commission felt that the design was consistent. Additional "Secondary" Access: The homeowners requested that an additf onal access he provided from the easterly portion of the proposed Tract connecting to same street other than Haven Avenue to serve as an add',ti on al secondary acwss in the event that Haven Avenue is made impassable. The DPDieCt LDI'rent lv hoc two ci root rnnnartinnc 4n wavnn Avenue (Tackstern Street and Ringstern Drive). These two connections were required to meet the Development Code requirement for two means of access when the project was originally approved. Circumstances have not changed from the original approval; therefore, additional access points were not required for the new approval in February 1986 nor for the current Lime extension. The current two access points provide adequate street capacity to serve the traffic from the 53 existing lots (Phase I), the 151 lots proposed for the rest of the tract, and the 42 lots master planned for the triangular property to the north. However, prompted by the homeowners' concern, the Planning Commission did instruct staff to investigate the possibility of proyid{n^, „additional u,.Leia routE to LitE oro.iect area. Staff developed the Area Circulation Pian shown on Exhibit "D" that will eventually provide an additional access for the project area. The plan proposes that future streets will be extended from this tract northerly to the vacant triangular property and easterly though the vacant Flood Control District (SBCFCO) property, then southerly across abridge over Hillside Channel to connect primarily to Milson Avenue with a secondary connection to Hillside Road, The ~g3 CITY COUNCIL STA Ff REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 12332 - CRIST IANO MAY 4, 1988 PAGE 4 construction of the future access will be a requirement of the development of the triangular property, the SBCFCD property, and Lhe vacant property south of Hillside Channel. This access is no*- intended to be used for regular traffic from Tract 12332-1 and 12332, therefore the connecting streets will 6e sated and only opened for emergencies. The Developer of the property south of Hillside Channel has expressed disagreement with the proposed access through his property. However, this street connection is necessary to provide addequate traffic circulation for the area west of Deer Creek Channel, and to serve the SBCFCD property to the north when it develops. These future streets will also serve as an emergency access for Tract 12332. The Ceveloper of Tract 12332 has proposed a method of providing an immediate additional access for fire and other emergency vehicles (Exhibit "E"). It consists of a graded road from the northeast corner of the proposed tract easterly across the SBCFCD property, then northerly adjacent to the west side of Deer Creek Channel to an existing bridge over Deer Creek Channel (used for Flood Control and utility company access), then easterly cross the 6rf dge, and then southerly using the existing paved Flood Control access road ad latent to the eact cida of Goer fraa4 rhanna7 rn utn6 t,"d Avenue or Banyan Avenue (which is scheduled to 6e constructed in the near future with an approved Tract). At the time of the Planning Commission meeting, the Flood Control District had expressed concern with liability for this route; however, it now appears that this concern can be resolved by the Developer posting a bond with the District. /R/esp~tf submitted, 1 ~ ~`~ RHM;BRH-dir~ attachment. Exhibit "A" -Vicinity Map Exhibit "8" -Tentative Map Exhibit "C" -Narrow Streets Exhibit "D" -Area Circulation Plan Exhibit "E" -Additional Emergency Vehicle Access Appeal Letter Foothill Fire Protection District Letter Planning Commission Minutes Planning Comnisison Staff Report ' ~/ /I unurr fo~NYNr f ~'~ ~/ 7~ ``/~~ I n~ ~ i I W^.. ~ 1 'ter i I i --J-~ S/T~ -- r-- cxaner I Co<aeef LEGGND: IIIf 11Y/ ltnf/)f. MMxf~! (TL. fYtux/ Jrn//tf ••••.• !/Ia IM/NOnnl/I crrx o~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA I `~ Irk!/=l\\[~~ V N ITEM: TT 12 3 3 ~ APPEAG. T1TLE; VlC/N/TY MAP EtvGn~nva nrvrstox e . j'- ~ 5107 FS .__. _,.--- ~i ii _. _ ~ ,- - - ~ -- ~ ;~j., - - - - ~ - -__ '1 Cl c'. I'.~e~'D `'aa L11`, ~'' .. ~. ' , ../. ~,ie WP1Q'N,~~..e'~P,IPt,R I`:~Y,t'~jj.'P n..y al-.. av °~D 111/// e ~~l ` {I-. _ _ '~.- «~ t1 a ~;~ /`e.a-~ / t ., a , _. __' .i•1.'~F ': ~.u1 k, 1Le~ ~.tiY~J"t...' _c: "'D P. i --~ ~. ..D~'Ta,.. r`~ ,.,.~ ~'' Y •P ,a : . ~.,. 4 ~~~'.,. t ~~ $ `o. 3`%~ y`e; il~ '. 1, e ` / I . ` f R• a . T •. . I1. . `.. . l laLL LI `~!R e „RLnt' Ee d~~Pb ~C MI ~,a'c R, t ~. Q i P st,~ J(L{,~ * °P-6.', a 4.. •` / M ~y Zi Y .~ % • 6i a1' a~' Flte iI •,.i ~~5~ `-' . ~ ' p i 0 W ^riWJ ,~ ,' ~.- -~-- ..f: ~ x ~ ~ tl ~ ~~~-___. !~ / .. ~ _ / ~i ,,. ..__ 7X/, _ I I L - / .~ J ____~.. .-.._. ~ f . ~'I '~:y 4 i _ i, 1 / I ,. .~..~ ,--..r_a- i r app rt - ~ a1 -~~'~- ~,~ ~ ~l ! ~,~: ~ r~ 'tom ~ '~• ., ~, I~ a ..,;:. T :. s, ,. r ,1J.1' ' a Sri ~~I~ .M L._ ~ c'~~~i F5 ~ epic ~ gyp.' l t+~l r+(1 ir~ 3. /.: Y Tf ~ : t ~~~ /? 7+~ti ,, / IV v _ N ~1 -, ~~ ~. ,... 8 W r ' ~ ~ h /' q ~ i 0 m~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ M W a° M M 1~N~I I U ~ M ~ ~ rr V z _ ., 4i a 4," ~q ~ V Q ~ ~ ~ ~ U ' i= ~~ ~ Grr Q O ~ x 'Ia+ ~ a ~ urrclTV s~se~nacNT ;~ % ~~ ~~~ ; O TTf233,Z ~ v :u~ • lf/lsTf K . 1 ' n C ` ' 8 /' \ c'y'bYry~ ~ ` \ ~ , ~ . Secy. ~ 1 ~ ,~ ~ `'~~I ~ pia? ~ l ~ ~ • / t ? ` , o~/s tic ~ t I u I "~ R+r ~ 1~ ''"'' ` ~ i Y _ ~ _ ~ J t _ i i nrusJe/ w0. ~ ~ - t ~ ~ 1 t I ~ I ~ wnwN Aur : ~ LEGEND : $~ %'~ tX15TlN9 JTwl1<Y3/ CNANN[LS 67C. - '~ ilIT4I~E JTRCfT3 ad I ~ANYMJ JT ~i ~ VN 3 N~' t NiiHFANi mug, ~~ ,00 l ~ 0! ~^ r 1 I V N Ciaa i OF 1'PEM; TT/,233,2 gppEgL ~~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA ' ' 'I'1TLE; AREA C/RCGF..yTlON PLAN ENGWEERI ' ~ DIV a /7 OR/ObE Ji~YYyyY tltM~/M~YT ~•ITAy.r ~•~ . -.Ir~~. ~ i~ ~(~~ ~ p~Ti-11L ~ ~ F ~, ~ r , 1"'t~,r _ ~ SiT~' A00/T/ON~L E.MGAG6NCV V8N/CLI' RCtG55 --=~"- ~- ' - - r -- GMI/I/Y musq ~~ I .M ~~ .»~N >r i ~ m J 1 ~ ..~ LHGLNO ~~ /II)f/MI Ii.IfIY1r CMMN/Y ltt. /Y fYN/ aTa//1i ...... aIIN IIYMMa4• Y/~ 2~ CITI' OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGIIQEERIIVG DMBION `b ~ ~ NV 1~ PfE1R: 7'T l ~ 33~ APPEAL. /1 G0/T/ONAL E~rQRaiNCY ~; v~rN/eae .tccESs ~~; E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MEMORANDUM .__b. 6~IY GF AA,'.'^.HO CGCnMO!iGA ENCINEEdiND GI~ISIGN ` I - <~ DATE: Mareh !0, 1988 T0: C1ty Clark l~ FROM: Paarla Nrlght, Couneileaawr SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12332 - CRISTIANO I Mnby appeal tIM dactsion of tM Planning Coeatsslon to gent a claw exgnsion for Tengt/se Treet 12332. TM nasone for sti appeal an the lack of adegw4 secondary aeeess and streaL design in tM proJacL. Please scMduU this stele for C1ty Council nWer. PN:kek cc: C1ty Council :!''[?~J;C'E;ICi["?[IOC' :C~[S'~"'[~TC~" P. O BO% 35 b643 AMETMYSi Si. • xANCNO CUCAMONGA 91707 17141 987-1575 April 15, 1988 County of San Bernardino Department of Transportation/Flood Control ATTN: Charles Laird-Assistant Director 825 East Third Street San Bernardino, CA 92415-0835 Subject: Request for Joint UselEmergency Access RE: FC, 2one i, Deer Creek Channel b Parcel 5 -APN 201-121-01 Oear Mr. Laird: I have recently reviewed Tentative Tract 12332, which is located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, for emergency access as seen on Exhibit "A" (attached). This area Is protected by the Foolhlll Fire Protection District. In light of my review, I am requesting joint use of your access facilities to accommodate an alternate emergency response into this development. Tfie proposed access generally begins at Highland Avenue, continues northerly along the east side of the Deer Creek Channel asphalt patro! road approximately 2.2 miles to the existing power line road bridge, crosses the bridge, continues southerly along the west side of the Deer Creek Channel graded patrol road approximately 1,400 feet, continues westerly across Flood Control District property iParcel 5, APN 201-121-01) in the form of a new graded 26 toot wide access road, and westerly through the proposed development to the existing terminus of Ringstem Road. i believe in addition to providing an alternate form of emergency access to the existing and proposed development; th. fire creak c atad by the proposed graded access road through the project will benefit the existing homes in the area. I will appreciate your expedient cooperation in the review and appravat of this request, in light of the fact that a City Gouncfl hearing is scheduled for early May on this item. ~~4 County of San Bernardino April 15, 1988 Page Two Should you have any questions regarding this request, please contact me at (7141 987-2535. I sincerely appreciate your quick consideration of this matter. You``rs~~very truly, ~ ~J~ Lloyd B. Almand Division ChieflFire Marshal LBA/ss attachement cc: Jack Lam, Director of Community Development/Rancho Cucamonga ~ Ken A. Miller, Director Transportation/Flood Control Robert Stoiomayer, The Cristiana Company 192 OLO BUSINESS H. TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12332 - CRI STIANO - A custom lot res en a su v s on o o s on approx ma e y 85 acres of land in the Yery Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located on Lhe east side of Haven Avenue, north of Hillside Drainage Channel - APN: 201-121-24. (Continued from February 24, 1988). Barrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, presented the staff report. Commissioner Tolstoy questioned Engineering if in the future the triangular piece should be available and some one else should acquire it, will 94 lots be able to financially support a crossing of the channel. Mr. Nanson responded that it can occur. Commissioner Blakesloy salted the exhibits show a street coming out of Tract 12332 that ends in a cul-de-sac and if this develops, will there still be the avatlabiiity for access. Mr. Hanson stated there would be. Bill Silva, Deputy City Engineer, added that it would be fully improved to the tract boundary, both street extensions to the east would be extended to the limits of the tract. This would be curb aM gutter and paving, Chairman Mc Niel opened the public hearing. Bob Szolomayer, representing Cristiano Companies, 4400 MacArthur Boulevard, Newport Beach, stated they have tried to mitigate the issues that were discussed at the last meeting. They are in agreement with the staff report. Bruce Ann Hahn, 5087 Granada Court, Aita Lama, stated there are several concerns of the homeowners regarding the access. Their major concern is emergency access and she feels this has not been soived. The triangular piece at the top would have to be developed before the condition of access would be answered and there is no tract map on that piece. The wedge piece would also have to be developed and this has not been sold by the Flood Control Otstrtct, In *_he reports, Associated Ena_inaarina talked aboui some emergency access alternatives. There is an existing Dridge at the top so residents could possibly get out and go northerly across the existing Dridge and come down the Ftoad Control District's easement on the other side of the channel. However, without emergency access easement, emergency access 1s still the major concern. After speaking with the fire department, Ms. Hahn stated they, too, would like to see an emergency access to the east. She questioned Engineering if there are plans to extend Milliken. Dlanning Commission Minutes - 7 _ ~~ ~ March 9, 1988 Mr. Hanson stated that the bridge is used by Southern California Edison and Los Mgeles Mater and Power. However, the difficulty with it is getting from this tract to it. There are some easements concerns and the actual usability of the facility. It does not look particularly viable but has same potential in an extreme emergency, more so for emergency vehicles to get in and less feasible for residents getting out that way. From Haven, you could get there; it is a gravel road however. Regarding the progress on Milliken, the property to the east of Dear Creek Charnel is owned by the Fiood Control District and Engineering feels it is highly unlikely that Milliken will 6e developed straight north as shown by the developer's engineer because of the restrictions on the property on that side of the channel, it may curve to the east. The Flood Control District has not declared that property surplus so Engineering has no Idea when or if that will happen. If it does, it will be a much smaller street than Milliken south to Mil son. Marc Roy, 5068 Calypso Court, Alta Loma, stated that as the tract map is presently designed 80-85 percent of all the traffic to the west will have to exit on Ringstn as a natural course of traffic flow which means according to the Traffic Department of 3300 trips per day. Th15 is going to create some traffic circulation problems. The present development and the part to the east is drawn in a whole series of small cul-de-sacs of 15 lots per cul-de-sac. in the back Dart of the map, there is no consistency of the project with what was designed or developed in the front part of 1t. instead of having short cul-de-sacs, there are some cul-de-sac but an extremely long, winding road with 30-50 lots on there also adding to the congestion. in reference to the traffic flow and consistency throughout the tract map. the residents ll6a L, ~~~ aumetning eise acne. iney would also like to see something definite on easement agreements. They would like to see something fina that says that at this particular point in time the people wno live there could exit at certain exits when there is a problem. Larry Clark, 6728 Teak Hay, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he supported Mr. Roy's comeents. The residents would iike to see an ability to exit through the east side to balance the traffic flow and the proposal doesn't afford this capability. The current developers are reluctant to build the bridge aM provide the access. The problem will be magnified in years to came. Frank Williams, Associated Engineer representative, 316 East "G" Street, Ontario, clarified they (as the developers; and€rsiccd that ability for the adjacent properties w support the construction of the bridge would include a third property, the property south of the Hillside Channel. They understood that all three properties would trigger that circulation element. Regarding emergency access, extensive discussions with the Flood Control District, the Bureau of Power and Mater, and Southern California Edlsbn have been held and though they have not said ft can not be done, it is a long-term process and there are no guarantees, The Flood Control District is very reluctant to grant access unless somebody Planning Commission Minutes - 8 - l~~ March 9, 1948 other than the Flood Control District assures the liability for the use of the access. They do not view a developer or a howowners association as a proper party to assure liability. They look to the City to assure that liability, Ms. JoAnne Knatcher, So83 Bramble Court, Alta Low, CA, stated her concerns regarding the access roads, traffic flow, and the high crowns in the streets. yi sam Durrani, resident of Haven Yiew Estates, stated he concurred with Mr. Clark's corwntt and stated that the City should have inttlaily reviewed these wtters when first approving the plans. Chairwn NcNiel closed the publTC hearing. Chairwn McNfel clarified the three issues Defore the Commission were: 1) emergency access, 2) intersection visibility on north-south streets, 3) street widths. Commissioner Tolstoy stated because of the length and width of this tract, he felt there should be sore type of emmrgency access. Further, he felt that the drainage 1s quite a probin on the nerth_south streets and sow other mitigation wasurcs other than the crown shotd be considered for any new construction. Mr. Hanson stated that them are comments 1n the resolution to try to spread or wke the hops wider but this runs the risk of wking very steep streets and this needs to be Looked at very carefully, ev,wniaai user TuiSGey SUSlU trot siOCe Lnes! are private Streets, the only way to wke then safer is for the homeowners association to put stop signs on the existing streets. The City doesn't have Jurisdiction over that. Commissioner Chltiea stated she agreed with Commissioner Tolstoy regarding that sore type of emergency access should be provided. Regarding the visibility in the crown of the roads, she would like to see sore different design use4 and possibly four-way stops at those locations where there may De a problem. Chairwn MCN1e1 requested clarification of access easements. Brad Buller, City planner, stated the developer has attepted to acquire emergerh;y access easements across the Flood Control property Gut nave user laid no unless the City wants t0 take rcsponsibfllty and liability for that access. Commissioner Tolstay stated that though economics are lportant to the developer, but the money needs to be spent now and not later for a direct, positive exit from this protect to the east. l~ Planning Commission Minutes - 9 - March 9, 1988 Chairmwn McNiel questioned if the south side of Hillside Channel was developed? Brad Buller, City Planner, stated yes and no, the property immediately south oP thla Droposal and west of the easterly property line of this tract is currently being developed, but southeast of this project is vacant and no formal application for devei opa~ent has been submitted. Commissioner Chi ti ea questioned why the City would have to accept lie b!lt ty for the accass and why not the nameawners associattonl Barrye Hanson, Senior Cirii Engineer, stated this is a requirement of the Flood Control District. Commissioner Emerick stated there 1s a condition 1n the resolution that requires the developer to design a cul-de-sac at the southeast corner of the tract with both a turnaround and an access to the Droperty to the east as approved by the City Engineer. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that the caller before the Commission tonight is the extension of the map. The Flood Control District east of this map is the key if emergency access Lo the east Ts required at this time. Nlthout Flood Control cooperation emegency access to the east myy not be possible. Chairman MCNieI stated the Flood Control people arc not going to grant an easement without the liability transfer. Brad Bu 11er, City Planner, added if access is required. Flood fontrnl .';`t Sa ~.~..~ iiaeiy iu grant easement across their property if the request was only far the southern tip of the Tr property. If an access easement is required from the north to south along the entire length of the Fiood Control property, it can be expected chat Flood Control nay be a little snore reluctant to granting an easement. Comaissf oner Emerick stated that it was unfair to expect taxpayers to extend the City's liability to ensure ingress and egress over County Fiood Control land for the benefit of residents who reside an private gated streets. Rat ph Nanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated that conditioning the map with offslte improvements across property owned neither by the developer or the City creates a problem. It is not a valid Idea to put a condition on the map. A proUlea artsts, lac, when the City acq~!ires through a^inent domain an action wMch is already pu611c land put W a public purpose. This relates to the willingness of the Fiood Control District to cooperate. Commissioner Emw!rlck shared the City Attorney's legal concern that a private developer's right to develop his land cannot be conditioned upon the occurance of events that are outside of his control, Comwissioner Emerick stated that Haven would be heavily impacted in the event of any Planning Comaission Minutes - 10 - I~~ ~ March 9, 1988 emergency, fire, flood, or earthquake. He also stated that many of the potential disasters, i.e. fire, flooding, would core from the north and east and therefore was not sure emergency access to the east would be a good solution. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated currently there Ts no emergency access to the east across tha Fiood Control land until you get down to Highland. Comei ssioner di akesley stated he agreed with Commissioner Easerick and Halph Hanson that there Tsn'L a way to obtain an access and action shouid be on the matter presented, Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing Frank Nt111ams, Associated Engineers rcprcsentatlve, clarified that when the developer met with the Fiood Control District on the easement issue, they asked the Fiood Controi District whet would happen if the developer graded a road across their property to the gravel rod along the channel which exists. The Flood Control District responded they would not prevent them to do so as long as the developer did not put it in on top of the levees or some other point of danger. They would require the developer to gate the access to that rod with sane form of crash gate. Coswissloner Chitiea raised concern that the Conmiscion night waive public safety far the development of~this land. Bob Szolom4yer, Cristfano representative, stated the developer has made a formal request to Deer Creek to Duv a lot for the nzrnne. of arn..e ... the sautn. He believed access to the south through~Deer Creek would be of mutual benefit. They totally dented this request. They have tried many options. They would pore than happy to provide a graded emergency access. Bruce Mn Hahn questioned what would happen if Cristfano sold their property sfnce Cristfano does not build homes. Mow would this be conditioned) Chairman Mcktel stated development of the property would go through the City's Design Review Process. Chairman MCNieI rcclosed the public hearing. Caa!eissioner EaErick apved aoarovai df tiwi roenL,iinn r..~~..,_.__ Blakesely seconded the notlon.~ Notion carried by the following voteV11e1 AYES: CONMiSSI0NER5: EMERICK, BLAKESELY, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, TOLSTOY ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE Planning Commission Minutes - I1 - ~~ March 9, 1988 Brad Buller, C1 ty Planner, stated the Commission entertain minute action to direct staff to work rith Flood Control to encourage their participation in developing an access to the east. Commis si ~~er Tolstny stated that he felt the tract is a good design but pubic safety 1s ^ore itaportant. • tr + : • ~ MEY BUSINESS I. ADPEAL i ALTA --carried ,rwv - . m apyeai ur qIC wool ilOna 07 dppreVal oT a n orm gn rogra~ Ttaposed by the fity Planner for the tenants within the Alta Loax Plaza Shopping Center located at the southeast corner of 19th Street and Carnelian Street. Brad Buller, City Planner, stated that staff is in receipt of a letter withdraring the appeal. 8:45 p.~. _ Planning Cototssion Recessed 8:55 p.~. - Planning Commisslort Reconvened DIRECTOR'S REPORTS ~. mULi1-tAMllf SETBACKS NITHIN PLANNED COMMUNITIES K. MINIMUM UNIT SIZE FDR MULTI-FAMILY ONELL[NGS - City Council to a e s u rev ew s ze rcqu neaten s for nulti-family dwellings. Brad Buller, City Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Chitiea sUted she felt it very desirable to bring the setbacks in confortaance to the standards elsewhere in the City. The additional setbacks really add to a protect. Commissioner Eserlck stated the Design Review Committee was looking at an apartfent coatplex and it appeared 1t be too close to the street with thn ~IniLs fairly c'. o;e tA3ether wits Ch aavM iP an iinnieaeanr appearance. This 1s what spawned the Cowaisslon to review the setbacks for multi-fa~aily land uses. Commissioner Etaerick agreed with Commissioner Chitiea's comments. Commissioner Blakesley stated he felt untonfortable with the 22 foot setback on a motor arterial street and felt the setbacks should be consistent with the Developaent Code. Chairman MtNiel opened the public hearing. ~C~~ Planning Commission Minutes - 12 - March 9, 1988 --CITY OF RANCHG CL'CAMOtiG~1 STAFF ftEPOftT ~ DATE: March 9, 1988 i0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission fROM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12332 - CRISTIANO - A custom lot rest en a 5u v s on o o s on approx ma ely 85 acres of land in the Yery Low Residential District (iess than two dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Haven Avenue north of the Hillside Drainage Channel - APN 201-121-24 [. BACKGROUND On January 27, 1988, the Planning Commission reviewed a request for a time extension for the above-referenced protect. During the meeting, homeowners within the tract expressed concern about three areas of the tentative tract design: A. The width of the east-west collector streets, o. 5ne pumped design oP the street intersect tans, and L. limited access to the tract. On February 24, 1988 the Planning Commission continued the protect to provide staff more time to prepare a response to the Naneowner5 concerns. ti. ANALYSIS: A. Street Nidths: The homeowners requested that the main collector streets within the Tract be increased from the approved width of 32 feet to the city locai street standard of 36 feet. The streets which are 32 feet wide are 5ho--: by 8 dashed iine nn Exhibit "A". Aii other Streets are 36 feet wide. The streets which are 32 feet wide and posted for no parking on both sides wfll provide for better traffic flaw than 36 foot wide streets with parking, because their is less "side friction" caused by the parked cars. This barking restriction should not cause a parking deficiency, because no lots front on the streets. The other streets are sufficfently wide for parking on both sides, and the lots are large with long driveways. ~C.~q PLANNING CWMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT 12332 - CRISTIANO COMPANY MARCH 9, 1988 PAGE 2 B. Humped Intersections: The homeowners expressed concern for the apparently exaggerated humps on the downhill leg of the streets intersecting with the main collertor streets. As stated by Lhe Developer's Engineer Getter attached), these humps were installed as a drainage control measure. For the developed Phase of the Tract (TR 12332-1), it was decided that it was a safer and more economical design to contain drainage within the main streets and prevent it from entering the cul de sac streets. The only way io accomplish this was to raise the entrances to the cul-de-sacs, which, in contunction with the steep street grades, resulted 1n the exaggerated humps. The conceptual grading plan for the rest of the protect does not propose this design, C. Access: The homeowners requested that an additional access be provided from the easterly portion of the proposed Tract connecting to some street other than Haven Avenue in the event that Haven Avenue is made impassible. The protect currently has two points of connection to Haven Avenue, therefore meets the intent of the Development Lode regarding nAa t~~~~ ven2C~ivos yruviue adequate street capacity to' serve the traffic ~fram the 53 existing lots plus the 151 lots proposed by the rest of the development, The Staff recommendation is that an additional access connection will not be necessary until development of the currently vacant tr?angular property adtacent to the Tract north boundary and the Flood Control District (SBCFCD) property adtacent to the Tract east boundary (refer to Exhlblt "8'). A master plan showing 42 lots for the northerly property is shorn on Exhlblt "A", and a master plan for the easterly property showing 52 lots is shown on Exhibit "C". Access for further development beyond the boundaries of Tract 12332 can be accomplished by extending streets from this tract northerly to then triangular property and easterly through the SBCFCD property. •~ ~~~~~r~f atross a bridge over Hillside Channel to either Hillside Road or Nilson Avenue as shown an Exhibit "8", the construction of the access will be a requirement of the development of the triangular and/or the SBCFCD property. Once constructed, this access can serve both Tracts 12332-1 and 12332. a o0 ~-~, PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT 12332- CRISTIANO COMPANY MRRCN 9, 1988 PAGE 3 III. CIXICLUSIpI: It appears that the concerns expressed 6y the homeowners within Tract 12332-1 wilt be addressed by the administrative clarification of wnd Pions of approvai inc iuded in the attached resolution. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the planning Commission consider all input and elements on this matter. If, after such consideration, the Commission can support the recananendation of approval, adoption of the attached Resolution with a clarification of conditions would be appropriate. Respectfully submitted, ~~- 8arrye R. Nanson Senior Civil Engineer NJS:BRM:dIw Attachments: Exhibit "R" -Narrow Street Locations Exhibit "8" -Area Circulation Plan 2ahii,it '°C- - ~autU rroperty Master Plan Resolution of Approval Prior Staff Reports ao~ N-- 3 Y - ~N ~ 1~~r7) . ~ ,ll Lr V', "~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ,, y~ R R `1T~1-' ~ ti '~ n~j ~ - .-~~. ~ ®, ,~ ~~~ ~o i o' ~ 4~~ f f ~ e i a~ f ~ f = ~ ~ ~ ;- ~I f~~ ~' , ~ ~E RD • ~~ 0 ~ '' a . I .1 R it Z "" © ' ~ AI ~ J f l ! i !! ~i! qy i ~*w~in° ~ i ~ ~ i ' ~ _ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ a i =1 '', ' ~~ V V ~ .i-~ eta „ ~• ' ~ O x w ( '~~ w ' ~ ~ ~~ z U ~-, _ ~ z a -- µ-~( ~ _ 4 7T/ 332-/ \~ ~ -m~~j _ r +\ I ' ~ ~ S3l.h ~`~~ ~`I ~, ~T%~233~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ is/ /rls ~ ~ ~ S -i b ~ ~ 1 ,~, ' ~ 1 = w ~ ~ ~ O ~•w / ~ ~ I .. f ~ 1 1 ~ ~ ~ / ~ ~ / ~ ~ 1 ~ I I I 1 Hd/t/de •Pd. ~, ~ ~ _~ ~ v teGENO: ~~r~Ny sl~rrvFo~ c1-sN~/s efc, - - - - iutare strte'r'S /v N CITY OF 1TF~: TT iz 33~' RANCHO CUCAMONGA o~~ 1'I'PLE: AreaC~.^cu/aroma ENGINEERING DIVISION EXHIBIT: ~~~ ~;\ ___~_, ,Y _ _~ _ carp ri~w s~o.~Ma 1~ ~ NYrNi IYIYN=N =4NNYI II rY1 I\IN YMrIH, '~ ~ J ~ 1 MY• • 19IIai 1. N rIYrYI1N rYiii N. IIIYI /r.!?t LS ---~ --~ .. 1,a ~ 331 ~ ~, --~ ~` v ~_, ~-- i ___~- 40 ua ~_r_°zJ I ~L -- ~ ~,ti r.r"---~ ~ _~~ ~ . \`~ i,~lo' Safi f ~o '' ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ti~ ~5 ~ ~-- ~~ 1~ 1-rT'T-1--., -------- l i i ~ i i i d :, ;~ --.- /~ CITX OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~rran~e~ro Dtvr~aox N T'T l233~ ~~ ~~ 3lGFCD ropy r ~~ M~.fr ~O/ON ~~~ G RESOLUTION N0. A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING LOMMI SSION APPROVING A TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 12332 A. Recitals. (i) The Cristi ono Lompany has Pi lea an application for the extension of Tentative Tract Ho. 12332 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in Lhis Resolution, the suD,{ect Time Extension request is referred to as "the application. (ii) On March 9, 1986, this Commission adopted its Resolution No. 8E-23, thereby approving, sub3ect to specific conditions and time limits, Tentative Tract Mo. 12332. (iii) Ali legal prerequisites to the adoDtton of this Resolution nave occurred. G. Aesoiutlon. NOM, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined and resolved by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission, including written and oral staff reports, this Commission hereby specifically finds as foilows: (a) The previously approved Tentative Map is '.n substantial compliance with the City's current General Plan, Specific Plans, Ordinances, Plans, Codes and Poitctes; and (b) The time extension of the Tentative Map will not cause significant inconsistencies with the current Generai Plan, Specific Plans, Ordinances, Plans, Codes and Policies; and (c) The time extension of the tentative Map is not iikely to cause Dubitt health an safety problems; ana (d) The time extension is within the time limits prescribed by state taw artd focal ordinance. ~~S PLANNING LOMMISS ION RESOLUTION N0. 7T 12332 - Christiano Company January 27, 1988 Page 2 3. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby grants a Time Extension for: Tract 1lcant Expiration 12332 Cri stlano Company February 12, 1989 SubJ ect to the following administrative clarification of the condt ti ons of approval: 1. The 32 foot wide streets shall be posted for ra parking on both sides. 2, the downhill legs of street intersections shall be designed to minimize the effect of roiling the profile if required for drainage control. 3. The cul-de-sac street (Court H) at the southeast corner of the Tract shall be designed with both a turnaround and an access to the property to the east as approved by the City Engineer. 4. The Deputy Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH 0.AY OF W1RCN, 1988. PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO Cl1CAMONGq BY; Larry cN e a rman ATTEST: ra u er, pu y ecre ary I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretarv of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamartga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adapted by the Planning Comm{sstan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 9th day of March, 1988, 6y the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMIISSIONERS: ~~j ~~ ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS; ~' D - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~~u~a,~ STAFF REPORT < ~ °" ~ 197] DATE: February 24, 1988 TO; Chai r~nan and !!em!~e o` the Plar a;.g Ci~i of ssion FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12332 - CRISTIANO - A cus om o res en a su v s on o a s on approximately 85 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (less than two dwelling antis per acre), located on the east side of Haven Avenue north of the Hillside Drainage Channel _ APN 201-121-24. I. BACKGROUND: On January 27, 1988, the Planning Caaaxtsston reviewed a re- qu~ior a time extension for the above-referenced pro,)ect. Ouri ng the meeting, homeowners wt thin the tract expressed concern about three areas of the tentative tract design: 1 I tmt lnA __~--. tL -uC u. u , 2. The width of the east-west collector streets, and 3. The rolled design of the street intersections. iI. ANALYSIS: A. Access The existing homeowners of the tract felt there was, in essence, only one point of access into the site. Because both street connections Into the tract were off Haven Avenue, the residents were concerned that if Haven Avenue wes to be blocked, they would not 6e able to exit *.he tract and ^^,drgency vehicles would not De able to serve the residents. The residents felt that an access should be provided to the east, with a bridge over the channel, to connect to the extension of Milliken Avenue. B. Street Widths The homeowners were also concerned about the width of the east-west streets that serve as collector streets for the tract. The private streets were originally approved with a iLr PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TIME E%TENSION FOR TT 12332 - CRISTIANO February 24, 1988 Page 2 32 foot curb to curb width which only allows parking on one side of the street. The City standard for puDltc streets is 36 feet curb to curb which allows parking on bath sides of the st~'eet. The !'"Si den ti std t2d that the pavPlSi ant width should be increased to +eet the City standard. C. Intersection Design The hcaieowners stated that the design of saax of the intersections, particularly the dormhill streets, did not provide adeQuate sight distance visibility. The dovmh111 streets had been designed with a "hoop" to prevent water frai running down the cut-de-saes. Nith the roll 1n the street, visiD111ty of oncoHng traffic was difficult. The rest dents felt Lha4 a 51aHlar design should not De repeated within the reaalnder of the tract. III. RECOMMENDATION: In order to allow the applicant and staff tliae o researc ese Issues, the Planning Caa~lssion continued this heal for four (4~ weeks. On February 12, 1988, staff received new information frawt the applicant but has not had sufficient tiaw! to analyze the new material. fierefore, staff recommends that tA1s iteAl De tonttnued for two 121 additional ro.tr" Res ly s b t , Dr r City P1 ner BB:SM:te Attachments: ExhiDlt "A" Exhibit "8" Exh1D1t "C" exhibit "D" Exhibit "E" Letter from Associated Engineers Letter from Fiood Control District Sit! Ut111zatton Plan Conceptuai Grading plan Conceptual Master Dl an ~v~ µ-~o Associated Er+gineers COWSIILTINOOMC~afalHef~a 71m tABT '!' STREET • ONTARIO. CAUPORNIA e17M • ITt11 /N-NU MAlI3N0 AOOREN: P.O. b% Wr0. ONTARIO. G atyet February 12, 1988 Mz. Brad eui ler D irectoz u£ Planning C icy of Rancho Cucamonga 9340-C Baseline Raad Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 RE: Teneae ive trace 12332 Exeansion Planning Co®iaaion Continuance SubmittQ Deer Nr. Butler: Pursuant to our recent meeting regard in6 the PLnning Cosaeiu ion'• continuance of a canaent calendar item for a%tenaion of tentative Yract 12332, va herabq submit [he following: A. Four prince of Tentative Tnc[ No. 12332 revised [o illustrate Che appro%imate lot scion of two poinu of acceea. Condition of approval fur Tr. 12731. Resolution No. 86-23, Section 2. En¢ineerinv rrom '1 requcre9 an Accel3 EaalmenC. 8. Four prin[+ of a mea[er plan ahori ng potential development of the adj acenc property [a the east owned by the San Bernardino County Flood Control Diacric [. Prior co the developalan[ of. the potential master plan, i[ mu aC be dace rmined if: L The Plood Con[rul Dist rice plans co utilize the property Eoc i[a ovn purpoNap (See copy of letter from [he Plood ConC rol Dint riot dated 9-12-87 included hereri[h) 2. IL the Flood Control Dist ric[ would offer [he pro perCy for sale; 7. If the al[imate owner could obtain a Tentative Map for residential dove lopmant, then the orner would have to dace rm ins if; a. He could obc sin aeceaa to Haven via Trace L2J72 and Tract L 2771-! via a joint use of acceea agreement, or; ao9 N~-~I b. Obtain atceaa to the east or couch by development of new roads and bridges. C. Four pri eta of the A.L.T.A. Survey plat vurked to show the propoeed location of an emergency access co the eat from Tmtacive Tuct 12332 to Wilson Ave. via the existing bridge and road on Plood Control D:atr icG property. The eeaeemnc would allow resident of Tract 12372 and 12772-1, during an emergency which blocked [he Raven Ave exit, Co drive [o [he west aide of [he channel, then north on the gravel road to an eziating bridge, Chen east ac Toss [he bridge, end south along the east •idn of the channel co Wilaan Ave. The eaeaxo! could also be used, by Eire and safety pe nonnel, co bring equipaten[ to the trot ta. We have been in comunicacion with [ht San Bernardino County Plood Control D ie lricc, Loa Angeles Department of Water and Povar and [he Southern Cal iforni• Edison Company to initiate [he procea• of obtaining the naceaaary eaaemenca from each agency. In addition, we have requested a letter from each agency vh ich ind is oleo the it position on Chia auctar. AC this lima, w have received no aeaurance they rill agree Co the propoeed eawrgencq act sae. IC ie cm [omary Eor each agency to have a normal review oerimd for this type eF easement of ern [o Eour months. The Flood Control Di rtricc hoe informed ua on easement each ea we have reque aces, they wtlt requcre the Ci[y of Rancho Cucamonga to assume all tie bilicy vh ich would arise Erom the use of Chia road. 7. Pour prince of revised Sice Utilitat ion Map. E. One print of [hn Flood Control District Right of Wey Nap as information only for your Lng inearing Department. In response [o Barrye Ranaan'a reque at w offer the following information: A. The radu<ad roadway Tid[ha specif is ally on Tackacem Street, Ringstem Screat, Calico Court and Bramble Court re re approved by the Commiaa ion co transfer the normal parking area an Che unloaded side _., thr landscaped areas. These setae ea ahouid taws been nnnr e,i .,,. no parking co accomplish chin goal. If chin hoe eat been done, we are Tilling [o assist the ex lacing homeowners in poet ing the eziating st rests. 4. The seemingly exage rated humps a[ south running Cul-drSeca was designed primarily as a drainage Concrol to assure that aeurm flora are directed where :hey era supposed co go. In steep areas tuna Ff C ~/ 7 velocities are ao high ouch part icularl extreme me asurea ere necesaa ry y when mass grading is noc being proposed, Ge understand the Planning Comiaaion'a concern abouc safecy issues and hope chat our rea ponae• to your request prove uaefui in eat iafying chose concerns. If you have questions please call. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EN lgi , INC. ~' ~~ Prank E. Nilliama Poz: Cri at iaoo Parcnera 1 82-66C1 cc: Criatiano Parener^ 1 a~~ ~-l3 •2~3}i{• li~l! i >H i!2 {{{) Tq~{OT Cp. •~ DE~P~ChTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION/ ~ CouNtt as w, alanMDN10 dW/ twwaoaalaMtu FLOOD CONTROLIAIRPORTS ~~~~.~ nNUCwanadoancr a27 EfH rnf {xw, .few M•KrfMw. CA a2f1a-M16 . 171{1 7{73{00 ~N/(1 ry\~M MICMA(ni.xta AIKfK SaPtaaDa7' 22, 1987 Filet 7-500/2.03 171e trlatiano Ca2panias 7700 Main St. Buita B Irv1na, G 9271b Attn: Robert J. Bmlomaycr Ru FCD, Zone 1, DNr CrNk Cha1u1a1, Faroel Sr AFM 207-121-Ot, lbNlble Surplus. Defr Mr. Ssolamayar, 111a Diatriet~• inwatiptim into your raQUaat W purohN fha nuD~Nt property ravNlad Nat St Sa travaread by the Dlatriat'• Da! trNk Clannal. DW to oo7lditiona that haw raaantly aqr W our attwatim m propartiN m Dear Croak era baler{ aonaidared far puDlio asla. Thera ors aapaelty atudlN baler dons, by fha Dis7;riot and ua U.S. Att•P Carps of ~lnaara, m tM notin Dear Omsk Pro~act to datralna LM cease W attamrta flown Sn Dsr Crank Qereelal. Until .......l..~.....r ,r.... .r„N1•^ U4• ermarty aunt d nLlnfd far ON/lblf bNln ua~. If ya1 have any aueatlona, plena, amtact Kan Millinaa d (714) 387-2736• Yary t7vly yarn, Kan A. Millar, ANt. Director-ylannln{ T1~anaportatim/Flaod Control KM/K1i/lr a~2 ........... ., ~ . , •. f ..1,, . ~,, ... . . __.. ; M ~~ -. _ ti i ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~. `f~ / ~~ ~~ • ti-` ~ :y..' .1~~ ~~.~ c ~ It r ~ i ~ ~ ~~~ B+ . ~' ; ~ t A ~ ~ ~ 1 ,~g '4 _y - ~ ~. . ., --- ~ ~~~~ ~- ~ ;-- i • i~_.~' -. _•e.-~- ~-- ill. -~ i-!i •is~ u G CITE' (~ °~ 13 irE~i: ~ /t~~ R.-~~CHO CL'C~~IO~G~ riri.e s.~,~.rrssrs,~~___ PL.~.\'\'ItiG DI\'I$IOh E~HIWr C SC:~Lt t-~ -~s --~= y} : , ~- ~r - -- ,_;_ i _,~. , , -~-- e ~,r ~~ CITY (~ ~ ~4. R •-~ ~Z'HO CL'C~ 110\G,~ PL.~.\\I~G pl\'LS1pn• ITEM: ,~'/Xilz TITI.F. - ~,~ E\HIRIT a 5C.,1LL ~~~~0 i -- ___ YASTFN lLAN SNOWIMa ` - - ^ ~ e.veu rn.u enuanu. or a. r.we ee.ae vum ..... ..v v n.e.n.r n.cr .e. um ~ _-J ~ _, i - `r ' ~R/~ ~ '~ - _- ~ ~~ _-~ I r.. ~ i~ I ~ __.__ __ ~ ' --- Y ~.`~ ~___ ---y i ~I -____-___w--~-~ i 9~ it ~ ~-. •~. ~- ;: \r MtT ~ ~~/ CITY (~' R.~~CI-K) CtC~~1p`G~-~ Ir>`~I: ~/t~~ '' PL.~.\\I~G TITLE ~ ~_^~~,y gl'LSIO~ ~ E\HIWT ~!' X:.~LE ll Tr ~~7 CITY OF RANCHO CtiCAMONGA ~~~,,y,~ STAFF REPORT ~ ~ ~ ~^ Y }I A F. ® Z DATE: January 27, 1988 ier, T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Tam Grahn, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: TIME EKTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 12332 - CRISTIANO - cus m o rcs en a su v s on o o s on approximately 85 acres of land in the Very Low Residential District (less than two dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Haven Avenue north of the Hillside Drainage Channel - APN: 201-121-24. BACKGROUND: Tentative Tract 12332 (204 lots on 141 acres) was or g na y approved by the Planning Cos*{ssion on May 11, 1983. The applicant recorded Phase I (53 lots 1. Subsequently, the appUcant received a new approval for the remaining 151 lots on February 12, 1986, which is due LA expire on february 12, 1988. According to the Subdivision Map Act, a tentative tract map may be cn lc iiJcu uy W j i~! yea r5 Trdm Lne dd Le OT approval. Therefore, the applicant may request two additional time extensions, in one year increments, extending the map until February 12, 1991. The applicant is requesting a one year time extension to expire on February 12, 1989. II. ANALYSIS: Staff has analyzes the proposed time extension and has comps the proposal with the developarcnt criteria outlined in the City's Development Code. Based upon this review, the project meets the Ba51c Residential Development Standards of the Development Cod! for the Yery Low Residential District except for the required minim lot frontage of 50 feet at the front property line, This project shows 19 lots of the total 151 that have a lot frontage ranging from 40 to 48 feet. However, these 19 cut-de-sac lots average 31,516 square feet, dyer B,OCC sduare feet larger fha_r, t.hn average size of the remaining lots within the tract, This inconsistency is not considered Lo be significant by staff and would not significantly alter the development of the project. III. RECOMMENOAiION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission aPDrove a me extension through the adoption of the attached Resolution. ~I~ PLANNING COMMISSIGN STAFF REPORT TT 12332 - Christiano Co~pany January 27, 1988 Page 2 0.esp ully su Lted, rad r C1ty P1 ner BB:TG:vc AttachaKnts: Letters free Applicant Exhibit "A" -Location Map Exhibit "8' - Tract Map Exhibit "C" -Equestrian Tratis and Landscape Concept Resolution 86-23 Tice Extension Resolution of Approval a 1~l µ-~ q 1'HE CRISTIANO COMPANY December 2. 1987 Mr. Brad Huller Director of P1anr.3nq city of Rancho cueamonga 9320-C Baseline Road Rancho Cveaaonga, CA 91730 SUBJECT: Request !or one-yur extension on Tentative Tract 12332 Dear Mr. Buller: We have just acquired the unimproved portion of Tentat3vs Tract 12332, and have eoniacted an englneer3nQ company to complete the required work .to record a linal map. Zn addition, we have begun our prkst research •florts to determine the type of yraduct moat suitable for the project, which we believe will be very eospatibl• with the existing developaent Sn the tract. SSne• we have bean informed by our coneu iron.. .~.._. .•____ ._ . ^.Sme to complete the above work before expiratlon•of,the Tentative Tract Map, we hereby request your sincere consideration in extending Tentative Tract Map 12332 for one year in order far us to complete our work. Enclosed Ss our 962.00 !Sling tee rsqu3red !or the Tentative Tract Map wxtension request. Plsas• file this request today Sn order to 6e placed on she January 27, 19e8 agenda. I." you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at anytime. Sincerely, TFiE,~STIANO COMPAKY Bober t.~J, Szolomayer RJS:cis ~ (~ Enclosure DOC:BO BS.-Extension-Rancho Cucamonga r~ Associated Engineers CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS SAN BERNARDINO OFiICE 1e3 W. NOSPITALITY LANE. SUIYE 15 • SAN BERNARDINO. CA. 97108 17Ya) Ba40191 - - ~_ - December 15, 1987 ~~" ~ ~ ~~ Oi rector of Planning Dc`. 1 ~ ~D07 City of Rnncno Cucamonga A'~ 4 ~~IIUU 9740 Baseline Road r ~~ ~ ~+ Al[a Loma, CA 91701 •~~' '~3 Re: Tent ativs Tract 11373 - Hevenview Esta tle ' Deer Mr. Buller: We hereby request an axtention of the approval of Tentative Tract 13312 - Havenview Estates which 11 due to expire in February. Please notify me if there is anything which would preve.^.t t.`.e grant i.^.q cf t.`.is first eztantion. Thank you Eor your consideration on ehia matear. Very eru lv vnurt ASSOCIATED ENGINEERS, INC. h~ ~~~~ ?hi1Lp M. Doug lea, P,E. PMD: s 1 cc: Nr. Walser H. Laband - WHL Corp. Mr. Robert Szolomeyer - The Chrieeiano Co. Nr. Funk Williams - AasoC to tad EnglMera (Onset lol ~1 J.N. 91-66 ^~~^~1 lq fN;~A~1rti r~S 1 ! Htrnl,y : UcaMr. ~ry~S~n .q~1 N }~-zl crr~~ c~F ~.ao R.-1\'CHO CC.'C-1~tU\G.-~ PL:~\\I~G Dll'LSIO\ \URTH TITLE E\III[11T ~ $C,~LE -7? ~i lLetiaa0+-Y ~.7E'~ BSI tvr tti iJTAfIJLf 1RfN~ ~Z~3L atzoQpeo _ _ _ _ i'~'_'^'- `~-.n y.~ ^aac_ __..._ TENTATIVE t'.ACT If333 ~i~~a • w'"~if ~ r ~~".'~ s~ ~ ~ .,~ .~1 ~ . ~1 ~' ~~~ \(1RTH CIT1' ()E: ITEM: ~K~~. ~fC~ - ~'?~i2--~~ R.-~\~CI-K) CL'C.-~~I~~(x~ TITLE PL.\\'\I\L DI\'ItiIU\' ~ ~3~\IIIRIT,~_SC;~LE i • 1 ~ ___ _ _ / _ ___ 4 '.. _ ~ f - Jl 1 =OT.. q ' y ~ i j,;. ! ! ~ ! III _ ~~`\'Y -.. . a~ , :A ~• ! y` i '4 ti w. 1 ,' V ~ ~ ~ '- ~~ ° ~ ~~ i ~ ~ ~ 3 ~, j ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~~~ / 'II (. ~ z r .~ ~ ~ a 1 ! ' ii 7 '1 a i'~ ~ i ! ! ~ t \ s ,~~~~ ~_~ 1111 l~~ 1~1l:~a~ R~ ~~ ~I 'f r, e •• i ~ ! '/ 1 i ~ r r~a~; ~ 1~ '~ ~ ,~ 1 / 1 a • ,! : !~~ /,/ ' i 1/14 S,1 t1l~ ~ ~~ / ! - !. Owe ®~ 3 I , n F -~ ! - ..-. -'- ~ a oaf ~ ~~ ~E1 I --err ~ CITI' (~F ITEM= I keel I - 12;x^, R•~~CI~ CLC~~IO\G-~ TITLE _~l~e~~rl.~1-t ~r PL:1\\'f\G DI\'1510\ a..d~l'~----_ ~a ~•~~t~ullnir G sc.~LE RESOLUTION N0. 86-23 A RESOLUTION Of THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY Of RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENTATIVE TRACT 12332. WHEREAS. Tentative Tract M3R Na. 12332, hertina{tor "Map• suaoi ttzd 6y Walter Laband, applicant, for the purpose of subd iv ld lag the real propert situated 1n the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino, State of California, described as a custom lot development into 151 lots, regularly came before the Planning Commission for public hearing and action on February 12, 1986; and WHEREAS, the City Planner has retomnendad approval of the Map sub,iect to ail conditions set forth in the Engineering and Planning Division's reports; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has read and considered the Engineering and Planning Division's reports and has considered other evidence presented at the public hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Camaisslon of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does resolve as follows: SECTION 1: The Dlanning Commission makes the following findings in regard to entT ati'v Tract xn t~aa~ ,,,a .~. ~,....___.. (a) The tentative tract is consistent with the General Plan, Development Cade, and spec191c plans; (b) The design ar improvements of the tentative tract is consistent with the Ggnerat Dlan, Development Code, and spec191c plans; (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proDOSed; (d) The design of the subdivision is noe likely to cause substantial envirommental damage and avoidable 1n~ury to humans and wildlife or their habitat; (e) The tentative tract is not likely to cause serious public health Droblems; (f) the design of the ten tatlve tract will not conflict with any easement acquired by the public at large, now of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed subdivision. aa3 ~-~-a-~ Page 2 (g) That this pro,lect will not create adverse impacts on the environment and a Negative Oeelaratton is issued. attached herctoON s2 hereby approved suD,lectpt Nall lof 3the foll~ingfco dllttons and the attached Standard Condittens: PLANNING DIVISION 1. A signature sign-off shall be contained within the individuai homeowner CC Z R's designed to alert the Duyer as to the requirement for street trees, including maintenance. Prior to eccuRancy, street trees and slope plantings an Ind 1v 1dual parcels nusL be inspeMed and approval by the City. 2. Parkstrip landscaping and strwt trees, with apDroPrlate 1rr1gatlon systems shall be required along streets "A" and "C". The required landscaping and street trees may De added with each phase of street construction. 3. Rooted ground cover 1s required for slope bank erosion control when required by standard conditions. Hydroseeding shall not be allowed because of rocky soil. ENGINEERING 1. Dedication of Ingress and egress and maintenance easements overall interior streets shall be dedicated on the F1na1 Map to tM C1ty of Rancho Cucamonga Engineering and Public Norks 01v1s1ons; LAe Cucamonga County Mater pistrict; the San Bernardino County Flood Control 0lstrtet; Southern Califarnla Gas ~DanY: SoutMrn California Edison Cangany. 2. The northeasterly portlan of the project area (Flood Control Otstrtct Easement) shall be made a art of the trsct moo. The CC 5 R's for this tr ~ acs iha:l Homeowner'ssASSOCIationconeerthis tares lsedevenlopedT• 3. An access easement by separate instrument shall be provided to the property lying east of the pro~eet Dtstricowned The SdocumentrshallCb! tprepared to tthe satisfaction of the 0lstrtct. This condition shall be waived if the access is not required by the Fioad Control 0lstrict. ~_~ aa4 Page 3 4. The Homeowners Association established shad provide spec ifleally for adequate funding fcr the future maintenance of the prfvate roadways and the Haven Avenue landscaping. APPROVED AND ADDPTED THIS 12TH DIIY OF FEBRUARY, 1986. PLAH7M' I~Cf1 , COMMIS51 TM€ C1T'f DF "nANCiki CuCAM(INW I, Brad Buller, Oeputy Secretary of tM Planning Camaisslan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that tM foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular aitettnngg of the Plalmtng Commission held on the 12th day of February, 1986, by tM foitowing vote-to-wit: h BY: ~Ai!"6~ ' benrt-isZ~t'ou4, ~(a/'~rm'a~~n//~~~//JJ ATTEST:~`~H_"~H~~ ra u er, uty ecre aryuty ecre arm AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, BARKER, REMPEL, STOUT NOFC• rnru;~.~vn~nr. nimG ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ~a ~ ~ ~ ~-~ CITY OF RANCAO NCAMONGA JanwrY 29, 1988 ROb1i't $d419a4Ylr c/a TIN Crlsttano Caapagy 4400 MKArthur Blvd. Satta 780 Nsrport Baat:h, CA 9660 rye 0/~ d pt, RAY 1.1~~ C.i,~ 911)p. If 1919t9~1b 1 SUBJECT: TINE EXTENSION FOX TENTATIYE TRACT 12332 -CBISTIAMO 6antlaarn: TM planningy W~lssion nWatwd tM a0ova daserlbad pro~act at thatr s>latiny o1 Janwry 27, 1988. TAa -lamtine Ca~taston took no aetloa at this paN, Out instNd eont/nued this 1tw to tlla watln8 of iaOruary 24, 1988. TM ~ootln~y riil M hNd at tlla lion's hPlt Caossuntt,V Gntar lotatad at 9161 BaN11M Nwd, Rancho Cuaaonnya and ri11 kaBin at 7:00 p.a. If you hero am gwstions, plaasa /N1 fm >m call oar office at any t1M. St lv~.vt ~ C01181NITT DEYEL(NNENT DEpABTMENT DLVIMINC DIVISION arm C. Kissack D1anMng Cosfeffion Sat-atiry /kk ~..~ a ~.~ ~-~-`a" ~_~,.~ AFFIOA7IT a~ MRiiIR6 I+ ~!l21CN'~ Xl~.1~p.,~e=~ Matl Clerk fnr the City of Rancho a Cucamonga, do hereby swear that on ~ ~ aS 198 X at approximately u'~L) o'clock }Om (a.nl. or p.m.), I deposited in the Cucamonga Branch of the United States Post Office located at 9607 Business Center Orive, a letter addressed to and regarding: NOTICE OF PUDLIC HEARING, CITY COUNCIL - MAV 4, 1988 AT 7:;0 P.M. TENTATIVE TRACT N0. 12332 - CRISTIANO 26 NOTICES NA ILEDA~ SEE ATTACHED FOR NAMES AND ADDRESS AND PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE Signed: ~UYiaQt. .~Lt.yXw.i.o~. Oate: _~-p aS~iS~~ ~-- (RETURN TO ENGINEERING QIVISIgI AFTER SIGNING) a ~~ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING IUUICHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL The Rancho Cucamonga Planning Coanlsston will be holding public hearings at 7:30 p. m. on Nay 4, 1988, at the Lions Park Community Building located at 9161 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730, to consider the following described pro3ect: APPEAL OF pLANMIN6 COMMISSION ACTION APPROVING TIME EXTENSION cus a res n a su v son o o s on approalmately 85 acres of sand Tn the Yery Law Resi6ant1al District (less than two dwelling units per acre), located on the east side of Haven Avenue north of the Hillside Drainage Channel (Deer Creek Drive) - APN 201-121-24 Anvnna havlnn r ..~..-- ~--+..+o+ ~% uBj v` ~iR auur< Ite116 are we1COm! TA contact the City Engineering 01v1sion at (714) 989-1862 or visit the offices located at 9340 Base Line Road, Unit 0. Also, anyone ob~ecting to or to favor of the above, may appear in person at the above-described meeting or mqy submit their concerns Tn writing to the Engineering Division, C1Ly of Rancho Cucamonga prior to said meeting. DATE Of PUBLICATION Rancho Cucamonga City Council ate pr , aa~ dNTHON+ J. ~'~JREVLA CAL`/1N 'DL I''/ER BARRY SIBJL P o. Box 1302 8255 VINEYARD 6222 SACRAMCNTG CUCAMONGA, CA 91730 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CA 917j0 ALTA COMA, CA 917.1 APNd 201-484-10 APN 201-494-22 APN 201-494-14 JOSEPH GARCIA 1p5EPH STEPHEN DONALD BRIGGS 10261 PEPPER 331 W. BENNETT 2350 OAKLEAf CVN RD. RANCHO CUCAMCNGA, 81730 COMVTON, CA 90304 WALNUT, CA 91789 APN 201-484-09 APN 201-494-21 APN 201-484-24 CHARLES OUNLAP PAMELA ANDERSON JACQUELINE PAP.ISH BD E. FOOTHILL BLVD 5079 GRANADA C7. 2114 SA7ICOV ST. UPLAND, CALIFORNIA 91786 RANCHO CUCAMONGA, LA 91701 POM DNA, CA 91767 ACN 2D1-L AIj_GA APN 2u1-4yq-~V APN 201-484-16 EARLE KRUGGEL ALLAN HAHN RICKEY S. ROSS 7380 ARCHIBALO AVENUE 9910 LA VINE ST, 833 W. 115th ST. RANCHO CUCAMONGA, 91730 ALTA COMA, CALIFORNIA 91701 LOS ANGELES, CA 90044 APN 201-484-07 APN 201-494-19 APN 201-484-IS JACQUELYN PARISH JON R. YOUNG LLOYD MICHAEL 2114 SATICDV STREET 17578 HAWTMORNE 6320 HAVEN AVENUE POMONA, LALIf ORNIA 91767 FGNTA NA, CA 92335 AL7A COMA, CA. 91701 APN 201-484-06 ApN 201-494-18 APN 201-484-14 WllllnM RA WLI NGS RALPH LAIRD ALBERT C. SEGUY 6250 MARBLE CT. 1882 N. MOUNTAIN AVE 4942 CAC iUS CT. RANCHO CUCAMONGA, g17G1 CLAREMONT, CA 91711 ftANC MO CUCAMONGA, CA 9170 APN 201-484-05 ApN 201-494-17 APN 201-484-12 JAMES 905LEV TR LOREN GILES SR. WAVNE 5. CAREY P,O. BO% 785 550 MARIPOSA ST. 1547 NEWC UMB Pl, ALTA COMA, CA 91701 UPLAND, CA 91786 CLAREMONT, CA 91711 APN 201-484-04 qpN 201-494-Ib qPN 201-484-12 IOMN BARGEE GEORGE LIGHTNER RONALD VEIRS 1867 ELAINE WAY 390 N. EUCLID STE. 202 12969 SUMMITT JPLAND, CA 91786 UPlANO, CALIFORNIA 91786 E7IWA NDA, CA 91759 ?PN 201-494-23 APN 201-494-15 APN 201-484-11 SAN 6ER NAROINO CO, FLOOD THE DEER CREEK COMpANV o n o ~ . ~ ~ Oi6TRiCi RANLHOVCUCAMONGA, CA 917] 825TEA5T TNIRD ST. SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92415 aa~ --CITY OF RANCHO CCGAMONGA STAFF REPORT r-~~.' _. DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brad Buller, City Ptamier BT: Dino Putri no, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENYIROIAIENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENCMEN7 88-OlA reques o amen a nera an an se p rom Office to Neighborhood Commercial for , approximately 3.45 acres of land, located on the southwest ' corner of Base Line Road and Neuman Avenue - APN: 208- 202-13,14. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT - reques o amen e eve opmen s r e s p rom fice/Professional FOP) to Neighborhood Comnerciai (NCI for approximately 3,45 acres of land, Located on the southwest corner of Base line Road and Heilman - APH: 208-202-13,14. 1. BACKGROUND: The applicant has submitted this Genere~ etc; "nu eve opmen District IYnendnent ran!."~Y~~y a change of the existing land ~~~_ dr,ignation from Office to Neighborhood ':^-T,orai. The applicant contends that this change is necessary because current market conditions do not warrant the development of this site for office use. A traffic study and market feasibility analysis have been submitted as attachments to this application. The Planning Commission reviewed this protect at their meeting of January 27, 1988. This item was originally scheduled for City Council review at the meeting of February 17, 1988. However, upon written request of the applicant, this item was contiwed to the March 16 and May 4 public hearing. In addition, upon further written request of the applicant, this item was continued to the May 18, 1988 City Council meeting. As of this roauest, the applicant has discussed with staff oo~sible aiiernatives to the subtect pro.iect such as the concept of a "Development Agreement". The applicant was advised that staff work on a Development Agreement proposal would have to be initiated by direction of City Council. A draft aggreement developed by the applicant and staff would then be reviewed by the Dlanning Commission prior to formal City Councii consideration. ;~ 3c~ CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 88-OlA - CARTER May 18, 1988 Page 2 On July 16, 1986, the City Councii directed that five "Office/professional" sites and one commercial site be studied by the Planning Commission for possible General Plan land use changes. fie subtect protect site was one of the five sites identified by the City Cauncll. The Wien.^.ing Co~aission reviewed the fire sites at their meeting of August 27, 1486. In the review of the Base Line/Hellman site, three alternative sand uses were considered: I) Medium Residential, 2) Neighborhood Camierctal, and 3) Office. The Commission determined that multi-family residential would not be appropriate adtacent tc Base Line and therefore, was not in favor of the first alternative. likewise, the Commission was opposed to Lhe second alternative of Neighborhood Commercial. The Commission concurred that the site was a difficuit one to Develop, and their concern was that Lo redesignate the site to a more intense commercial use would only magnify the already existing problems. The consensus of the Commission was to recommend to the Ctty Council that this site retain its Office designation. At their meeting of November 5, 1986, the Ctty Council reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendations regarding the various sites for possible redeslgnation. The City Council concurred with the Planning Commission's analysis and the Council chose not to change the site's existing "Office" designation. II. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTSON: TM" ^~.._ct r;c~a~ol, as requested by nr%arter, is en ca to the one reviewed Dy the Planning Commission and City Council in 1986. In review'ng the current proposal, the Commission arrived at the same conclusion as they did in their 1986 review. The Planning Commission found that the subtect property's physical design constraints render the site Incapable of adequately handling the increased land use Intensities resulting from a land use redeslgnation to Neighborhood Commercial without significant adverse impacts resulting to adtacent properties. Therefore, the Planning Commission, at the meeting of January 27, 1988, adopted a Resolution recpmaending that the City Council deny the proposed General Plan and Development District AmenAaents. RECOf4AENDATION: At its meeting of January 27, 1988, the Planning 0111n SS On recommended the City ~JunG{i dorv r-,er,era-i Pial1 %Mendlnent 88- OlA ar~d Oeveiopment District Amendment 87-11 and adopt a Resolution of Denial. Since this meeting, the applicant stated that they are interested in forming a "Development Agreement". Staff recommends that should the City Council wish to consider a development agreement for General Plan Amendment 88-OlA and Development District Amendment 87-i1, it is recommended the City Council provide staff with any significant agreement provisions which are desired and that the applicant De 31 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 88-OlA - CARTER May 1II 1988 Page 3 instructed to begin .cork on a develapuent agreement with staff for review by the Planning Cosaisston. If the Council does not wish to consider a development agreement, then 1t 1s recoamended that the Council uphold the recommendation of the Planning Commission to deny General Plan Am!ndment 88-OlA and Development District AeenAaent 87-11 and adopt the attached Resolution of Denial. Respectfully submitted, Brad Buller City Planner BB:DP:Js ~ 3'z- AYES; COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, TOLSTOY, EMERICK, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSEIff: COMMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY r r r ... _-carried P. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSE55ee:NT ANp GENERAL rlAl1 11natOle,nf ea-uln - t. GAISIEN - n RQ{iesL W aNnu G,R OllAral nan aria uaa my rtw 'OPffc~'-to 'Neighborhood Cot•ercial' for approxl~ately 3.45 acres of land, located on the southwest corner of Base Line Rad and Nelirn Avenue - APN: 20B-202-13, 14. ce rofesslonal (oP) to Neighborhood Cassaerclal (NC1 for rtelY 3.45 acres o/ land, located on the soutdirest corner Line Rad and Melinsn Awnw - NM: 208-2021-13, 11. Bruce Cook, Associate Planner, presented the staff nporL. Coa~issioner 7olstoy gWStloned Mr Rougtau regarding the widening of the protect on Nellawn Avenw. Mr, Rougeau stated that Tt would renatn two lanes but !t would be a such rider two lanes and a acre aeslly traversed two lanes owr the rNlrwd track. There 1s a sLOn drain that will be proposed in the City's budget in the next year that will accaeplish the iaornvern+ ^! :`~ ~~a!r_^- --"-- a: u. raiirwo so that the street can 6e widened to . ,_ p...,,,~. its noraul width there and so that them will be roon Por a left-turn lane into this property. Chalrawn McMtel opened the public hearing. Mr. Janes E. CxrUr, applicant, presented an analysis of the proposal regarding three specific issues, including land use, tM appropriateness of the site for coe~erclal designation, traffic access, traffic clroulatlon and ingress/egross 15sws related to site specific criteria, and a4rket aMiysts t0 deUretne the econoetc /easib111ty of LM site for a coeierctal rather than office use. Ms. Catharine R. Clayter, 7360 Larlet Place, ID, stated her concerns were the traffic increase; [r1Ne, and parkino. She w~?uld rat::^.ar ,.~ a !rdical building gaing in racher than a shopping center, Mr, Mike Mitchell, stated his off/ce is an the soutMut corner of the intersection and stated he would retMr set coaeeerclal ratMr than office use which generates Dare traffic. a3~ Planning Coasaission Minutes -25- January 27, 1988 Ms. Elizabeth Brandt, 9188 Base Line, stated there is an extrcaie awount of traffic on Base Line. She would prefer to see eedical or dental rather than cae~ercial. Mr. Ray Young, Urban Research Assotiates, stated this site has severe site constraints regarding land use, zoning or developing. The need for careful consideration in the General Plan designation is needed now. Chtlrmn McNtel closed the public hearing. Ca~issloner Eawerlck stated that offlte vacancy for the entire region is quite high. Co~isstoner EaNerick feels that Nelghborhoad Coeawerctal is not appropriate for the site as is Office/Profasslonal but tt should reetitin what tt is for now. Coaisstoner Tolstoy stated he concurred with Co~issloner Eaerick. Co~lssionar Chitiea stapd tM intensity of the use was anothtr aspect next to tM apartrnts. A neighborhood coa~erclal center 1s quite an intense use and is not coepatibte. Office Professional nay not M viable use at this tier but tM use ieusL M nserwd. 7ht proposed cowercial derelopaxtnt is not appropriad to tM neighborhood and to the traffic concerns. Co~issloner Chitiea Boas not wpport thr aastnd~ant change. Chairaxn McN1e1 stated the Office Professional does not davolap rapidly and they oust protect the sites accordingly. Chairean MtNAI stated he did not support the change. C.sis,i~,Rr CniEiea agvee t0 fornard a reco~endatlon of denial W the City Council for General Pian Men6aent 88-OlA and Develop~ent District Awendaw:nt 81-11, Coswisstoner Enerick seconded tho siotton. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHI TI EA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COIMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY • ... - r . OLD BUSTMESS --carried v"• EAST A'fENUE WALL - CSTATIOM - Review of a proposed periaeter wall a ong as venue or a rcs dentiai subdivision of 74 single /wily lots on 32.6 acres of land 1n the Low Residential DistrlcL 12-4 dwelling units per acre) of the Etiwanda Specific Plan, loeaud on the east side of East Avenue at Catalpa Street - APN: 227-071-OT, 11 and 10. a~ Plannfng Coeasisston Minutes -26- January 27, 1988 CI2Y OF R.4NCH0 CCCADIONGd ~~U Nfj`r STAFF REPORT ~?'~~`' <; ~ ~:; ~'~; 6 z DATE: January 27, 1988 ~9°' T0: Chalrawn and Hubert of the Planning Coee!ssion FROM: Brad Bu11er, City Planner OY: Bruce Cook, AssaclKe Planner ~ SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSES9tENT AND GENERAL PLAM AMENDMENT 88-OlA - • nva an n se D ra Of11ce to 'IN1ghDorhood CaaMrolel' for approslatatNy 3.46 uns of land, located on the southwest corner of Bau Une Rad and Mel lawn Avenue - APN: 208-202-13,14. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND OEYEIOPMENT DISTRICT regwa eaten e ve o s r c p - Office/Professional (OP) Lo Ikslghborhood Cdreerctal (NC) for approalartdy 3.45 acres of land, located on the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Ration Avenue - APN: 208-202-13.14. IaCTa Nt• !!!~ ~~~, ;;,;,,,, Ja.ea e. garter, nas initiated Doth a nave Ln and Dewiopaaent Dlsiricts Aanndnent to change the existing Office destgnatton to NelghDOrhood Ca~wrcial for 3.45 acres of land on the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Yklinwn Avenue. The Planning Cor/ssion previously considered redeslgnattnp Lhe s1Le froe Office to Neighborhood Cbawerctat 1n August, 1986. AL that date, the Ca~lsslon reeaaaeended thrt the site retain Its Offta destgnat/on. The Caostission fd t then ware a nutabar of design dlfflculttes assoelaLed with this sib and was not fn favor of a Ca~eretal rehsignatlon which could potentlaily increase the land use lnbnslty of the sib, and therefor, tpagnify the 1dMt1fled design dl /fteuittes in 1Ls dwelopunt. Although staff has nqulred the subaltbl of traffle and awrket studies, a further analysis of this proposal has not found any appreclaDle change of conditions sine. the last reviar, 1n Augifst of ?985. there?Dr:, ;toff has provided Ruolut/ons of Dental for this prof act for the Cowtss tons rev/ew and consideration. II. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION; A. Action Requested: Amend the General Plan free "Olflce" to e g o 0o retai', amend the Development 01str1ees MaD f ram Office/Professional fOP to NeighDornood Coauerci al INC , and issuance of a Negative Oectaratton. a3~ PLANNING COMMISSI O~ GAFF REPORT RE: GPA88-OlA, ODA 87-I1 January 27, 1988 Page 2 s. Laotian: Southwest corner of Base Ltne Road and Helicon w7~ hue. C. Parcel Sire: Approxtav+tely 3.45 acres. 0. Surroundln~ Land Use and Zoning: North - Church and single fa~11y re3ldMttal; Low Residential (2-t dwe11/ng units per acn). South - ILlti-faaslly apardenL cdepiex; Nedlua ResiGntlal (8-14 dwa)ting units par acn). Esst -Serv1q SUt/on and Office Buildings; (Office/Professional). Nast - Library and Dons PaM:; Lor Rastdentlal (2-4 dansUing units par aenl. E. General Plan Oas_ lgnstlons: c s i- ~FiTEF-- North - Low Residential (2-4 diwllinyy units par acre) South - Medfw Residential (8-18 dweiling uM is per acre) E+st - Off1a Nest - C1vic/COe~unity and Parks F. S1to Cha raCterlftiCa: fie sib ~• r^,.~r~ i.''. w, •nnYaJ Meads .~. y..-'~"raaes ana -gentry slopes 1n a southerly direction. Thera are no existing structures on the site, but a two-wy access drive with ned/an Island bisects the property 1n a north to south direction to Drovlda access Ior the eulti-h~tiy aparteKnt captex dtrettty adjacent to the south of the pro0ect seta. III. BACKGROUND: On July 16, 1986, Me City Council dirtettd that five ce asslonal sites and one Caearrcial stet bt studied Dy the PLnning Coa>w/sslon for posslblt General Plan Land Use changes. fie C1ty Countll 01d not g/va any spetlal alternative land user to be eonaldered, but requested that the Planning Caarisslon study the step identified and prov/de recoaaaendatlons to the C1ty Council. fie project site at tJle southwest corner of Base L1ne Rood artd Hellawn Avenue eras one of th! fivs sitei iwniified by the City Ouuncii. The Pianning Cowetsslon reviewed the flue sites at their Ntetin9 of August 27, 1986. In the reuse o/ the Base Ltne/)Mlhan site, three alternative land usp were considered: 1) Nedlual Residential 2)Nelghborhood Caaseerclal 3)Offtct. The Coaseisslon detenalned that eu161-faalily residanHal mould not be aDDroprlate adjacent to Baae Line and therNore, was not to favor of the tfrst aiternative. Likewise, the Comaission was opposed to the second ~ 3~~ PANNING CCMMISSICI AfF REPORT RE: GPABB-OlA, DDA tl1-11 January 27, 1988 Page 3 alternatfw to IN1gnDorhood Cosewrclal. The Caawlssion concurred that Lne site was a difficult one to develop, fieir concern was that to redesignate the s1U to a eprt lntensa cassercial use could only aNgnify the al rowdy ezi sting proDl eee. Asa result, the Caeaisston concurred, as a Drocess a1 e11e1naLton, that Office would nave the least lspaet and ws the apDroprtate choice. The consensus Of the Cos•ission was t0 recoaawnd to the City Counc/1 that this site retain its Off1w designation. At their siaettng o1 Nor~ber 5, 1986, the City Caunell revlered the Planning Caselssion's reco~eendatlons regarding the various sties for possible redeslgnatfon. The City Cduncll concurred with the Planning Cos~tsalon ana{ysts of tha Base L1nellNilasn site, and they chose not to change the sites existing Office designation. IV. ENVIRONlE11TAL ASSESSMENT: Staff has conducted a Preltsinary nv ro se teen n1t1a1 Study per the requlresenLS of the Catiforota Envtroiwntal Quality Act and Ms detenalned that this project could result 1n slynlflcant adverse NfecLS resulting frdla DotA soda-«onalc faROrs and health, safety, and nuisance factors. Asa result, staff cannot sake a Hnding of no significant tagacts and would recossend against the issuance of a Negative Declaration with this prajeCL. GENERAL PLAN ANENOwswr ~9!SY.:S: A maaoer of design constraints rescrict a eve o p n a of this site. Base Line Road is a heavily traveled thoroughNro. fi• 8ase Line/Hellsan intersect/on is a soderatety lrpacted intersection. At peak Hours of use (weekday sorntnq and erMing rush hours!. traffic sovesent will Dack up into tAe exlsLlnq driveway on Baas Line Road. Ai so, the access potMtUl off Hel•lsan Arenw is sewnly iisited. The sfte's relatlwly short frontage along INllgn (295 feel! restricts driveway locations because driveways cost salnUtn a stnleaae distance of 200 fwt fras Base LiM on ins rest skis of Hellsan. Secondly, aecas Eros Hal lawn is lisited because of Heilsan's con9lqurstlon wksrs the street bottlenecks at tDS railroad crossing. A t1Hrd factor tMt canstralns dwdopeen*, potortial of the sites i; the LX t;tance of •_ :'1 ti-'Tilly apartMnt CoagleA adlapnt to the south of the pro~eet site and the attalnNnt of reasonaDty compatible land uses. Due to Hellsan's configuration, the apartment site could not access off of this street. Th/s left this site wltn direct access only to Base Line Rad. In response, an access easesent was obtained Dy the apartsent site through the project site to 8ase Line. fie result is a two-way driveway across the entire depth of the project site that, essentially splits the property in half. a37 PLANNING LOfMISSI01 'AFF REPORT RE: GPA88.OlA, OOA d7-11 January 27, 1988 Page 4 to Lhe analysis of this proposal, stall has identtflad three specific Issues. They Include: 1) land use, Ue appropriateness of the site for cawMfrclal Mstgnatlon; ralflc/access, trafftc circulation and ingress/egress Issues rel s e specific criteria; ant 3) wrk_eL/anaylsis, to deGrslne the econetlc feasibility of LAe s orclal ranter than efHee use. Land Use: In caegaring airirnatlw futuro land use options for the pro K site, an unavoidable consideration is the existence of the adlacen4 aultl-hsHly apartwnt coaglex. Out LO unique design constraints Drerlously Mghllghted, M13 aparbrnt caeplax awst store access r/tll Lht proiact site. fie prtatnt con7lguratlon Dtirttn the tro sites could nquin a substantial Dufftr froal rhatwtr is ultlwttly dtrtloped on the proQtet site. In thtlr prwious rwiew of the proposal to rtdes/gMLt thla site as coaawretal, the planning Co~iaston dettr+•lntd that alulLf- ta~ilY nsidtnttal could De an fnapproprlatt utt because tt qs undtsirabie Lo locate Mghtr density rosidalntlal units so close to Bast Lint Rad. fit C1Ly's gal for land ust as per the General Plan (Pagt 12) is, "Land use shall a aanaogtadd rith respect to location, tladng and densityNntansity of developsttnt 1n order to bt cons/sLen4 rltlf the caPaD11tt1eS Of tht C1tv...' 1 siatr! ..!.~.:!!;_ ;~ w,!, ywi is co, -urgantie land uses to avoid ertaLing nuisances among +diacent land uses.' Tht Ca~atsslon ftl! that to redeslgnaN the site to a land use that ptrwlts a greater 1nUnsity of ust mould only ewtgntfy vie existing problaals and vould not bt consistent with the Lana Use Elewnt of the General Plan. fienfow, the Cawisslon did not recaestend redesignatlon of this sttt to NtigllDOrhood Cgmerclal. In staff's optnlon, s/nu Lht Limo of the Caatitsston's previous revlesr W rtdtslgMtt this site t0 Cawerclal, very little, 1f any, of the conditions Mvt changed. The issues and rosuiLing analysis as degrdntd by the punning Cawalsslon with their prwlous revier art still valid today. TraH1e Cirtulatlon - The Applfunt had Greer and Coaspany Engineers pre i ra E tiiuAy LD add cii Lire traffic iaaget aafpcL Led with this site. Staffs pr/alary conCtrn is that Cowatrclal 1s a more intense land use than is Office/professional. Mtth intenstlted land use caales Increased trafftc. the traffic study coaroares the tnffle ialpacts associated rith 4he site under four conditions: (11 Under current cored/Lions with no existing development on ene site, ~~1 (21 Mith tree site Du11t out with 40,000 Square feet under l~ D tree OfH ce designation, DLANNi hG COM1I SSi0 :AFP REPOR' RE: GPABB-OIA, DDA d7-I1 January 27, 1988 Page 5 (3) M1th the Site built out with 31,000 square fret of Coanerclai/Retafl Usa, and ,4) kith the stir built out with 31,0000 square felt of Coeeercial/Retail Use, including a 6,000 square feet conwnlence store. The traffic study 1ooM both /n 1989 under tl conditions in tree year that for 1989 the tra} and iMlleen Avenue wool tree sit.. gut, the better than acceptable lepacts of easrerelal traffle study conclude at what could be the traffic conditions Pour alternatives, and aiso the traffic D10. The results of the traffic study are c ctrculat/on systee, 1.e. 8ase Ltne Road M eoderaKiy tepacted rlth developeant of prsectlon could sail bt operating at a wN of service. In ceeparlson of traffic ewlopMnt versus Offlee areloprent, the that eon dotty traffle mould result free Caeaerctal rather than Off/ce use, but there world M no slgnlflcant dHference to. the operating level 0/ service of the traffic systa raultin~ fro either the Cawercial or Office use. Likewise, to 2010, the study eoncludea that the traffle systee will be hNV11y lepacted by that tic due iw r'!!; ~_!!~„;-„ ,,,u „newer u,rre is an Office protect, Ccasserelal protect, or no protect, it w111 have little lepaet as t0 the overate condition of tree traffic systee, Aga/n, to the caepar/son of traffic lepasts of Coewercial developawenL versus Office devslopMnt, the traffle study concludes Loaf core dotty traN!c would result ir0e Cdeeerciai rather than Office use, Dut then would be no significant difference to the operating truce of servla of the traffle systee resulting from either the Coe~ercial or O/flce use, In analyzing the results of the Lrafftc study, eartain points must De kept in clod: (il Th• Traffic Study only considered the effects of tree potential site develapeent alternatives as they rota*.e LO iepaeti to the pQ.^!phi::) itfeei SySLee, 1.l. Of1- stte c1rCUlat/0n. (21 There are a nueber of on-site Lrafftc issues that must be considered with tAfs per t'i~ct: (a) The Drotect site shares access with Lhe adtacent apartment complex to the south. Mith Coaaeretal uses as opposed to Office uses, there would be a ~~ I greater amount of on-site truck traffic for I delivery purposes leadeng to a greater numeer of traffic coMlicts with as 0naD11e users. PIANN:NG CCMM:SS O 'AFF REPORT RE: GPA88.OlA, DDA tl7-I1 January 27, 1988 Page 6 (b) Commercl al use produces the greater number of Lr1 pt to and from the site Men wuid offtcm use. MiM Me Shred access w1M the awrtamnt complex Me 9nater number of Lrt pS onto Me si to mould fncnast traffic con911cts with Me apartment usen. (C) OHict reLted try/fit /s generally on week days during Duslness noun. peak use is aL morning and evening rushes w1M limited use at other times. Cae~erc/a1 traffic cecun during weekday business hours as v1t11 Office, buL wilt also cecw during Mm evenings and/or wmtkends. Thenfero, lceroased traffic use /s extended over a longer period of limo and could result to increased impacts to the +wrtment usen and usen of the center as they travent DoM dn_s/b and oft-site. (3) Finally, Me tratflc study indiates tMro wou10 be no significant df%farence DeUieen Offlee and Commercial uses 1n teems of traffic impacts. However, in assessing Mis cocelustan one must understand Me assupttons on MHeh Me ea4arlson was msde. in Lhts study. commercial ,_,.. /. ~....... s. .w. _ devllOpmeni Mile in Me Office••deV~ Oyreri Tsai Oi assuatd 40,000 squaro feet of development~nAlso, Me traffic study was camplettd under an assumed office mix of 10 wrctnt financial, 50 percent medical/dental, and 40 percent general office. [n Me generation of traffic niaMn geneni office nsulta in Me least impact, wiM H nanctal and medical/dental having stgnlficantly 9naGr impact to the terse of number of trips gerNrated. If Me olHce mix were recalculated 1n greater favor of general office at Me expense of medical/dental and financial the tratflc numbers would De cMnged Mat could possibly alter Me level of slgnlftcanu between camrrctal and office uses of Me site. Market Mal s1s - the a0011unt indicates that he 1s rtqutsLing i s his be, fefr Matf Thera ols~notb sufHelen~t edpynd btoaabsorD 30,000+ square feet of professlanal o/flce space Mat would be provided 1f this site was campietely built Out as office use. AC the City's request, th• appitunt provided as par4 of tMs proposal a market research study to compare Me existing market conditions between office and cdmwrctai use. The findings of ^_1 h the study indicates that the existing supply of office IX Av (Community-scat!) has approaehtd the point of egU111brtum and VI ft 1s questionable as to wheMer the need exists to absorb the additional square footage that would De provided with this ?:ANHING CDMMI SSI GI 'AiF REPORT RE: GPABB-OlA, DOA d1-11 January 27, 1988 Page 7 development as office. fie study 1ndlcated that there is strong market potential for evbin Coss•lercial retail uses such as famiiy restaurants, spec1a11ty food stores, and apparel shops. A question of the market study concerns the Dastc assumption under which tt ws coeptl ed that tf the sib wro to be left with its currant office daignatton it would bt developed 100 percent as professional offtca use. This 1s a questtonaole assuption. The office/professional zone of the Dewlopment Code per~lts a nua»er of servlee/retell uses rlthtn she office deslggnnaa~ion. fi• office dKlgnation Ms a ftextb111ty of availaDl• land uses to perHt tM development of a dxad - use cenbr, and 1s not confined to dust Me dewtopment of professional office span. A key point b eonslMr, Aowver, is that the service/retail uses penelttM under Office an of a tow lnbnsity type that would Dt eon eoepatlbl• rich the ayacenL nsldenttal uses. TD• Neighborhood Commercial designation penatts a,niaMr of Mgher intensity type of use that wuid not be ai compatible with the adfaeent apartment complex. A final concern of tM market study 1s that the market study area used to assts need ws Dosed an a 1-1/2 e11e radius of t!:: ~•':~: w iii. iaY3 cne atUdy atlas wS CDnfined Lo th! area south of Banyan only. fiere is a significant population that resides north of Banyan that could potentially make use of the servtns provided on the sib. A quesLlon remains o9 the market study, that 1f the Mtire population from north of Base Line and most of Navin wi Tr~tTuded in the study, mould there then De suffielent demand to wrrant the provision of additional offlee spaeel VI. OEYEIODMENi DISTRICT AMENDMENT ANALPSIS: Stab Law requires that e w s r e s, .e., g Ordinance, be consistent with the General Plan (Seetton 65860, Government Codel. If flndlnys can not be made to wrrant a General DLn Amendment of the sib to a Casaaerctal ]and use designation, similar /tndings should a1S0 Nde regarding tl+! proposed Dovolopssant Dtsir4et A!endesnt of t;~l site to Cdasaercial development district to mainpln tM s requirement of consistency. VII. FACTS FOR FiN0ING5: In order for the planning Comsisston to recaneaen approve of this project, they must find the following; 1, fiat this project is consistent with the land use policies of the General plan. 2, fiat this project would b! in the Dest interest of the health, ~ ~, safety, and welfare of the ctitzens of Rancho Cucamonga. PLANNING COMNf SSf O. :AFF REPORT RE: GDABb-OIA, DOA d7-11 January 27, 1988 Page 8 3. That thls pro~act could not result 1n any stgnl/fcant adverse fagacts Lo parsons and Droperty in the ricinlty of the protect site. Vil(. OORRFSPOaDENCE: 'Tis iie~ has ban advertised in the Daily Report pare a Pu011c Nearing ite~, all properly owners rf thin J00 fat of the proleet std wen sMt direet aril Public lMartng latlea, anb the property vas posts rich a t foal by 8 fool large notlf/GLton sign per tM City sup0lun+mal noticing rtquirantnts. Ill. RECtNE-OATIOM: Staff racaawende Lhat tM Planning Cataisston City CoYnttl reaolutlans raa:oawanbing Lhe benlai of this pro,~ect /or the roasone as sptad in tM raolVtlons. If t9+e Cat+aisslan eoneuri, the the aboptton of tM attadled naolutians could M appropriate. Brad Butler Clty Planner ao•r•+• Attadwlents: Exhibit 'A' - LocaLlonJSurroun4ing Lana Uses Exhibit '8' -General Plan and Developebnt 0lstricts Exh101L "C - Dewlopnnt Dietrlet AsrnAaent kap ExMbit `D' • Propofad Stte Plan Exhibit 'lE - Applicant's SULe~ant o1 Justlftcatlon EKIitblt 'F' Traffic Study by Greer and Cospany Exhibit 'G' -Merkel Fusibility SWdy by Urban Research Aatoclata aaolutton of Dental iGPA) aesotuLton of Oental (ODA) 0~~-2-- ~"~ VORTH ~~3 CITY OF ~`~; GPI BS-OIA~ODA 81-11 R.~.~iCHO CL'C~~10i~C,~- tIt1.F: IOCAt10N/SURRDUNOING ~AnID PIA\~it~JG D{~'LAON FaCHl87'~_SGLE NSTIFZ GTION WITH REASONS FOR AMENDMENT Applicant regwets Chat the General Plan Designs Clan and the Zoning of the subj act property be changed from Otfiee/Professional District (OP1,. to Neighborhood/COmmereial District (NC). The •ite is a 3.65 acre parcel proposed to be used a• a retail/service commercial center and 1• intended to provide day-to-day conven- ience shopping and serviee^ for ottiee personnel and reside..^.ts - che immediate neighborhood. The proposed change is requested for the following reasonsa 1. with the existing OP General Plan designation and zoning, these parcels would support at lout {0,000 square feet of Drof essional/administrative off Sees. Horevar, at Criis time, there appeer• to be a large vacancy lessor in the existing office buildings in the immedia4 vicinity of this •i G. Thera is no need or desu~nd for additional otEiees. Z. Tha City of Rancho Cucamonga rill 6e mwiaq its feciliele• from eha Smmediate area within eighteen months creating •n additional supply of Drofeseioaal/administrative offices. 3. The City of Rancho Cucamonga has planned the development of a substantial of tics/Droteasicnal district an Haves Avenue which is drawing a large number of the professional uses away from Cha subject property. This will continue to draw those potential Cenanes for Cha foraseeabt. tn•++.._ a. There will probably always be tome demand for certain local Drof essionals such as family doctors, optometrists, den- tists, and family lawyers, Although Chi• demand could not fill a 60,000 aqusre foot pro[essional building, it would be adequately accommodated by Cha proposed project. Tha proposed Droject la designed eo attract profuelonal and Dersonal urvic• tenants as well a• retail tenants. 5. This property is located in the cantor of an established office/protesaioaal/residential area and would Drwide day-to-day convenience shoDDing and services for the office peraonnsl and residents of Cha immediate neighborhood, 6 Th0 da:1w-.+ation of ch. .Wc .._ -ls ffiiigi+Gorhoodicom- mercial would re~uira eh• two parcels to 6a dsvaloped in a consistent, unified pattern. ~~ ++ al ~~? "~ RESOLUTION N0. 88-24 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNENG CCMMfS$!ON RECOAe1ENDIN6 DENIAL OF A REQUEST TO AMEND THE LANG USE MM Oi THE GENERAL PLAN, GPA B8-OIA, FROM OFFICE TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL FOR 3.45 ACRES OF LANG LOCATED ON THE SOUTNNEST CORNER OF BASE LINE ROAD AND HELLMAN AVENUE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AND MAKE FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREQF A. Recitals, (1) Janes E. Carter has filed an appllwLion for the General Plan Amen0aent No. 88-OlA as described 1n the title of tM s Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the suD,lect General D1 an A~endlaent ropiest 1s referred to as The Application. (ill On January 27, 1988, the Planning Co~isston of the City of Rancho Cucaapnga conducted a duty not/ced public hear/ng on The Application and concluded said hearing on toot date. (111) A11 1ege1 prerepelsltes LO the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolutior. NON, THEREFORE, it /s hereby found, deterwl nod and resolved ny rtio Planning Goa~tssion of +M rH~ ~s n~~~~ ~ ;,u~ai.onga dS feI1001f: 1. This Casalsston hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Pert A, of Lhis Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon suDStantlal evidence presented to this Cawission during the above-referenced puDtic hearing on January 2J, 1988, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testiagny, this Comalsslon hereby spectflully finds as follows: (a1 The Application applies to a 3.45 acre parcel o/ land basically rectangular in confl9urotion, located on the southwest corner of Base Line Rad and IN!11sNn Avenue. Said property is currently designated as Office on Lhe Land Use IMp Of the General D1 an and is suDStantially vacant Land except for an existing access easement that bisects the pFOSerey in a nn rth-e0y+f1 direction over phich ; Ewa way driveway with central median is developed; and (D) fie property to the north of the sub,tect site is designated Low Resldentlal (2.4 4u/ac) on the Land Use Map of General Mep and consists of a church site and surrounding Single Fatally Resldentlal, the property to the south of the sub,lect site 1s designated Medtuia Residential (8- 14 du/acl on the Land Use Map of the General Plan and consists of a multi- family apartment compl ez, the property to the East 15 designated Office on the Lang Use M4D of the General Plan and tOnslSts Of d $ervlce Station and Office ~ 4S ALAN N:AG COM.N:SS ON AESGL.':~N VG. -_ AE: GPA 8&OlA Page 2 buildings, and the property to the rest is designated C/v1c/Can~unlty and Dark on the Land Use Map of the General Plan and consists of the public Library and Li Ons Park; and (c) The appllution requests the Aeendnent of the land Usa Mao oP the General Plan frog Dfflce to Neighborhood Cawerclal for the 3.45 acre pa rtel; and (d) 1*.e •ppl ici ti on wuid not De conslstmt with the Land Use Elea>•nL of the General plan, could potentially result 1n significant adverse tapacts to persons and property 1n the tseaediad vicinity of the subject site, and could not De 1n the best interests of the hea1U, safety and wlfare Of the citi2ens of the Lity of Rancho Cucaawnga at foliowa: H) Savers site constrNnts liNt the develop~ent potential Of this site. Speeiflcally, Nis Site ^uet SMn access to Deripheral strNts with an adjacMt apartment eoaplex, ibis shard access regilreaklnt itarlts the site's potential to be bufferW tram tM adjacent apartmtnt toaplex. fie Applintton could permit land uses of greater intensity than under torrent General Plan designation. Therefore, this Application has the potential to increase 1aM use ineaa>oatiDtilty of this site with the adjacent res141ntfal use, and this 1s contrary to the oDjettives o/ the Land Use Elanant of the General Plan. (11) Mith the approval 01 this app)iution, the project sate would be subjected to land uses of grater intensity that would expose ay scent residents to greater amounts of noise, ODjettlonaDl• odors, light/gLre, truck tryf/itt litter and oMar nuf aan~. fader; inese conditions nay. ~~_ ;;,t~,-,~;r, 20 result to slgnlfleant adverse iagacts to the people and property in the tmeedlate vicinity of the project site, and therefore, wuid not De 1n the best Interest of the health, safety, and wlfare of the citi2ens of the Ctty of Rancho Cucaasonga. (111) Based upon the subsUntta) widens presented to this Caasaission during the aDOVhreferented public hearing and upon the sDeclNc Hndingi of bets set Iorth 1n paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Caawisslon hereby finds and concludes that the appllcatton wuid not be consistent rlth the objectives of tM Land Use Element of the Genarai Plan to organi2e land uses t0 avoid creating nuisances among ayuent land uses wuid not be 1n the best interest of the Ctty of Rancho Cucamonga, and wuid not protect the health, safety, and wlfare of the citi2ens of Rancho Cucaaanga, California. iivi In conjunction with The AppUcatlon, an Initial requlrementsinwtth the roCallfornia~FnviwonmaMGin puality fAeL, has been prepared; however, Coawlssion has determined that this prolect could have a significant adverse effect on the environment, and hereby declines to make a finding of na signf/leant impact and to certify a Negative Dee)aratton, iv) Based upon the /indings and conctuslans set forth in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 above, this Commlssian hereby recoaeeends dental of The ADolication and directs that a certified copy of this Resolutlan and related material De forwarded to the City Council for /foal determination.. . a~ PANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. 3n-_+ RE: GPA B~OU Page 3 (v1) The Deputy Secretary to this Caoaelssion tha11 certify to the adopt/on of this Resolution. APPROYED AMD ADOPTED THIS 27TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1988. PLANNING CCaMISSION QF THE CITY QF RANCHO CUCANOi~A BY: ~. )h~~~ arty , ~/•/rJwa n ATTEST: f/CIA. (,dC.l~1/~_ 7aC. r u er, pu y re I, Brad Buller, Deputy SecroUry of the planning Ctaaalssl0n of the C1ty of Rancho Cucaegnga, do herby certify that the foregoing Resolution ws duty and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted Dy the Planning Cowelsston of the City of Rancho Cuealaonga, aL a.Yegular rooting of tM Planning Ca~tsslon held on the 27th day of January, 1988, Dy the foltoring vote-to.e1C: AYES: COMIISSiONERS: CNITIEA, EMERECK, MCNIEL, TOLSTOY NOES: CONIISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COIMISSIONERS: BLAKESLEY a4~ RESOLUTION N0. 88-25 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMIaISSION RECOMMEND [NG DENIAL OF A REQUEST TO AMEND THE OEYELOPMENT DISTRICTS MAP, ODA 87-11, FROM OFFICE/PROFESSIONAL TO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIK FOR A 3.45 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED ON 7HE' SOUTHNEST CORNER OF BASE LTNE ROAD AND HELLMAN AVENUE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFDRNIA; aMg MAKE FINOIN65 iN SUPPORT THEREOF A. Recitals. (11 Jaawn E. Carter has filed an appitcatlon for the Development Districts Amendment No. 87-11 as MscriDed to the tltta at this Resolution, Hereinafter to this Resolution, the suDJect Development Districts AaNmdaent request is referred to as The Appilcatton. (111 On January 27, 1988, the Planning C~1sslon of the City of Rancho Cucaagnga conducted a duly noticed puoltc hearing on fie Application and concluded said hearing on that date. (111) A11 legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurreA. B. 0.lsoiutton. NON, THEREFORE. it is harebp fn,md n.!.r.!~.! ~-_ -c-,,,,~„ ;,~ ~;,~ n anm ng Coemission of Lhe City of Rancho Cucamonga as follors: 1. This Comm/sslon hereby specifically itnds that ail of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon zubstant/ai evidence presented to this Commission during the aDOVe-referenced puD11c hNring on January 27. 1988, Including written and oral staff reports, tageLAer w1tA public testimony, this Commission hereby spec1f1u11y finds as follows: (a) fie Appllcatton applies to a 3.45 acre parcel of land bas1ca11y octangular in conftguratlon, located an the southwest corner of Base Line Road and IN!11a4n Avenue. Sa1d property is currently designated as Office/Professional an the Oevelopaknt D1ftHets Map and is suDStant1a11y vats nT land eALSPt foP an axiiti no a[re<s ai3.......t that Diiei.Li the property in a north-south dlrectton over which a two why driveway with central median fs developed; and (b) The property to the north of the suD~ect site is designated Low Residential (2-4 du/acl on the Development 0litrtcts Map and consists of a church site and surrounding Single Fam11y Residential, the property to the south 0' the suDJect site is designated Medium 0.esidenttal 18- 14 du/ac) on the Development Districts Map an4 consists of a mu1t1-family apartment complex, the property to the East is designated Offt<e/Professional on the 0evelopment Districts Map and consists of a Service Station and Office a 4$ PLANN'NG COif1iSS1CN RESOLJTiON N0. do-=~ RE: ODA 81-11 January 27, 1988 Page 2 buildings, and the Droperty to the west is designs ted Low Resi den ti ai (2-4 du/ac) on the Develapaknt Districts Map and and consists of the public Library and Lions Park; snd ' (cl The apptica Lion requests the Amendment Of the Oevei opment Districts Map from Dfti ce/Professional to Neighborhood Caawerci al for the 3.45 acre parcel; and (d) The appl lca Lion would not De consistent with the Land Use Element of the General Plan, could Dotentially result in significant adverse impacts to persons and property in the immediate vicinity of the suDtect site, and would not De to the best interests of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City o9 Rancho Cucamonga as follows: (1) Seven site constraints limit the development potentiat of this site. Spec/ftcally, th/s seta lust share access to peripheral streets within an adjacent apartamnt coa~pleA. This shred access requirement tiadts the site's potential LO b! buffered fro! the ayacent apartment. Th! ADD1lution would penaiL land uses of ggrnater intensity than under current Oewlopmant Districts deslgnatlon. Therefore, this Application has the potmLlal to increase land use incoapat1D111ty of this site with the ayacent residential use, anb2hls is contrary t0 the ob~ectlves of the Land Use Element of the General Plan. (ii) Nith the approval of Lh1s application, the protect site would be suDtected to land uses of grNtar lntanstty that would esoocn ddidCMt red M~~e to i-~,; t2r durvw~i.a Oi raise, obi lCtlonaDle Odors, light/glare, truck traffic, litter and other nuisance factors. These conditions have the potential to result 1n significant adverse impacts to the people and Droperty in the /mNdiata vicinity of the protKt site, and therefore, would not De 1n the btst interest of the health, Safety, and welfare of the citizens of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. (111) Based upon the substantial evidence Dresented to this Commission during the above-referenced pu011c haring and upon the spec1/1c findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this Commission hereby finds end Conttudes that the application would not be consistent with the oD~ettlves of the Land Use Element of the General Pt an to arganlze land uses to avoid creating nuisances among ayaeent land uses would not be 1n the bast interest of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and would net protect thr health, safety, eras wet/era of the citizens of Rancho Cuzaman;., Cal ifoPnia: - - (iv) In conjunct/on with The Application, an Initial Study/Preliminary Environmental Assessment, to conformity with the requirements with the Califarnta Environmental Quat/ty Act, has been prepared; nowever, Commission has determined that this Drotect could have a significant adverse effect on the environment, end hereby declines t0 make a finding of no significant impact and to certify a Negative Declaration, (v) based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in f paragrapns 1, 2 and 3 above, this Cammisston hereby recommends denial of me "I Application and directs that a certified copy of this Resolution and related material De forwarded to the City Council for final determination. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION N0. 33-ZS RE: OOA 87-11 Januuy 27, 1988 Page 3 (vi} The Deputy Secretary to th/s Coswisston shah certify to the adoption of th/s Resolut/on. APPROYEO AMD ADOPTED THIS 27TH OAY OF JANUARY, 1988. PiANNIN6 COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOMBA ~~{{ ~-, BY •~ ~ cal 1 ° /tai-•C arty ~ n ATTEST: ~ ~~-les/i+-7j'~ ra u r, u y ry I, Brad Builer, Dputy Satntary of the Planning Coianlsston of tha C9ty of Rancho Cucaatonga, do hereby cart/1y tMt tM foregoing Resolut/on ws duty and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Plann/ng Caflsslan of the C1ty of RanMo Cucaeonga, at a regular areting of the -lanMng Ca~isston held on the 27th day of January, 1988, by the follotring vothta-rtt: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL, 70LSTOY NOES: COMMISSIONERS: wow ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: gLAKESLEY CITY OF RANCH(1 CUCAMONGA MEMOKANDUM DATE: May 18, 1988 TO: City Council ~l PROM: Beverly A. Au / City C1erk~ ~87~...- A,;dit ionai infozmation -' Due to the size of the agenda, some parts of tfie information rare not recopied. All information rae included in the May 4, 1988 agenda. The infor- mation deleted ia; Traffic Iapact Analysis Report by Creer & Co Engineers b Pl sonars Commercial Center Market Analysis by Urban Reaeazefi Associates If e:q memfier of council hee miepl aced hie copy, please give my office a cell and re rill see that another ie made. be ~J I CONTINUED TO 5/18/88 !ffiETING RESOLUTION N0. 88-092 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCHO CU CAlONGA, QIL IIORN7A, DENYING A REQUEST TO A!£ND THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRI CPS NAP DM 87-11, FRON OFNI CR/ PROFESSIONAL TD NEIGHBORHOOD COM1@RCIAL FOR A 3.45 ACRE a4?2tL LOG?TPD nN TFR ROIL TNYEST OORNBR OF BASE LING ROAD AND HELLMAN AVENBE, PANCHO CU CAFDNGA, GIL IEORNLI, AND MARB FIND;NGS IN 3UPPORT THEREOF - APN 208-202-13, 14 A. Recitals. (i) S®es E. Carter hoe filed an application for the Devel o}ment Districts Amendment No. 87-I1 as described in the title of th ie Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the eubj act Developaent 9iatricte Amendment request ie referred to as The Appl ice tion. (ii) On January 27, 1988, the Pl ginning Commieaion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on The Appl icaxion, and issued Resolution No. 88-25 recomaending to ihie City Council that said application be denied. (iii) On Fe bruery 17, 7968, the City Councii of she City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly not;cad pu6l is hearing on the eppl ication end concluded said hearing on that date. (iv) All iegal pr erequisitee to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Reaolut ion. NOW. IHERElORE, IT IS HEREBY FOUND, pETERMINED AND RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamongc es follows: 1. Th ie Council hereby ape cif icel ly finds that all of the facie set for rh in the Reci[el s, Part A, of this Reeol uxion are true and correct, 2. Es sad upon eubetential evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing on Februerq 17, 1988, including written end oral staff reports, together with public teetimorry, this Council hereby spa c.. ..o ly ._nan - sp+ln._. (a) The Application eppl iee to a 3.45 acre parcel of land beei celly rectengul er in conf iguretion, located on the southwest cornet of Base Line Rosd and Hellman Avenue. Said property ie currently designs ied ae Office/Prof ee sioMl on the Devel opeent Di etri ets Nap and i• substantially vacant lend eacept for en existing ecce6a eeaement that bi wets the property in a5~ Resolution No. 88-D92 Page 2 a ner th-south direction over which a two way dr ivewey with central median ie developed; and (h) The property to the north of the subj act site is designated Low Residential (2-4 du/ac) on the Development ^ietricte Hap and coneiste of a church Bite and surrounding Single Family Residential, the property to the south of the subj act Bite ie designs tad Hedium Residential (8-14 du/ac) on the Development Districts Mnp and co neiate of amulti-family a~rtmenr nninpl ef, the proper cy to the e6ai ie designated Office/Professional on the Development Dietricte Map end coneiste of a Service Station end Office buildings, and the property [o the west is designs tad Lw Residential (2-4 du/ac) on the Develop- ment Districts Map and end conei ate of the public library end Lions Park: and (c) The Application requests the Amendment of the Devel opuent Districts Map from Office/Professional to Neighborhood Commercial for the 3.45 acre parcel; end (d) The Appl ice tion would not be conei etent with the Land Use E1®ent of the General P1 en, could potentially result in eignif scant adverse impacts to per some and property in the immediate vicinity of the subj act site, and would not be in the beet intereete of the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Rancho Cucamonga ae follows: (i) Serere site co netrainte limit the development potential of chin Bite. Spa cif icnl ly, this ei ce must share acre se to pe ripherel streets within an adjacent apartment compl ez. YUie shared aces ea requixment limits the eite~e po eenti al to be buffered from the adjacent apartment. the Applice- Di str ices designation. Therefore, this Application hoe the potenti el to increase lend use incompe tibil sty of this ai to with the adjacent residential use, and this ie contrary to the obj ectivee of the Land Uee Element of the General Plan, (ii) With the approval of this application, the project ei to would be subj acted to land uses of greater intensity that would ezpo ¢e adj acenr. reside me [o greater eeounte of noise, obj ectiona6le odors, light/ glare, truck traffic, litter end other nuisance factor e. lbeee condi [ions have the po cential to result in sign if scant adverse impacts to the people and property in the immediate vicinity of the project ei te, and therefore, could not be in the beat interest of the henl th, eefety, end welfare of the citizens of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 3. neeed nano rho anbatanN ai wirio n,.. .ea.n .w; .. r...._..vi daring the above-referenced public peering and uponothe ape cif is-f indinge~of f acts set forth in paragraphs 1 end 2 above, this Council hereby finds and concl odes that the application would not be woes etent aith the obj ectivee of the Lend Uae E1®ent of the General Pl en to organize land uses to ovoid tree t.ing nuisances among adjacent land uses end would not protect the health, eefety, and welfare of the citizens of Rancho Cucmonga, Cel storms e. a~~ Resolution No, 88-092 Page 3 4. In mnj unction rith The Application, an Initial Study/prel iminnry Em iromental Ae ce eament. in conform ity with the tequi remente rith the California Emiromental Quali[y Act, has been prepared; hwever, Council has de terained tfiat this project mold have a significant adverce effect on the em 3roment, end hereby decl inee to make a finding of no eignif scant impact end to certify a Negative Declaration. 5. Hexed upon the findings end co ncl uaione eat forth in para¢zaphe 1, 2 end 3 atwe, thin Council hereby resolves that pursuant to sec4ion 65853 to 65857 of the Cel ifornia Goverment Code, that the City Com~cil of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby de aiee on the 17th day of Pebr eery, 1988, Development District Aaendaent No. 87-11. ~`~ ~ sq CONTINJJED TO 5/18/88 METING RESOLUTION N0. 88-093 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAM)NGA, CALIARN7A, DENYING A REgUBST TO AMEND THE LAND USE M4P OP THE GHNERAL PLAN. GPA 88-O1 A, PR ON OFFICE TD NEIGHBORHOGD COMMERCIAL LOR 3.45 ACRES OP LAND LOCATED ON m;x em mlygST OORNRR OF BASE LINE ROAD AND HELLMAN AVENt1E, RANCHO WCAFDNGA, CALIFORNIA, AND MAID FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN 208-202-13, 14. A. Recitals. (i) James H. Carter hfle filed an eppl ication for the General P1 en Amendment No. 88-OlA ae described in [be title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the eubj act General P1 en Amendment request is referred to ee The Appl ice Lion. (ii) On January 27, 1938, the Planning Comieaion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public 6eering on The Application, and issued Reaolut ion No. 88-24 recomending to this City Council that said eppl ice Lion be denied. (ii) On February 17, 1988, the City Council of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearinH on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. (iv) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution Ewe occurred. B. Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY IOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLV-cD by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga ee follors: 1. This Council hereby ape cif ical ly finds that ell of the facts set Forth in the Recitals, Pert A, of this Resolution ere true and correct. 2, Baeed upon eubatanti al evidence prase nted to thin Council during the above-referenced public hearing on February 17, 1988, including written and oral staff repot te, together rith public testimoiry. th ie Council hereby c... i..,.=. spa <.. ..., ly ._..__ __ -_-__-_. (a) The Application appl Tee to a 3.45 acre parcel of lend beei cally rectengul er in configuration, located on the southreet corner of Beae Line Road end Hellman Avenue. Said property ie currently designated ea Office on the Lend Ute Map of the General Plen and ie euba[entl al ly vacant land ezcept for an exiati ng access easement that bile cte the property in a north-south direction over rhich a wo ray driver ey rith central median is devalope d; and ass Resolution No. 86-093 Page 2 (b) The property to the north of the subject site ie designated Lw Residential (2-4 du/a c) on the Land Use Map of General Map and co nei eta of e church site and surrounding Single Family Residential, the property co the south of the euhj act Bite ie designated Medium Residential (8-14 du/ac) on the Land Use Map of the General Pl en end coneiata at a multifamily apartment complex, the property to the east ie designated Office on the Land Uae Map of the Gereral P1 en and consists of a Service Station and Office 6uil dings, end the prororry to the rent is dasi roared Civic/Community e.id Park on the Land Uee Map of the General Plan and coneiata of the public library end Lions Perk; and (c) The Application requests the Amendment of the Land llae Map of the General Plan from Office to Neighborhood Coauaerci al for the 3.45 acre parcel; end (d) The Application wou16 not be consistent rith the Lend Use El meet of the General Plan, could potentially result in eignif scent adverse impacts to persona and property in the immediate vicinity of the subject Bite, end could not he in the beet interests of the heel th, safety end rel fare of the citizens of the City of Rancho Cucmonga ne follws: (i) Severe Bite co netrei me limit the development potential of this site. Specifically. this site moat share ecce ae to peripheral streets with an adj event aparrment complex. This shared ecce se requirement limits the site's potential to be buffered from the adjacent apartment complez. 'fie Application could permit land uses of greater intensity then under current Gereral P1 en designation, Therefore, this Appl ire tion has the potential to increase land use incompatibility of this Bite rit6 the adjacent residential _ _a . v~.__... s .:... .aa ~a wn.,, u.~ .... .... ~r ~.j ~_...._- __ .._._ _~.._ ___ __~_.._ __ _.._ Gene ral"Pl en. (iiJ With the approval of this sppl ice tion, the proj ee[ site could be subjected to land uses of greater intensity that could expose adjacent reside me So greater ®oun is of noise, objectionable odors, light/ glare, truck traffic, litter and other nuisance factor e. These conditions have Lhe potential to resole in eignif ice na adverce impacts to the people and property in the immediate vicinity of the project Bite, end therefore, could not be ir. the beet interest of the health, safety, end welfare of the ci tizene of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 3. Based upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the ape cif is f4ndinge of facts set forth in paragraphs 1 and 2 shove, this Council hereby finds and .. a.. ,. .x,. .,...a :ro .:..n .. ~.an iw r_nn_ni aro nr ri_th the obi art i_vwa of concl .._~_ ..hat ...._ _rr_-__.. the Land Use E1®ent of the General Plan to organize land uaea~ to avoid tree tang nuisances among adj scent lend uses and could not protect the health. safety, end welfare of the citizens of Rancho Cucamonga, California. 4. In conjunction rith 11,e Application, an Initial Studq/Prel iminarq Errv iromental Asee semen[, in conform itq with the requirements rith the California Em iromental Quel sty Act, bee been prepared; ho-ever, Council hu determined that thin project mold have a eignif scant adverse effect on the a~~ Resolution No. BB-093 2ege 3 environment, and hereby de cl inea to make a finding of no eignif ieant impact and to certify a Negative Declaration. 5. Saaed anon the flndinge and co nclusione set forth in paragraphs I, 2 and 3 above, this Covncil hereby resolves that pursuant to Section 65350 to 65362 of the California Goverment Code, that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucemenga hereby denies on the 17th day of February, 1988, General Plan Amendment No. 88-O1 A. a57 --~-- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May iR, 1968 ~ I T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer 'I BY: Henry Murakoshi, Associate Civil Engineer Ali SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY PARTS I AND II AND ISSUANCE OF A NEGATIVE DEC'~.ARATION FOR THE ETIWAN DA STORM ORA IN, PHASE I, LOCATED WEST OF I-15, NORTH OF VICTORIA AVENUE FROM THE VICTORIA BASIN TO NORTN OF HIGHLAND AVENUE AND FUTURE ROUTE 30 ~ FREEWAY RECOIilIENDATION: It is hereby recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution accepting and approving the Environmental Initial Study Parts I and II for the proposed Etiwanda Storm Drain Phase I and issuance of a Negative Declaration therefor and direct the City Clerk to file a Notice of Oe?ermtr.at ton pursuant to the Cal tfornia Environmental Quality Act. BACKGROUN O/ANALYSIS This report presents an Environmental Assessment Initial Study for the proposed Etiwanda Storm Drain Phase [. in conformance with the C a', ifornia Environmental Quality Act and State Guidelines, the attached document has been prepared to Dermit construction of the above mentioned improvements. Said improvements generally entail the construction of a mainline master plan storm drain from Victoria Basin continuing northerly crossing under Highland Avenue and the Foothill Freeway Corridor to a temporary ending. It is the Engineering SLaff's finding that the proposed project will not create a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures has been added to the project and therefore recommend issuance of a Negative Declaration. Resp~j~~~~ubmi tted, Attac~ent R :HM: a5~ Sta. 12 -26- 26~-31 31--38~ 38~-45- l 45-- 51- J 51~ - 72° Vf4:J^' - 27^' 0/72-27~ aSE I C. T. C. 108" RCP c. r. c. 102"/108" RCP C, T. C. 4s'/6o° RC? 54"f6O" RCP PLAN W VARIES 40' MIN. 2~1. CHANNEL LINING PER SP 192 E R/ W 40' -6' CI O. G. II ONE - 't, GRADE 10 DRAIN WHERE SHOWN ON PLAN (TYP. 30~H SIDES) ash ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW APPLICATION INITIAL STUDY -PART I GENERAL For all proje7ts reauirina environmental review, this fora ,ru;t ba caitp laced and submitted to the Development Review Committee through the department where the project application is made. Upon receipt of this application, the Planning Division staff will prepare Part II of the Initial Study and make recommendations to Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will make one of three determinations: (1) The project will have na significant environmental impact and a Negative Declaration will be filed, (2) The project will have a significant environmental impact and art Environmental Impact Report will be prepared, ar (3) An additional information report should be supplied by Lhe applicant giving further information concerning the proposed project. Date Filed: project lit le: Etiroa nda Storm Drain Line 2-1, Phase I Applicant's Name, Address, Telephone: Citv of Rancho Cucamonga 9i9n Race lion Rnad_ Ranrho Curamnnaa. i:A X730 , _ Name, Address, Telephone of Person Ta Be Contacted Concerning this pYaj eCt: Henrv Mora knchi. Accnnia to Civil Fnainaar rtutect, ~~, ~y cf Ra~idw Cuc cnw~~ lw) 9U5-1862, Ext. 32U Lotatton of Project: The project is located trithin ttie Etittanua Area of the Gity of _Rancho Cucamonga. being east of East Avenue bounced on the south by the Victoria Aa cin and extendinQ~ feet north of Highland Avenue Assessor's Parcel No.: N/N ' List other permits necessary tram local, regional, state and federal agencies and the agency issuing such permits:„croachment permit from State of Galiforniu =___•t^ ^t ^f T, r• - ion. OiS trici 8 io cross Route 3U and Foothill Freeway Corridor. Connection permit from San Bernardino County Flood Control District to connect to Victoria Basin. WQ PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed use or proposed project: ;1 Waster plan flood control facility _ _ r« c«., n. n,~oac t R 2 Acreage of project area and square footage of er,i<-ti.^.g and p,^Gposed 'ouiidings, Describe the environmental settin of the project site including information on topography, sa stabs ty, pants (trees), land animals, any cultural, historical or scenic aspects, land use of surrounding properties, and the description of any existing structures and their use (attach necessary sheets): rno nr,.;acr coca *_o.: north of tfie Victoria Storr~t Dr_ain_Bas_i r~ traverses a ynr c;atn rnnr;nn;ne „nrtherly crossing under Nigh land Avenue and the Foothill ~teEU/dy r 'tor to a temoora rv end ina The area is covered with native grasses. ~f~ ar a ;s "bottom land" oa rallelina the Etiwanda Creek. ;t reamlets cross thz area carrvinq highuav run-off from Hi ahland Avenue. The drain terminates r 't rt f the freeway corridor from which the line will eventually be Syr A d r ty glq tl freeway rn •.;An~ «_,. ^ - - ~, uiuuye rrom Lfle no rt li ~,,,, e~« nn i, ,.-rt;~~n nr dra inage from East and Etiwanda Avenues Is the project Dart of a larger project, one of a series of cumulative actipns, which although individua??y smal?. may as a ~ltc?~ Save significant eFlVirnrMental ;,;yaci This is the first ofta se of a series of master plan storm drain Drojects which will serve the Etiwanda Area of the City of Rancho t.ucamonoa. f I-2 NILL THIS PROJECT: YES NO 1. Create a su bstantf al change in ground contours? l~ 2. Create a substantial change in existing noise of produce vibration or glare? K 3. Create a substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.)? _ x 4. Create changes in the existing Zoning or General Plan designations? R 5. Remove any existing trees? How many? 73 yy 6. Create the need for use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials such as toxic substances, f lamnab les or explosives? _ yy Explanation of any YES answers above (attach additional sheets if necessary): 73 trees fall within rile intended storn cha oriel Ali nnent ~nd will be required to be removed. 7. Estimate the amount of sewage and solid waste materials this project will generate daily: II~A 8. Estimate the number of auto and truck trips generated daily 6y this project: 9. Estimate the amount of grading (cutting and filling) required for this project, in cubic yards: 10. if the protect involves the construction of residential antis, cwiglete the form an the next page. CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and hPIIPF 1 {nw•Fnw .nA • A be submitted- before an ~adequate~ evaluation cano bet made abyb the gPlanning Division. ,~/,/ Date: i Y" Y~Y Signature ~`f ~ ~'~. _ ~ ,le 7C;_ Title_ Associate Civil Engineer a ~z I-3 RESIDENTiAI CONSTRUCTION The following informaticn should be provided to the City of Rancho Cucamonga Planning Division in cyder to aid the school district in assessing their ability to accommodate the proposed residential deve loRment. Developers are required to secure letters from the school district for accommodating the increased number of students prior to issuance of building permits. Name of Developer and Tentative Tract No.: Specific Location of Project: PHASE I PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PNASE 4 TOTAL 1. Number of single family units: 2. Number of multiple family units: 3. Date proposed to begin construction: 4. Earliest Oate OT occupancy: Moael/ and # of Tentative 4. Bedrooms Price Range ~~3 I-4 ~ s -t'` CITY Oi RANCHO CDCAYONGA PART II - INISIAL STCDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST APPLICAft1': r{tv of aanrhn foram fomm, ity~gyelODm2nt Department FILI:r'G DATE: LOC NUlDIER: PROJELY: Etiwanda Storm Drain Line 2-1 Phase I PROJECT LOCATION: Etiwanda Area - City of Rancho CUComonna I. LYVIAON^tENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "yes" and "maybe" ansvera are required on atcathed ghee cs). YES MAYBE NO 1. Soils and Geolo¢v. Will the proposal have significant naulcs in: a. Unstable ground <ondltlona or in changes !n e=al~al~ aaia uonanlps( _ x b. Dis ruptlona, displacements, compaction or burial of the soil? x c. Change Sn topography or ground surface coneour intervals? x d. The des [ruction, covszing or modification of any unique geologic or physical faaeures? __ x •• My poeential lncrease 1n vind or vaesr erosion of soils, affac ting •1lhar on or off •1ee <ondltona? _ ~ x i. a-nane.. . -- o-- -.• -.ca.cn aiitacion, or deposit ion% x g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hararda such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hasards? _ x h. M lncrease Sn the race o[ axeraction and/or uu of any mineral rnouru? x 2. Hydro lo¢y, Will th• proposal have slgnif !cant tool is in: ~~~ "age 2 YES YAYSE ::0 a. Changes 1n Curren cs, or the course of direction of floving streams, rivers, oz ephemeral stream channels? - _~ b. Changes Sn absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the race and amount of surface vacer runoff? X_ _ c. Alterations co the course or flov of flood varers? ' ~ -_ - d. Change in cha amount of surface voter Sn any body of vacer? e. Discharge into surface varers, or any alteration of surface voter quality? ~ f. Alteration of groundvater characceriatics? ~ ~_ ~ g. Changa io [he quantl ty of groundvacera, either through direct additions or vi[h- dravals, or through interference vlth an aquifer? Quality? Quantity? x h. The reduction in cha amount of vatar ocher- vise available for public voter supplies? 1 -. ~ Y....Y~a .. Y~~Ya~~) LV ~aL\L ' related hazards such aa flooding or aeichea? x 3. Air Quality. H111 the proposal have significant res in [a iu: a. Constant or periodic air emissions from mobile or indirect aourcu? Stet lonary aourcuT 1 1 b. Datariozacfon of ambient alz quality and/or intarfazean with eha atcafnmant of appllubl• air gwlity standards? _ Y c. Al tazac ion of local or regional climatic eonaitiees; ai:etuag ai: m,,.._a: . --ia tu:a or temparature7 4. Bfoea Flora. Vill the proposal have aignitieant reaulu ine ~ / (O •. Change in the characterlstic• o[ apaclea, including divarslcy, distribution, or number of any apeclu of plants? X b. Raduetlom of tM numbara of any unigw, rata or amdanprad apeclaa o[ plant? % ?age 1 YES `1~YS° \0 c. Zn[rodut[Son of rev of disruptive species of planes into an area? x d. Reduc clop in the po cen[Sal for agricultural production? _- X Fauna. Will [ha proposal have significant results in: a, Change in the charac eerie tics of species, including diversity, distribution, oz numbnzs of any species of animals? _ K b. Reduction of [he numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of aniatals? x c. Introduction of rev or disruptive species of animals into an area, or result Sn a barrier to eha migration or movement of animals? x d. Decerforation or removal of exleCing fish oz wildlife habitat? _ _ x 5. Population. Will the proposal have afgnlflcant results in: a. Will the prepesal alter the Iocacion, diatri- buclon, density, diversity, or grouch rate of the human population of an area? _ ~ o. Will the psopoeal affect existing housing, or create a demand for addl[SOnal hmuslog? ~ 6. Socio-Economic Factors. Will the proposal have signir Scant rnaults in: •. Change in local or regional sac io-economic eharactarlstiea, including acoeomlc oz commercial diversity, tax rata, and property value? ~ _ b. Wlli pro}ect epee be equitably distributed _ among pro}ect benef lciarias, f.e., buyer, tax payers or pro}ect users? .JL ~ _ i. Land use and Planning Cansideraclons. Will the proposal have significant results Sn? a. A •uba cancial alteraclon of the present or planned land ua• of an area? _ ~ ^ f I !/ ^ ) b. A conflict uith any daalgnatlons, ob}actives, policies or ado ud l f `V Y/ ( , p p ena o any Qovarnmencal ~ entities? d_ c. M impact upon the qulaiey of quantity of exit clog consumpelva or non-consumptive reerutlonal apportunltiasl _ _ _ ~ Yage 4 Yf5 ~AY3E VO 9. Transnoztation. W111 the proposal have signif Scant results ia: a. Geneza[ion of 9ubstaatial addltlonal vehicular movement? x b. Effects on existing streets, or demand for neu street eons[ructfon? x ` c. Effeecs on existing p:: kire faciii ties, oz demand for new perking? x d. Substanclal impact upon exis cing ezanapatta- tlon fyatema? x e. Alterations to present patterns of clrcula- tion or movement of people and/or goods? x f. Alterations to or effects on prasert and pocea[ial vatar-borne, rail, mesa transit or air crafflc? x g. Incseaaea in [raffle hazards to on cor vehitlea, bicyclists or pedp crises? _ x h. Access to adj oininy vroppe rties % 9. Cul tural Resources. Will eha proposal have -- •lgndficaac resoles in: a. A disturbance to the integrl[y of archaeological, nal.nn...+.. oa ..+ __a~-~ ~..+.~~~i~si eaaeurcea: 10. Neal eh,LSafety, and Nuisance Psceors. Will eha pro posal have s1gnlFicanC resoles in: a. Creation of any health hazard oY potential health hazard? IL. b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? - ~ c. A risk of explosion or releua of hasardws eubstancu in the evens of an ace idmc? _ ~ ~ d. M lnersase in Cha nwber of individwl• or apaclu of vector ar ptrhenogenic osrafllama Or r_"nr a ~---.~ Lf paoyie cG i,iCr organfemei ~ _ _ ~ e. Incrasa• !n exist ing nola• levels? _ e ~ f. Exposure of people to potentially dangerous (1 / ~ noise levels? __ ~(l.(~ _ ~_ ~ q• The craaeioa of ob~eecionabl• odors? _ ~ h. M incruu in light or glazes _ x Pa3e i Yz5 ;AYSE VO 11. Aesthetics. Uill the proposal have aignif Scant results in: a. The oba [ruction or degrade cion of any scenic vis ca or view? ~ b. The creation of an ass [helically offensive si ce? x c. A conflict with the ob~ec[ive of aeelgnated or potential aceaic corridors? __ _ ~ 12. Utilities and Public Services, Will the proposal have a slgniflcan[ need for nw systems, or alteraclona co the foiloving: a. Elect ric power? ~ ~ b. Natural or packaged gaa7 ~ c. Co®unicatlona eyscama? _ _ X d. Dater supply? Y e. Wastewater fac111 ties? ~ f. Flood control structures? ~ ~ _ g. Solid waste Euilltiea? _ _ ~ h. Fire protect San? _ _ ~ 1. Police protection? _ _ ~ ~. Schools? _ ' x k. Parks oz other raeraatlowl fac£1lties? _ _ _ ~ 1. Naintananea of public fat Slitiee, Sncluding roads and flood control Estill Beal ~ m. Other govaromental asrvices? _ x 13. Energv and Stsrce Resources. Y111 the proposal have aignif ie3n! results in, a. Uae of ^uba Untlal or excaaaiv fuel or energy? _ _ ~ x b. Substantial increase Sn demand upon axial ing sources of energy? _ _ yi ~Y ( _~ c. M inareaae Sn eba demand [or devalopmant of J1_\U - new sources of energy? - x d. M lncressa or parpacwtion of the consumption of non-rmwable forms of anaegy, when fus163a ranwabla sources o[ anaegy are avafLbla2 x Page 6 YES uAYBE NO e. Suba[aatlal depleelon of any nonrenevable or scarce natural resource? % 14. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential [o degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of fish or vlldllfe species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drom beiov aeif sustaining levels, threaten co eliminate a plan[ or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range oP • rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of [ha ma~oi periods of California history or pzehis [oryt x b. Does [ha project have the potential to achieve short-term, to ehs diaadvaatags of long-term. environmanul goals? (A ahoy[-term impact on the e,rviroman[ L one which occurs Sa a eslatlvely brief, definieive period of time while loeg- term impacts will endure yell into eha future). _ % c. Does the pro~sct have impacts which an Sndlvidwlly limited, but eumulatlvaly eowlderablet (Cumulatively conaldarabls means chat the Sacremaatal affects o[ as Sndividwl pro~aet an considerable when viwed in connection with eha effects o[ out ore+.~•~, and pianaDla fYCYre prn~aCta). ~_ _~ % d. Does the project have environmental sf[ec es which will cauu substantial adverse effects on human beings, afehar directly oz Sodizeeely? x II. DISCUSSION OF ENVIAONMENiAL BVALDA7ION (1. •., of affirmative answers to the above questions plus a discussion of proposed mitigation musures), Page 7 III. DETEA.`[INATION On the basis of [his in1 [Sal evaluation: I find [he proposed project COULD NOT Y.ave a significant effect on the environment, and a h~GATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant U effect on the enviro~ent, there will not be a significant effete in this cane because the mitigation maasures deacxibed an an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION {JILL BE PREPARED. I find Cha proposed project MAY have a algniflcant effect on [he envirc~ent, and an EtNIRONMEIT L`@ACT REPORT !s required. Date- .3. 'TM.-~1' /7` ~~.-.u Qr~f-2 tt gigoatnte /r 4llK ,/__ C/ ( _ Title l II. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 1. Soils and Geology b ~ c Disruption. displ acemzn t, carpac tier or ~~ri al of the soil? YES Change in topography or ground surface contour intervals? YES The Phase I construction of Etiwanda Storm Drain Line 2-1 consists of an open trapezoidal shape channel 6 feet deep, 27 feet wide at the top and 9 feet wide at the bottom. At either side of the channel, a 16 foot graded roadway will be constructed with 2 to 1 slopes graded up to match the existing or natural grade from 1 foot to 3 above the roadway. For the most part, the construction will cut into the existing soil generating about 10,600 cubic yards of excess material to be disposed of. The contractor will be required to disnnse of tM c Hecate mainrlal of an nffei to M cnnewl N to approved by the City. f. Changes in erosion siltation or deposition? MAYBE The existing drainage course consisting of normally dry streamlets exhibits primarily sheet flowage with minimal erosion occuring. The new Storm Drain Channel will be fully concrete lined eliminating any , erosion to the drainage course and will reduce siltation occuring at the Victoria Basin. New cut slopes will be created which are :Ub~eft •w .. sicn 310n0 th2 leiiGth 'vf the channel. These wi it be graded with a "brow" 4ltches above the cut slope to control such erosion. Periodic side inlets will also be provided along the length; of the channel to receive and discharge the surface flowage t0 the ~~~ channel. A determination has also been made regarding run-off from future streets adtoining the channel and lateral stub outs have been or will be constructed as part of the protect. These stub outs will be sealed until the improvements are made within the existing basin to accua;datz new ar addttiunal stone run-o€{ beiny delivered to the basin (see Item 2 for additional information). 2. Hydrology Wi11 the proposal have significant results in a. Changes in the currents, or the course of direction of flowing streams, rivers, or ephemeral stream channels? MAYBE The proposed protect improves a newly forming streamlet or drainage swale where street run-off from Highland Avenue east of East Avenue has been directeG to surface flow to the Victoria Basin and where surface flowage north of Highland Avenue have been collected into a culvarY. nMor N1nhlanA avnnna and amain null nl~nA f.. c_ ~~fa~e si w_ directed towards the basin. - The initial protect will accanplish little more than collect these flaws and deliver such by an improved flood control channel emptying into the Victoria Basin. In the future, however, the drain will serve as the first leg of a mat or ar master starn drain system to Intercept storn run-off from East Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue and to rarry such waters easterly, del iVEi inv t{'ie52 flaad wateri ty LNP Yi~tfirin na<in whom a can trolled release of such to Etiwanda Creek can occur. Eventually, therefore, as subsequent extensions are built following Lhis protect, a significant increase 1n flood water delivery to the Victoria Basin will occur. a~ Z b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water run-off? YES As noted in item a) above, the ultimate storm drainge system to be comple*_ed in later p355^S _. eY.her~t~rq M fAiS f3L{1aY xill intercept street run-off from East Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue. The intercepted run-off will be delivered to the Victoria Basin and then discharged to Etiwanda Creek. The run-off rate is changed little by the immediate proposed improvement. The ultimate extension of suchwill collect and discharge a significantly greater volume of flood water to the Victoria Basin and thereafter tothe upper reaches of Etiwanda Creek between the Victoria Basin and Foothill Boulevard than has heretofore occured. The Victoria Basin will therefore be required to hold the peak flow of these flood waters and to release such gradually to Etiwanda Creek. Basin improvements will be needed reduce the discharge rate to 902 of the existing peak discharge from the basin as required by virtue of the pertait required to discharge to the basin., This lowered distharge rate will however, be sustained for an exiended period to accomodate the increased run-off. The absorption rate of the old streamlet area above the basin will be reduced by the construction of a hardened channel. The new channel construction will place the Victoria Basin heretofore an old borrow pit into artiyn egrulre 35 3 flood contrel faLility lntendod ultimately to provide for ground water recharge or ground water absorption for a portion of the storm waters delivered to the basin. Again, such will not occur until the overall system is completed in protects subsequent to this one. a-~ 3 c. Alternations to the course or flow of flood waters? YES As previously noted, the primary intent of the ultimate facility will be to intercept flood waters occuring on East Avenue and Etiwanda Avenue and channel such safely to the Yictoria Basin and to gradually release such back to Etiwanda Creek. d. Change in the amount of surface water in any body of water? YES (eventually!) The initial result of this immediate protect has little effect on the amount of surface water on East Avenue and Etiwanda Avenues and in the Victoria Basin and upper reaches of Etiwanda Creek. In subsequent phases of the Etiwanda Storm Drain Protect, surface waters on East and Etiwanda Avenues are taken Into the drain and diverted to the Victoria Basin. The amount of surface run-off or ~~...... ~~..,~ ~~....~...~ o~ ~~m ,is wi ,a uuniu ,a nw,emeu nun, sire existing condition but for the first time, the use of the Victoria Basin as a flood control facility will occur i.e.; this improvement along with subsequent protects will provide the primary collection and delivery mechanism to bring flood waters to the basin. Heretofore, minimal usage of the basin has existed. g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct addition or withdrawals, or through interference with an aquifer? puantity? MAYBE Victoria Basin is sited to be used for ground water recharge with the eventual improvement of Etiwanda and San Sevatne Creeks by the County of San Bernardino and Army Carps of Engineers. To date, the natural run-off reaches the basin is minimal and remains unchanged by virtue of the proposed protect. When the system is completed and a~4 mafor storm run-off can be delivered to the basin by this and the subsequent channel extension prof ects .. The dead storage provided by the basin will allow for percolation of these flood waters to the ground. This will eventually sustain a planned ground water recharge effort, are intended use of the basin. i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or retches? MAYBE The eventual storm drain in itself is proposed to reduce and eliminate flood hazards from certain reaches of East and Etiwanda Avenues and serves as an umbrella to land areas south of Highland in the Etiwanda Area. The channel itself however, becomes a new hazard. Channel fencing is therefore proposed to limit access to the channe? to mitigate this hazard. 6. Sacio-Economic Factor Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Change in local or regional socio-economic characteristics, including economic or commercial diversity, tax rate and property values? MAYBE The Rancho Cucamonga community is experiencing a rapid and a very ~~3tai ned crv~ith iii rEii denti ai ueVei oaiment. ThA Aria rhirh rM ultimate storm drain system serves is predominately vacant and targeted for development. The installation or creation of these new first time flood control facilities will remove a motor environmental deterant to such development. As these developments occur, property values are pushed upward. The proposed storm drain ass improvement could therefore become an indirect provision alt owing development and property values to rise. b. Ni11 the project cost be equitably distributed among project beneficiaries, i.e.; buyers, taxpayers ur pruj ect users? 't'e> The source of funding for this initial construction is Drainage Fee's collected from developments occuring within the Etiwanda Area. No assessment spread or other taxation is occuring at this time. Existing homeowners and residents either have already paid fees or escape taxation from this initial project. All new development will pay for a drainage fees to support the subsequent costs of extending this system or will be required to build that portions of the system which would directly serve their development. The possibility of the creation of a Storm Drainage Distrtct to fund the remaining projeeY extensions is ever present or of potential. 7. Land Use and Planning Consideration Nill the proposal have significant results in7 a. A substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an areal MAYBE The installation of this first storm drain in its dry conditton will change about four (4) acres of vacant or dormant land to a hardscape facility of little chance. As the stui9a drat r. is eantinuad iri iatPr projects, the same affect will be noted. The resultant will though, remove a major natural deterant to the development of this area of the Rancho Cucamonga community (Etiwanda area). 9. Transportation a~~~ Nill the proposal have significant results in: g. Increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pe^-es*rians? HO This initial protect would appear to have no affect positive or negative regarding traffic hazards. The ultimate extension or completion of the drain to serve East and Etiwanda AYenues will serve to remove an existing flooding condition along portions of these two streets and the areas south of Highland between Etiwanda and the Vietorla Basin. A wave effect reducing fl oodings all the way to the southerly City limits should be realized. h. Impact Access to Adjoining Propertles7 YES The storm drain location being an open Flood control channel, will reduce access t0 the easterly lvi na nrnnarfiee aAin~.,t,.,. •~,a si,...~ control channel. In the present condition, this is ,of minimal significance. In the long term, such will take on greater importance. The easterly adjoining properties will be bounded on the west by this new storm drain fac911ty, on the north by the Foothill Freeway Corridor and on the east by the Etiwanda Creek and I-15 Freeway and on the south by the Victoria Basin. At present, access to these properties is from Highland Avenue. It is noted however, that when the Foothill Freeway is constructed, Highland AVe^.e° will bCCOme Gi bE re Li dieu' bV the Fr6AWaV anA roar new access must be taken from the west across the new channel. To this end, two locations for crossing the channel have been identified and access to cross the channel at these two locations have been reserved by the easterly lying parcels as part of the ~~ sales contract for the Flood Control Right-of-Way acquired by the City. It will remain however, the responsibility of these easterly properties to provide bridge or culvert structures to all the future roadways to cross the channel at these two Locations. The proposed Foothill freeway is also to be considered in the planning of this facility. The location of the drain will parallel the north side of the freeway corridor. Coordination efforts to realign the drain to provide for freeway on and off ramps have been provided for. Sufficient depth and structural design for the drain has also been provided where the drain will cross the freeway corridor using a closed reinforced concrete culvert or pipe. 12. Utilities and Public Services WTII the proposal have a significant need far new systems or alterations to the following: f. Flood control structures? YES In gaining approval to connect to the basin, the need to provide a new bottom outlet to the basin, the need to provide an overflow spillway and the need to remove additional materials from the basin is required by the San Bernardino County Flood Control District as conditions of the permit Lo connect or discharge flood water to the 6a sin facility. the ri ry and County will jci ntl'1 oarti ci Date in arovi di ea cnr crnw of these basin improvements. The bottom drain, spillway and initial basin enlargements will occur as part of the neighboring Day Creek Improvement Pre,{ect which will mine the 6as1n for core material for the Day Creek Debris Dam. In the event further excavations are needed within the basin, the City will require excavations t0 be ~~ b performed by parties wishing to develop upstream of the noted facilities. The extension of the systems to East and Etiwanda Avenues and tributary drains extending north along these streets shall also become "conditions of development" or be provided using fe9~c {nlleCted from the ~lavolp~erf of thnan tri hltarY 2ree5. 1. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads and flood control facilities? The new channel adds additional flood control facllify to the system for which maintenance must be provided. The drain will become a City drain requiring City maintenance. Construction standards for the proposed facility have been set for facilities operated by the San Bernardino County Flood Control Bistrlct and could be transferred to the County upon their acceptance. a~ `~ RESOLUTION N0. ~ O - 3 ~~ A RESOLUTIOI OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INITIAL STUDY AND ISSUANCE OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE PROPOSED ETIWANDA STORM DRAIN, PHASE I WHEREAS, the Etiwanda Storm Drain as a Public Agency Prej ect shall be subject to comply with the California Environmental Qualilty Act necessary to protect, rehabilitate and enhance the envirnmental quality of the State; and WHEREAS, an Environmental Assessment Initial Study has been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has for its consideration all the available inputs and has reviewed same concerning the proposed Etiwanda Storm Drain. NOW, THEREFORE, DE tT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does hereby resolved as follows: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby appraves t e nv ronmental Assessment initial Study and issuance of a Negative Declaration for the proposed Area VII Storm Drain Pro,Iect. Sectinn2. Tha f.f tv f.lwr4 is nt re~toA 4n fitn a un~i~o ..s Determina o~ n pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. ~I ~~6 nrmv nc n ~ wrncrn nr rn ~ n,nern . _.~ STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 70: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brad Buller, r+ty P'. a,.. ei BY: Miki Bratt, Associate Planner SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 87-04G - reques o amen a nera an i~ an s1~p-Fran Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling ~ units per acre) to High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) for 5.05 acres of land, located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19. ENYIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT reques o amen e eve oilmen s r e s p ram Low-Medium (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) attached aith the Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD) to the base district for 5.05 acres of sand, located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 87-02 - NOURSE DEVELOPMENT - A eve oilmen regimen a en e - y o anc o ucamonga and Nourse Development for the purpose of providing a Senior Housing Pro,)ect per the requirements of the Senior Housing Overlay District (Section 27.20.040 of the Development Code, Ordinance 211) for 170 apartment units to be located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 87-02A - NOURSE DEVELOPMENT - A ree-pa ve oilmen regimen a en e y of Rancho Cucamonga, Nourse Development and Nest End Investments for the purpose of providing a Senior Housing PrD,iect per the reautrements of the Senior !lousing Dver',aV District (Section i7.2v.v40 OT the Development Code, Ordinance 211) for 170 apartment units and office medical complex to be located on the south 51de of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-I8, 19. a~~ CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RE: NOURSE d NEST END May 18, 1988 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 87-04H - reques o amen e-Efi-CandlTse amen o e enera Plan from Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Office for 1,69 acres of land, located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line - APN: 208-031-17, 54, 55, 5b and 'a7. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT - reques o amen a eve opmen s r e s ap from Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Office Professional for 1.69 acres of land, located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road - APN: 208-031-17, 54, 55, 56 and 57, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEN 87-33 NOURSE UtYELOPMtNI - lne development or iiu sem or agar n s on acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located on the south side of Base Line road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19. Associated with the protect is Tree Removal Permit 88-14. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSNENT AND DEYELOPMENT REVIEM 87-34 - e eve opmen o a square ioo~ meurcai or?'ue ouilaing on i.l acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential INstrict (4-8 dwelling units per acre), iocated on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road - APN: 208-031-17, 54, 55, 56 and 51, Associated pith the protect is Tree Removal Permit 88-14. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends dental of the ~GFA67-IIAG~QA B7-05, GPA87-04H and DDA 87-06 and adoption of the attached Resolutions of Denial. Dental of DR 87-33 and 67-34 is also recommended by the Pianning Commission and at the direction of the City Council, Resolutions will be prepared. II. BACKGROUND: Seven different applications have been submitted in connec on with this development package, anchoron by General plan wnendmeni 87-04G, an application Tor High Residential use under the Senior Housing Overlay 01str1ct. A three-story 170 unit senior apartment protect is proposed for this parcei with frontage on Base line Road in the vicinity of Archibald Avenue. General Plan Amendment 87-04H is an application for Office use located on an adtacent parcel of land with frontage on Archibald Avenue. A 22,500 square foot nredical office protect 1s proposed for this site. ~~, Z CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RE: NOURSE & NEST END May 18, 1988 Page 3 The two protects wrap around the existing commercial center on the southwest corner of Archibald Avenue and Base Line Road. The proponents, Nourse Development Company and Nest End Investments, have requested that the two protects be considered as one. The reason for this request is that development of the Base line site for a senior protect requires a drainage easement and an emergency access easement across the office protect parcel (see Exhibit "A"1. The Planning Commission held public hearings and discussed these proposals on March 23, 1487 and April 13, 1988. (See attached staff reports and minutes). Although the Planning Commission was comfortable with the Senior Protect on this site, they could not support the Office use on the adtacent site. The reasons given for opposing the Office use are: o Increased intensity of use. Traffic impacts on Archibald avenue, including congestion at the intersection of Archibald and Base Line. o An excess of Office use Tn the vicinity of Archibald and Base Line, as well as anticipated future availability of office space nearby when City Ha11 vacates its present location. in summary, since the Senior Protect cannot be developed independently of development of the adtoining parcel of land with frontage on Archibald Avenue for which a medical office complex is proposed, and since the Planning Commission does not support a change of land use to Office use, the Planning Commission recommends denial of the package of applications. tII. RELATED APPLICATIONS: The Planning Commission discussed the re a e app daEtons as follows: Development Agreement 87-02 and 87-02A - Development Agreement bT-Z12~is require un er ernes o tFe Senior Housing Overlay District between the City and the proponent of the senior protect. Development Agreement 87-02A ties development of the office portal to fhe senior protect as requlreC by the proponents, Nourse Development Company and West End Investments. Tn all other respects the two agreements are the same. Provisions of the Development Agreement include: 1008 occupancy for senior citizens 30 year term 75E of the units to be reserved for low and moderate income. ~~~ CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RE: NOURSE d WEST ENO May 18, 1988 Page 4 In general, the Planning Commi ssT on supported the senior protect under the terms of the Senior Housing Overlay District, commenting that the site provided a good location fora senior housing protect due to the proximity of shopping centers and cxisti^g ^edical fac{lilies They felt the tern of the development agreement should run for 30 years, because of demographic protections for the future need for senior housing. Although the original proposal was for 100% of the units to be reserved for low and moderate income seniors, the proponent requested that only 5D% of the units be reserved. The agreement reflects the Planning Commission request that 75% of the units be reserved units. 2. Oeyelopment Reviews 87-33 and 87-34 - In addition, the Planning omn ss oC~r~ew~-fie IIeve~f Review applications for the Senior Apartment Protect and the Medical Office Protect. The Commission felt that the design and layout of the Senior Housing Protect was attractive. However, they expressed the following reservations: o Although the proposed one uncovered parking space per unit exceeds the standard of .7 uncovered space per unit required in the Senior Housing weri ay uisvicc, ac lea sc nair me spaces snouia be covered. o The proposed 56 to 70 square feet of private open space per unit was not acceptable and private open space should be increased to conform to the Oevelopment Code standard of 150 square feet per unit for ground floor units and 100 squa^e feet per unit for second and third floor units. The Planning Commission did not have a problem with the design of the medical office building. IV. ANALYSIS: The proposed Senior Nousing Protect under the Senior pus ng erlay District is intlmatel_v linked to development of the dut4ining parcel with frontage on Archibald Avenue Tor which a Medical Office Protect is proposed. For this reason, the proponents have asked that all seven applications be considered together. Also, for this reason Development Agreement 87-02 has been amended by Development Agreement 87-02A to legally tie the development of the Senior Housing Protect to development of the Medical Office Protect. The Planning Commission cannot support additional office use at this location and therefore recommends dental of the entire package of applications. ~`~~~ CItt COUNCIL STAFF REPORT RE: NDURSE 6 HEST ENO Mdy 18, 1988 Page 5 V. SUMMARY: Resolutions of Denial for the Senior Housing Project, GPA ~87-1J4G-and DDA 87-D5, as well as for the Medial Office Protect, GPA 87-o4H and DDA 87-06 are attached. In regard to the Development Review applications, staff will prepare Resolutions of Denial for the next meeting of the City Council if so directed. If the atteched/Resolutions of Denial are adopted, no further actions is require ~li the Development Agreement applications. Respec lly;submt;ted, ~~~~ Brad Buller City Planner BB:MB:mg Attachments: Exhibit "A" Exhibit "B" Report Exhibit "C' Report Exhibit "D" Exhibit "E" Exhibit "F" Exhibit "G" Resoiutton Resolution Resolution Resolution - Required Easements - March 23, 1988 Planning Commission Staff - Apr11 13, 1988 Planning Camisston Staff - Development Agreement 87-02 - Development Agreement 87-02A - March 23, 1988 Planning CommlSSian Minutes - Apr11 13, 1988 Planning Commission Minutes of Denial for GPA 87-04G of Denial for DDA 87-OS of Denial for GPA 87-04H of Genial for DDA 87-06 ~~~ L - .1 ~_ -'_ 1 l ~ ,c,_ RA SELINE ROAR , L ~i 11 I I I~.R i . ~ EXI9TIAIG ~ ~PROPUSE i _, COMMERCIAL 170 UNIT ~" CENTER fi .SEIJivR?,, u U PROTECT I . ti ; . i• ~-- L ~' ^ 1 11 I -1 I I~ -_ I ~. ! ~ _ EMERGENCY ACCESS pVL pCl~ 1\A1~A..11V CV~1YM `A.lC1 PLANNING DIVLSION ~~~ G~ !V(~'TH ITE~U TITLE ~FCiL~IRED EA_PEMENTS E\HI9IT~ ~_ SGaL& NONE - CITY OF RANCHO CUCANIONGA ~~cn.K° STAFF REPORT ;~° ~ zy x!~ r '-_ DATE: March 23, 1988 F~~, 'Z S T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission 19" FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Bruce Cook, Associate Planner SUBJECT: REVISED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 87-02 - For a senior housing pro ec on a sou s e o ase Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue. BACKGROUND: On March i, 1988, staff met with the developers of the sen or ousing project to discuss the terms of the proposed Development Agreement for the senior housing project. At that meeting, staff and the developer mutually agreed to certain revisions in the Development Agreement document. These changes were incorporated into the document and sent out for typing. However, at the time of the Planning Commission packet distribution for the agenda of March 23, 1988, this most recent version of the Development Agreement had not yet been completed. Since that time, the final version as recammerded by staff has been completed and is now available for the Commission's consideration. artarhnA is !tin nAnA ii...l ~~,.~ Agreement. Please note the changes from the document includ dFin your agenda packet as follows: The terms of agreement have been changed from a 30 to a 20 year pert ad (see Paragraph 1-C, Page 2 and Paragraph o, Page 4), This change has been made to make this Development Agreement consistent with the length of term as approved for the two existing senior housing projects, i.e. Heritage Apartments on Archibald, north of Base Line, and the Rudolph Hendrickson Apartments on Amethyst, north of 19th Street. 2. The low income rental requirement has been changed from 100 percent participation to 50 percent of the rental uni is hiino rncnrv_nA Fnr rn_eirin„!. ,.a i.... i..~.-., (Paragraph 8, Page 5). Nith the two previous senior housing projects, the City offered direct financial contributions in terms of fee reductions and fee waivers. No fee waives or reductions are being proposed as a part of this current project. As a result, the developer has requested, and staff is recommending, that the rental restrictions be applied to only 50 percent of the units as a means to make this project more economically tenable. a~~ PLANNING COMMISSIr° STAFF REPORT REVISED DEVELOPME~ AGREEMENT 87-02 March 23, 1988 Page 2 The time given to tenders to respond to various conditions has been increased from 30 to 60 days (see Paragraphs 27 and 28, Pages it and 12). This change has resulted from an indication that lenders wocld be unwilling to offer loans for development of the project under these terms. Most lenders would be unwilling to make a decision required of these paragraphs within the 30 day time frame as originally given, and would, therefore, find these terms unacceptable. 8y increasing the length of time lenders are given to make a decision, from 30 to 60 days, most lenders would find these terms much more amenable and would be willing to participate in the project. 4. The developer has been changed from Nest End Investments to Nourse Development to coincide with Nest End Investments transferring their rights and interests in the project to Nourse Development (see Pages 12 and 13 ). II. RECOIMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission cons er ese revisions as proposed by staff and adopt the Resolution recoamerding to the City Council that they approve Development Agreement 87-02 including the changes to the document as outlined above, Resp9ctfdTty s t , i Brad Drtiler City Planner BB:BC: to Attachments: Development Agreement 87-02 (Latest Revision) a~~ nrmv .mac n n win vn nr-n ~ •rnwrn STAFF REPORT DATE: March 23, 1988 T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Cnmmission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Bruce Cook, Associate Planner 'G'9 ;' !la ~' _' ~ I< - S 19 7 ~ SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN APIENOMENT 87-04G - reques o amen a nera an an s1~0 a ma~~Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) for 5.05 acres of land, located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-16, 19. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT - reques o amen e eve opmen s r e s p ram Low-Medium (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) attached with the Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD) to the base district for 5.05 acres of land, located on the south side of Base Line P.cad, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-19, 19. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 87-02 - NOURSE DEVELOPMENT - A eve oomen reemen a ween a v o anc o ucamonaa and Nourse Development for the purpose of providing a Senior Housing Pro,)ect per the requirements of the Senior Housing Overlay District (Section 17.20.D40 of the Development Code, Ordinance 211) for 170 apartment units to be located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 87-04H - Heal enu anre~imania - n request to amens the Lana use amen o e nera Plan from Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Office for 1.69 acres of land, located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road - APN: 208-031-17, 54, 55, 56 and 57. ENYIRO!}1ENTAI. ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT - - reques o Residential (4-8opdrenilin s nits P from Low-Medium g per acre) to Office Professional for 1.69 acres of land, located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road - APN: 208-031-17, 54, 55, 56 and 57. RELATED FILES: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-33 DEVELOPMENT REYiEN 87-34 ~~ PLANNING COMMISS'^Y STAFF REPORT WEST END INYESTh. ;S/NOURSE DEVELOPMENT March 23, 1988 Page 2 ABSTRACT: The applicants are proposing to develop the property imme a e y to the west and to the south of the Baskin-Robbins center located at the southwest corner of Base Line Road and Archibald Avenue with a senior housing apartment project and adjacent medical office facility. The processing of this project has required the submittal of seven different applications which are listed as r'oiiows: 1. A General Plan Amendment to redesignate the senior housing site from Low-Medium to High Density Residential, (GPA 87-04G), 2. A Development District gnendment to reclassify the senior housing site from Low-Medium to High Density Residential with a SHOD overlay, (DDA 87-05), 3. A Development Agreement between the City and the senior housing project developer as required by the Development Code, (DA 87-02), 4. Development Review 87-33, the development plans for the senior housing project site, 5. A General Ptan Amendment to redesignate the medical office site from Low-Medium to Office, (GPA 87-04H), 6. A Development District Miendment to reclassify the medical office site from Low-Medium Residential to Office/Professional, (DDA 87-06), and 7. Development Review 87-34, the development plans for the medical office facility site. The Planning Commission initially reviewed the General Plan and Development District Amendments on September 23, 1987. At that time, the Planning Commission indicated that they wanted to review all elements of the total project including the Development Agreement and Development Reviews at a single time. Therefore, the Commission has Issued a number of continuances for the amendments pending the Development Agreement and the Development Reviews being raar,~v 4n erhgd!yle inn Coaeai scion rea ep. At the previous public hearing, the Planning Commission indicated support for the senior housing project, but expressed some reservations with designating the Archibald site for office development. The Development Agreement between the City and the senior housing project developer has been prepared. This Agreement is fora 20 year period, restricts tenancy to tndivlduals defined as "seniors" (generally, people who are fifty-flue (55) years of age or older), designates 50 percent of the rental units to be ~T PLANNING COIMIISS"'4 STAFF REPORT NEST ENO SNVESTM. ,S/NOURSE DEYELOPMENT March 23, 1988 Page 3 reserved for households whose income qualifies at the "low to moderate" income level as defined by the Development Code, and rental rates on these designated units are to be controlled at a level determined as affordable based on rents not to exceed 30 percent of the median income for San Bernardino County. The Development Reviews are included as part of this overall application package but these specific proposals have been reviewed and analyzed by staff under separate cover. Dosed on the support for the senior housing project indicated by the Planning Commission at the September 23, 1987 meeting, staff has prepared Resolutions recommending to the City Council approval of GPA 87-04G, DDA 87-05, and DA 87-02. On the other hand, with the Commission's expressed concern and lack of consensus regarding the medical office site, staff has submitted Resolutions recommending both denial and approval for GPA 87-04H and DDA E7- 06. The Commission should consider all material and input regarding the medical office site and then provide staff with direction as to the appropriate course of action. If it is the Commission's decision to recamaend approval of the office professional site, staff should be directed to prepare an amendment stipulating that the senior project can not be developed unless the office professional project, off Archibald Avenue, is developed prior to or concurrent with the senior project. However, should the Development District hnendment for Office Professional declnnaN nn he AeniPA the newel nnnmM anreenwnt ehnnlA ha amnAPA to stipulate that the senior protect can not be developed unless all required access and drainage easements for the senior project are obtained. II. BACKGROUND: The original project applicant was TAC Development. r oP-i r fo ~fhe January 13, 1988 public hearing, TAC informed the City that they were transferring all rights and interests in the project to Nest End Investments. Nest End Investments has just recently informed the City that they are nav transferring their rights and interest in the senior housing portion of the application (GPA 87- 04G, DDA 87-05, DA 87-02) to Nourse Development. Nest End will remain as the project applicant for the medical office site (GPA 87-04H, DDA 87-06). Though there are now two separate project applicants, they have informed the City that they would still u refer LhPZP iims in hP 2nnef APrPA in rnn iunrtinn with earh other as a single comprehensive total development package. III. ANALYSIS: A. Senior Housing Project: 1. General Plan Amendment - fie General Plan Amendment is o re es gna e e senior housing site (the 5.05 acres located on the south side of Base Line Road, adjacent to the west of the Baskin-Robbins center) from its ~~ PLANNING COMMISS*^V STAFF REPORT NES7 END INVESTh S/NOURSE DEYELOPMENT March 23, 1988 Page 4 current designation of Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre). This General Plan Amendment is in conformance with Program 5.4 of the Housing Element of the General Plan in which it states that the City shall provide certain development incentives, i.e. increased densities, for protects in which at least 25 percent of the units are available to low and moderate income households. At the previous public hearing (September 23, 1987), the Planning Comaission indicated a consensus of support to approve this site for senior housing. 2. Development District Amendeient - This request is to reclassify Fie lan~use zoning of the site from its current designation of Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) with a Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD). if the Camatssion concurs that the above-mentioned General Plan Mendment is appropriate, then the redesignation of the Development District from "Low-Medium ResidentTat° to "High Residential" would also then be necessary to maintain the consistency of zoning to the General Plan, as is required by State Law. Also, the SHOD overia~y is additionally betn~ added to the land use classTficatT on. This "sHnn zoning would earmark the site for a senior housing prat ect only, and would preclude the site being developed with anything other than a senior housing protect. The protect site does meet the necessary preconditions required by Section 17.20.040-0 of the Development Code as prerequisites that must be present for the site to be considered for a senior housing p~otect (see attachments for copy of Section 17.20.040- 3. Development Agreement - The Development Agreement e ween e y and the senior housing protect developer has been prepared, as required by the Development Code. The Development Agreement 1s a contractual agreemant between the City and the developer that has as its function the implementation of the required development standards and amenities for a senior housing protect. A copy of the Development Agreement has been included 1n the attachments for the Commission's review. The basic deaf points of the Development Agreement are sumamrized as follows: ~~Z PLANNING COMMISS•'Y STAFF REPORT NEST END INVESTF, .'S/NOURSE OEYELOPMENT March 23, 1988 Page 5 a. The developer will provide 170 apartment units for "target tenants i.e. senior citizens who are 55 years of age or alder, with certain exceptions as contained within the Agreement. b. Fifty percent (50S) of the units will be targeted fcr residents who 1•reet the minimvav income qualifications, i.e. their income(s) do not exceed 80 percent of the median income for persons or couples within the County of San Bernardino as currentiy defined by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development. c. Rents on these target units will be restricted where the rents charged to residents will not exceed 30 percent of this 80 percent income limit. d. The term of this agreement will be far a 20 year period. After the Development Agreement expires, the property is no longer bound by the terms of the Agreement. Nowever, if the intent 1s to use the property for anything other than senior housing, a Development DTstr•1ct Amendment would first have to be applied for as the inclusion of "SHOD" in Che zoning of the property restricts perm7Lie0 uses LO Lnai for senior housing only. At the mutual consent of both the City and the property owner, the terms of the Development Agreement can be extended beyond this 20 year period. In exchange for the developer providing this affordable housing for the targeted senior group, the City has agreed to provide the following development incentives: a. In order to maximize the net yield per acre, the City will permit an increased pro,leet density with a combination of granting a change in the density range (the Generai Plan and Development District Axndmen;s ), and a density bonus *_o aiiow a net yie)d of 33.05 units to the acre resulting in a 16 percent density increase above the amended General P1 an designation, and a 338 percent density increase above the current General Plan designation. a~ 3 PLANNING CDMMISS'^4 STAFF REPORT NEST END INYESIT. ,S/NOURSE DEYELOPMENT March 23, 1988 Page 6 b. A reduction in the required an-site parkins standard will be granted to a ratio of 1 non- covered parking space per unit. No fee waivers or reductions or any other type of direct financial contribution by the City is being proposed as apart of this Gevelopment Agreement. 4. Development Review - Included as part of the total eve opmen pac age is the Development Review for the site development of the senior housing site (DR 87- 33). The approved Development Review will be incorporated by reference as an exhib{t as part of the Development Agreement to require that the site be developed to those approved standards. The issue of open space with site development of the senior protect has been analyzed by staff as part of the Development Review staff report. The ultimate resolution of this issue should then be incorporated into the approved development plans and/or conditions of approval. This element will then automatically became part of the Development Agreement as the revised DR 87-33 will be incorporated by reference iota the Development Agreement. B. Medical Office Site: General Plan Amendment - The General Plan Amendment is o re es gna e e proposed medical office site (the 1.69 acres located on the west side of Archibald, adJacent to the south of the Baskin-Robbins center) from Low-Medium Residential {4-8 dwelling unt*_5 per acre) to Office for a planned 22,400 square foot medical office facility. The Planning Commission initially reviewed this request at the September 23, 1987 public hearing. Though no consensus was reached, the Planning Conission, at that time, expressed concern with designating additional office use at the Archl6ald/Base Line Intersection. The concerns were that there was already sufficient commercial and office use at this intersection and mere was no*_ needed, and That by increasing the potential intensity of land use at this site rith the redesignatton from residential to office would result in undesirable traffic impacts to the street circulation system. 1n consideration of the expressed traffic concerns, staff has consulted with Traffic Engineering in regards to this issue. In comparing the 1.69 acre parcel developed with the proposed 22,400 square feet of medical office with 9 residential dwelling units that could be expected under aG4 PLANNING COMMISS?"' STAFF REPORT NEST END INYESI'ML. 5/NOURSE DEVELOPMENT March 23, 1988 Page 7 present General Plan/Development District classification, 90 ADT's would be generated with the residential use Versus between 900 and 1,050 with the medical office development. Nhile the medical office facility would generate significantly more traffic, it is expected that this traffic would be dfstributed iii roughout the course of the dqy and no4 eoneentra ted at peak hours. Therefore, Tt is not expected that the medical office facility would result in traffic impacts that would significantly alter or change the flow of traffic along Archibald Avenue. Since no clear direction was indicated by the Planning Commission at the first public hearing, staff has prepared Resolutions recommending both denial and approval for the General Plan Amendment. The Commission should consider all material and input, and then provide staff with direction as to the appropriate course of action. tf the Planning Commission concurs with staff's findings, then adoption of the attached Resolution would be the appropriate course of action. If it is the Commission's decision to recommend approval of the !medical office site, staff would recommend to the Commission to direct that the Development Agreemw!nt be amended to include provisions restricting development of the medical office site to approved plans only and phase development such that the medical office facility may only be constructed concurrent with or subsequent to, but not prior to, the senior housing protect. Development District Amendment - This request is to recTssi~fy a att-i Tn use zoo of the site from its current designation of Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Office/Professional to permit development of the medical office facility. AS with the above-mentioned General Plan Amendment, staff has also prepared two Resolutions for the Development District Amendment, one recommending denial and one recommending approval. Nhatever is the Commission's direction regarding the General Plan Amendmen*_ should be the similar direction for the DOA to maintain the required consistency between the General Plan and zoning. 3. Develo nt Review - Included as part of the total eve opmen pac age is the Development Review for the site development of the medical office facility (DR 87- 341. The Development Review has been reviewed and analyzed by staff under separate cover. ~~ PLANNING CDMMI59"~V STAFF REPORT NEST EN6 INYESR,_.(S/NOURSE DEVELOPMENT March 23, 1488 Page 8 IY. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Part I of the Environmental Checklist as een sum e y e applicant. Staff has canpl eted Part iI of the Environmental Checklist. Upon completion of the Initial Stugy, staff has found no adverse impacts on the environment as a result of the proposed projects, and recommends the issuance of a Negative Oeciaration. Y. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: In order for the Planning Commission to recommen approve o these projects, they must find the following: 1. That these projects are consistent with the land use policies of the General Ptan, 2. That these projects would be in the best interest of the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Rancho Cucamonga, and 3. That these projects would not result in any significant adverse impacts to persons and property in the vicinity of the project site. Yi. CORRESPONDENCE: These items have been advertised 1n The Da11Y eoo~r as a oublic hearino item, all orooerty owners wffFin 300 feet of the project site were sent direct mall public hearing notices, and the property was posted with a 4 x 8 foot notification sign per the City's supplemental noticing requirements (these items have been re-advertised and re-noticed for Lhe March 23, 1968 public hearing). VII. RECpMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission orwa'f rd~o~~ City Council Resolutions recommending approval of the senior housing project (GPA 87-04G, DDR 8T-05, and DA 87-02) for the reasons stated Tn the Resolutions. Staff also recommends that the Commission provide staff with direction as to the appropriate course of action regarding the medicai office site (GPA 87-04H, DDA 87-06 ). Resolutions for both approval and denial have bec,^, included for the Coamtssicn's review and cansideratiort. Nith Commission concurrence, adoption of the applicable attached Resolutions would then be appropriate. ~~~ PLANNING COMMISS-~'~ STAFF REPORT HEST END INYESTh..~S/NOURSE DEVELOPMENT March 23, 1986 Page 9 Re a ful s t , B d B er City anner BB:BC:te Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "0" - Existing General Plan/Zoning Exhibit "C-1" - Existing Land Use - Senior Housing Exhibit "C-2" - Existing Land Use - Medical Office Exhibit "D" -Proposed Site Plan Section 17.20.040D of the Development Code Planning Commission Minutes of September 23, 1987 Planning Camnission Staff Report of September 23, for Senior Housing Planning Commission Staff Report of September 23, for Medical Office Resolution of Approval -GPA 87-04G Resolution of Approval -DDA 87-05 Resolution of Approval - DA 87-02 M1th Attached Development Agreement Resolution of Approval -GPA 87-04H Resolution of Denial - GPA 87-04N Resolution of Approval -DDA 87-06 Resolution of Denial - DDA 87-05 1987 1987 a~~ BANYAN i ~ O OOTHILL ~~ WY ~ L t 2 V c 79th 6AS[LIN i sr(ti \ jP ~jj~l FOO NN.L BLVD V q f\ORTH ~- I~ /~A ,~`-/- CITY C-F ITE`t~~[~~-04'CT TG. R~1\CHO CL'CA~IC2~GA TITL&~dNrN MAY PLA.'V~I,~iG DI~'$ION EXHiBIT~ ~_ SGLE~ ©~nraraf bra DwNopmmt Dl~trlct~ /V NORTH CITY OF I~;~~: ~ G, RANCHO CLC~~'IO~~Cu1 TITLE PLAN~II\G DIVISION ~~q EXHI&T~ ~pLE: ~~n~ TAT ~rrrerz ~torr~nr 9Ati1~ ~,+y~.R_ ~_ U N1= ~~ ~~ ~ SN~PIr1Fr Tl ~ltconr vo~artT REST Ew ui V NORTH CIT'1' OF RAiCHU CL'CA~ICh1'GA ~...~vNi~c avrstav ~ ~~ ITE,y1: TITLE: EXHIDIT: G-1 $~:qLE: 9uovPwfr 5L4~PYIhI(r SST. G~NtL'{z-. "$ql'{K GE;N~- L ~~ uN~ -T-, .- Rt'/i M~ ~!~!K- 11~ 51bFPINCr ~NTE;K-- vDcCi T I ~ Vag-oNT ~zxr+riad~ y~cA{yr NE81 EN IAL V NQRTH CITY OF RA\CHO CL'CA~ICAIGA ~..~~v;vivc av~siav 3~ ~ ITFJ~t~ TITLE exHtelT:~? scALE: SewoF- 1{OU~,It•IEr 6(• 04~r MB01l1kL. OPPILC~s V ~i VORTH CITY OF hENioR- Fl~a~stMi- 87.0~6- ~: Aso u .,~,.ex s'~I~• H- RA.'~IC,'HO CL~G~IKON(,A ,•mE: ;,1'~-Pte-t R.nMVnvc orvs~or, -3oZExH~r:$._scn~,: Section i7.20. 040 C. Tar¢et Population 1. The primary resident population group that is intended to be served by the units comtructed threugh use of incentives offered es pert of the Senior Housing Overlay District ere senior citizens who meet the following criteria: (s) For tenants, residents, or occupants who ere mertied to each other, either spouse shall be fifty-five (55) years of age or older. (b) For individuals who are not married, each individual shell be fifty-five (55) years of age or older. (c) Tn addition to the age restrictions set forth in subparagraphs a and b above, any individual or married couple who wish to occupy or reside in the Project shell nave end maintain en annual income from all sources equal to or less than eighty percent (80%) of the median income for persons or rnuples within the County o[ San Bernardino es currently defined by the Pedernl Department o[ Housing and Urban Development. D. Applicability The Senior Housing Overlay District requires the presence of certain conditions before it can 6e applied [or or attached to a specific parcel of lend. [n order [o adequately and satisfsetorfly serve Ne target population that this District has been created to serve, any peopwed project site must demonstrate the following cpnditions end features: 1. Appropnate base district caning. 2. Lend uses in the immediate and 9arl'OWding wren, ewrent and projected, ~...-.. ,._ _..... r ......... .........- .....y ...........,..-......y-....,...~ ...,..... .,.......,.. and must be tree of health, safety, or noise problems (i.e., area generally quite). 3. Area infrastructure moat be in piece or constructed es pert of the project end capable of serving the propwed project including: (a) afresh (b) sidewalks (c) traffic/pedestrian signals 4, Proposed site topography mtut be fairly level end easily tranversed by petsot~s of limited mobility. b. Proposed site mutt demonstrate proximity to commercial establishments, >ervice pivviders, and oilier aii:eni ilea iiiciuding: (a) food shopping (b) drug stores (c) banks (d) medical and dental facilities (e) public transit (main or hequenUy served routes) (f) open space/recreational facilities jC~ J S~vr+~a~-rC~-~ 17.20. f~ - a Miki Bratt, Assistant Planner, presented the staff report Comnissi~~er Tolstoy questioned the disposition of the snarl triangular piece next to Lhe freeway. Ne felt this cculd be a good design elenent of the project. Scott Murphy, Associate Planner, responded to the questt en stating this is flood control now and have not received a response iron the district stating the disposition. Chairnan Mc Niel opened the public hearing Mr. Craig Page, representing Ahwnson Developnent, 2361 El Torro Road, EI Torro, stated there aas one correction of the staff report. He clarified they are proposing the niniwue lot size as 7200 square and not 7500 square feet as stated 1n the staff report. They are otherwise in agreenent with the staff report and cannot respond to the question of the disposition of the triangular piece. Lhairwn NcNiel closed the public hearing. Conaissioner Tolstoy raved to approve the General Plan IMend•ent, Covwissioner elakesley seconded the aatton. Motion carded by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: TOLSTOY, BLAKESLEY, CHITIEA, EMERICK, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ~ ,e • • a + --carried Commissioner Chi ti ea raved to approve the Development District Amendment, Cow.issloner Tolstoy sACOnded the nation. Motion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CH1T[EA, TOLSTOY, BLAKESLEY, EMERICK, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE --carried cnvinunntniAL A]]tSSMENT ANO 6ENERAI PLAN AMENDMENT 87-04G - TAC reques osier enera an a se p rom ow- um Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to High Residential )24-30 dwelling units per acre) for 5.05 acres of land, located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald - APN 208-031-18, 19. `~~'~- 1t4 Planning Comwission Minutes -7- September 23, 1987 cm 1RVTRnIK ndx a.n+~n~ nnu uc ,c LVrncm YlJi nlbl MCOYA0.r11 o/-VO - reques assn eve opsen s r e s p raa ow un Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Nfgh Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) attached with the Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD) to the base district for 5.05 acres of land, located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN 208-031-18, 19. J. E - TAC Plan ~rom~.ow-Medius Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Office for 1.69 acres of land, located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road - APN 208-031-17, 54, 55, 56 and 57. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 81-06 - reques assn a eve opcen~Ts~ric~7~ap rom ol^C w~ediu~ Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Office Professional for 1.69 acres of land, located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Ltne Road - APN 208-U31-17, 54, 55, 56, and 57. Otto Kroutil, Deputy City Planner, presented the combined staff reports. Chairman McNtei opened the public hearing. Hr. Aian Dalsau, Pitassi-Delmau Architects, 9190 Haven Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga, stated they feel they have set with staff recommendations and would like Commission's consents to coplete the process. Mr. Hernan Rempel, 9505 Base Line Road, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he did have a problen with the senior housing but does have a probles with the office complex ay scent to the senior project if they are going to have a shared access. This will create traffic problems. He also stated his concerns with the office complex being on Archibald. Mr. Dave Peters, 7422 Archibald, Rancho Cucamonga, stated his property is next to this project and his primary concern is what type of water flow and flood control provisions are being pursued. Mr. Tim M1~sack, Civil Engineer for the project, verified that the drainage does exit out onto Archibald Avenue. The property gently drains over toward Archibald and they don't anticipate any big difference in grade between their site and Nr. Peters' property. There ..,.uld be a 4,:o tout difference in grade io accomnodaie driveways. Mr. Pete Pitassl, Pftasst-Dalmau Architects, 9190 Haven Avenue, Rancho Cucamwnga, stated regarding the grading they anticipated lowering the northern U-shaped building lower than Baseline and then the riddle portion of the project 1s 2 1/2 feet lower than that, and then the southern U-shaped building an additional 2 1/2 feet lower than that. 3c; .~ Z ~ 4 Planning Comaission Minutes -8- September 23, 1987 Their grading analysis analysis indicates there would approximately two feet of fill that would slope down the property line and the drainage would be handled with either a Swale or a retaining wall in addition to a garden wall that mould separate the project from the property to the south. The intended use is a medical office building, 25,000 square feet, and it is integral to the project as a whole and compliments each other. Traffic could pull into the property off Baseline and exit onto Archibald and it is the intent to link the project not only with pedestrian access but also with vehicular access. There will be a substantial grade point at the point too. Chairman Mc Niel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Chitiea stated that the senior project is an appropriate one and the idea of having low rents available would be appropriate. A medical facility adjacent is appropriate also. The circulation throurgh both projects is important to discuss. Responding to Mr. Rempel s comments, she questioned whether pedestrian circulation is what Lhe Coaoission is looking for or actualiy linking traffic through and what would be the repercussions of doing so. She would like to see acre specific information regarding the water flow down Archibald at this location. Mr. Peters does have a legitimate coMern as this would be a substantial area of land draining onto his property. Conceptually, she likes the idea of linking the two projects in same manner. A senior Droject in this location might be appropriate. Conmtsstoner Tolstoy state6 the water situation would have to be taken care of when they bring in the site plan for Design Review and thinks the senior project is a good one there. The surrounding retail centers dre there to serve aPOp1P WYIM1 •~o nM shin ~~ ~~!~~ •- .°c6i$ NIID I~ a good use for this piece of property. He is concerned with the General Plan Amendment which changes residential property to the office designation. Chairman McNfel stated there are going to be many more aDDlications for senior projects. Associated with most senior projects, there will not be space far medical office and from his point-of-view, Commission should take a good look at what is being proposed. Chairman MCNiei opened the public hearing. Mr. Terry A. Christensen, TAC Development, stated Lhat there is interest by area doctors to move into the medical office complex. He felt the seniors would do better entering and exiling on Baseline where t~ trdfffc it lace Mr. Herman Rempel, former Planning Coawissioner, stated there is a need for same type of facility for people who need medical care. This driveway already back ups and so does the driveway on Archibald so that a left turn to to the project would be a problem. A convalescent home is a good use to tie in with the senior housing project. Ms. Nilma Brenner, speaking on behalf of area senior citizens, stated a convalescent home in this location would not be appropriate. She 3c~~, 3~4 Dlanning Coamission Minutes •9- September 23, 1987 commented that a medical office complex adjacent is appropriate to the senior housing project. Senior cfttzens like something close they can walk to and be close. More and more seniors are moving out tats direction free Las Angeles and Orange County since there are some more freedoms in this area. This facility would be great to have adjacent to the senior housing project. Gomrissioner Chittea stated she would like t0 see this project continue and the possibiltty of working out same of the issues sSdressed in discussion. Commissioner Elates?ey stated hts concerns with the intensity of uses in this a:-ea, all of the coewercial and the traffic, This project will see traffic problems, ingress and egress, no matter what direction it faces. The best use far this parcel, from a land use point-of-view, would be residential, Coemissioner Tolstoy stated he could not support Item J since there is just too much office. Goeaeissioner Emerick questioned how many seniors could support the medical facility compiex and this particular intersection already has extremely heavy traffic congestion. He feels office generates more traffic congestion. Chaireun McNiel opened the public nearing. Commissioner Chittea moved to continue Item I to the October 28. i00~ meeting. Commeissioner Blakesley seconded the motion, m^Sio„ carried by the following vote: AYES: CONM15~:~wiNS: CHITIEA, BLAKESLEY, EMERICK, MCNIEL, i0LST0Y NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSFNT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE • f o .. . Cannissioner Chittea mov meetfng, Chairman McNiel following rote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NOES: COMMISSIONERS: A~SEHi: COMMISSIONERS: --carried !d to continue Item J to the October 28, 1987 seconded the motion. Notion carrfed by the CHITIEA, MCNIEL, BLAKESLEY, i0LST0Y EMtRiCii NONE Conraissioner Emerick clarified his no vote for the reasons stated in text. M ^ • f f C~~ --carried ~ ~ Planning Commission Minutes -10- September 23, 1967 - CITY OF RAPICHO CliCAbfONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: September 23, 1987 T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Miki Bratt, Assistant Planner ~~u.~oW, ~ ~~~. ~~, ` ^\= .~ ~ F c. Z j 19"% ~ SUBJECT: ENVIRDNMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 87-04G reques o amen e erera an an se p rom Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) for 5.05 acres of sand located on the south side of Base Line Raad, west of Archibald - APN: 208-031-18, 13. DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 87-OS - TAL DEYELOPMENT - reques o amen a eve opmen s r e s p rom ow-Mediual Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) attached with the Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD) to the base district for 5.05 acres of Land located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19. ABSTRACT: The applicant has submitted a development proposal under e n or Housing Overlay District (SHDD) of the Development Code. The submittal package includes a request fora Development Agreement, fora General Plan Amendment, for a Development District Amendment and an application for pro3ect approval of a 170 unit senior housing project on 5.5 gross acres of land and approval of a related project, of an adjacent 8,150 square foot medical office building on 1.69 gross acres of land. Because the General Plan land use change from Low-Medium Density to Nigh Density depends on the use of the site for Senior Housing, approval of the Development Agreement must be concurrent with approval for the General Plan Amendment and pevelopment 0lstrict Mendments. A± this tim_ the Development Agreement has not been finalized. Also, the project design and site plan are being reviewed. It is anticipated that the Development Agreement and project review will be caapieted by October 28, 1987. Therefore, the Planning Commission is requested to hold a public hearing for preliminary review and comment an the entire package and to continue the puDiic hearing to October 28, 1987 for final reconmlendatfon to the City Council. ~o~ 1 a• S q/Z3/S7 ~ ~~ ~r -~» ~ PLANNI N6 CpMI55I STAFF REPORT GPA 87-046 a DDA 8/-05 - TAC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION September 23, 1987 Page 2 II. BACKGROUND: The applicant is requesting a General Plan Amendment, a'-6e a opment Distritt Mendment and approval of separate applications for the senior apartwent project and an office medical pro,lect. The applicant is proposing to build affordable housing under the Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOD). There ore, under the terms of the SHOD the applicant will enter Into a Oevelapment Agreement with the City. The pro,iect proposed is for 170 units on 5.5 gross acres of Land. IIS. DRO]ECT AND SITE OESCRIPTTON (Exhibit 'A" dnd "C"}; Applications or an amen n o e an se p o e Hera lan and to the Development District Map have been made 1n con~unctlon with a proposal far development of a senior citizen project on the subject site and related medical offices on an ad,)acent site to the east. A. Action Requested: The applicant requests approval of apDTTcatfons~nd the Land Use Map of the General Plan and the Development Districts map from Low-Medium Density Residential Lo High Density Residential. B. Location: Base Line Road west of Archibald Avenue C. Parcel Size; 5.5 acres 0. Surrounding Land Use and Zonlna: South - Yacant; Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) East - Neighborhood Commercial Nest - Single Family Residential; Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) E. General Pian Designations (Exhibit "B" Project Sfte =-T.ow- a um s nEtal-Td-B dwelling units per acre) North - Neighborhood Commercial South •• low Oenslty Residential (2-d dwelling units per acre) East - Neighborhood Commercial and Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) Nest - Low Density Residential (p-; ;,~;iing units per acre) F. Site Characteristics: The site, consisting of two parcels, s oyes gra ua y o e southeast, On one parcel there fs an older single family residence which has no hl5torical or cultural significance and several smeller storage structures. The other parcel is vacant with a concentration of trees adjacent to Base Line Road. PLANNING COMMISSI ,TAPE REPORT GPA 87-04G 6 DDA 8/-05 - TAC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION september 23, 1987 Page 3 IV. ANALYSIS: A. Development Agreement Under the SeMor Housing Overiay lTfsl:r+ct. Purpose: The purpose of the Senior Housing Overlay District is to provide affordable housing for senior citizens in an area which has a character unique to the needs of senior citizens, including: o appropriate base district zoning o location in an area which is generally quiet and free from health, safety or noise problems. o area infrastructure in place including streets, sidewalks and traffic signals. o site topography which is fairly level. o located near to commercial establishments, service providers and other amenities. Location: The proposed location on Base Line Raad near rc a Avenue meets the above tone+r-cr, ; Services +^:?__"`,~' Tvuu sno in dru stores banks and v DD 9. 9 public transportation exist adfacent to the site. An emergency care medical facility exists and the appiicant is proposing to construct a medical office building so that additionai medical and dental services may be provided. Recreatlonel facilities may be reached by bus or Yan Go transportation. The area is well suited to a senior proiect. An earlier SHOD protect, the Heritage Park Senior Apartments, is located on Lomita Court adiacent to the Neighborhood Caawercial Center to the north. Development Incentives: In order to achieve an attractive an f nal ncialTy soun senior pro,~ect, the SH00 offers development Incentives, including: o Reduction in required on-site parking to a minimum ratio of .7 non-covered spaces per unit; o Density bonus ar increased land use density under the General Plan or both; and o Fee waivers and reductions. 3~5 3l0 PLANNING COMMISSI TAFF REPORT GPA 87-D4G 6 DOA 8/-05 - TAC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION September 23, 198J Page 4 The applicant is requesting a change in the General Plan Land Use Map from Low-Medium Density (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to High Denstty (24-30 dwelling units per acre). The applicant is also requesting a density bonus to allow an overall density of 34 dwelling units oer acre, The applicant x111 provide one I1) non-covered parking space per unit. The applicant is not requesting waiver of fees. Staff recommends entering into a 30 year Development Agreement with the applicant under the terms of the SHOD far affordable housing for Senior Citizens. For purposes of the agreement target tenants are persons who are 55 years of age or o16er and whose household incomes do not exceed 80f of median income for San Bernardino County as defined by the Federal Department of Nousing and Urban Development. Two and four person household sizes are used respectively to calculate affordable rents For one and two bedroom apartment sizes. Staff recommends the following terms for the Development Agreement: o Approval of a three story 1T0 unit senior protect. o Approval of the General plan Land Use and Development District Amendments Dlus a denary pq,.c „, ,,;;,,,, , Cc,-sity ui ;» aweiiing units per acre. o Approval of one (1) parking space per unit. Based on the present avai1ab111ty of 344 existing units in two protects bunt under SHOD provisions using the two and four person household rental formula, the need for this price range senior apartment fs dose to being met. B. Existing and Proposed Land Use: The existing General Plan land use es yyna on -Ts oC w-Fredium Density single family residential. The Low-Medium Censity designation provides a buffer between the Neighborhood Commerctal and the adtacent single family residential neighborhood, Nith appropriate siting, landscape treatment and Uarking, a proposed senior protect .Quid continue t0 provide such a buffer (Exhibit "D"). C. Deos~•, firough the General Plan Amendment process, the app can is requesting an increase fn density from Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to High Density Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre). Additionally, under the Uevelopment Agreement which will be required by the SHOO, the applicant is requesting a density bonus to allow an 4 ~ 3 ~~Ii PLANNING COMMISSI .AFF REPORT 6PA 87-046 d DDA 8i-05 - TAC DEYELOPNENT CORPORA710N September 23, 1987 Page 5 ultimate density of 34 dwelling units per acre. Density serves as an indicator of intensity of use. A senior project is a lower intensity use than other multi-family residential projects. For example, 1n a senior project there are typically a predainance of one person households operating less than one automobile per household. Tne result is a reduced demand on infrastructure and services. Therefore the density of a senior project will not significantly increase the intensity of land use. Y. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: In preparing the Environmental sessmen s a as reQuested that the applicant supply a traffic stuQy. After the traffic lnfonmatlon has been received and reviewed, an environmental determination will be made. VI. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has peen advertised as a public hearing n e a y sport newspaper, notices were sent to all property owners w n 300-feet of the project site, and the property has been posed with a 4' x 8' supplemental notlficatlon sign. VII. RECg71ENDATION: Because the Development Agreement has not been na ze an a project design and site pi an reviews have not been completed, staff recommends that the Planning Commission review and comment on the application for a change in land use and increase 1n density for the purposes of nrn"~~+"~ 17C ~•;; ;, ,~„iur `'==~1~3 r vJC~G unaer the SHOD and continue the public hearing until October 28, 1981. Respec fully submitted, Br le City anner BB: Me:vc Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity/Land Use Exhibit "B" - Or:nerai Plan Land L'se dap Exhibit "C" - Development Districts Map Exhibit "D" - Site Pian ~j 17 5~ 5 - - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAbjONGA ~~c,+..KO~ STl~.FF REPORT ~?~ ~.,, Lr - i' Z GATE: September 23, 1987 '> _ iy-- 70: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner O": Miki Bratt, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: ENYIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 81-O4H - reques o amen a ,.an se ap o e enera an rom Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Office for 1.69 acres of land located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road - APN: 20&031-17, 50., 55, 56, and 57. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSES9~ENT AND OEYELOPMENT DISTRICT - reques o amen e eve opmen s r c p roar ow-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units Der acre) to Office Professional for 1.69 acres of land, located on the west side of Archibald Avenue„ south of Base Line Road - APN: 208-031-17, 54, 55, 56 and 57, i I. ABSTRACT: The anni7r+~! ?c -cy;;~,;;,;,,y a general Ylan Amendment and zone cFiange on 1.69 gross acres of land in order to build anAsi30"~1,YOo square foot medical office building as part of a development package submitted under the Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOO) of the Development Code. The package also Includes the proposed 170 unit, three story senior apartment compiex, as well as a General Plan Amendaent and zone change on the 5.5 gross acres of land needed for the housing protect and a Development Agreement. At this meeting the Planning Caaaisslon is requested to review and comment on the office component of the package and to continue the public hearing to October 28, 1987 for Planning Commission recommendations to the City Council. II. BACKGROUND: This General Plan Amendment and Development District n n were initiated by TAC Development Corpcration. 11!e prCGertY ii n~limded C^, the aui$`n and east by commercial development and on the south by a church. The senior citizen housing protect to be developed under the Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOO) is proposed on the west. Because the availab111ty of medical services is a SH00 goal, the applicant is proposing to build a medical office protect at this location adjacent Lo thr senior protect. ~~~3 1 ~ 3 9/23/89 t~ gr~fF ' M~ ~ - - - ~ PLANNING COMMISSI AFF REPORT GPA 87-04N d DDA ai-06 - TAC DEVELOPMENT September 23, 1987 Page 2 III. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: Applications for an amendment to the an se p o e enera Plan and to the Development District Map have been made to conjunction with a proposal for development of a medical office project on the subject site and a senior citizen project on an adjacent site to the west. A. Action Requested: The applicant requests approval of appT~ai:Tons {o amend the Land Use Map of the General Pian and the Development Districts map from Low-Medium Density Resldential to Office professional. B. Location: Archibald Avenue south of Base Line Road C. Parcel Size: 1.69 acres D. Surroundlnyy Land Use and Zoning iExhibit "A' and "C'): or - Caiserc a e g o 0o amaerc a South - Church; Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) East - Commercial and Single Family Resldential; Neighborhood Caaaw•rcial and Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) West - Yacant and Christmas Tree Farnr; Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) E. General Plan Designations (Exhibit "B"): - ".". neaiuencrai 14-a dwelling units per acre) North - Neighborhood Commercial South - Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) East - Neighborhood ComaMrcial and Low Density Residential (2-4 dwelling units per acre) Nest - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) Site Characteristics: The topography of the site slopes gently o e sou eas av ng about a 3S grade. Three single family residences with detached garages now occupy part of the site. These existing dwellings would became non-conforming uses with adoption of the amendments. These units would be scheduled for demolition with developmen4 of the medical office site. One residence has a built-in swimming peel. fie southerly nnrtien of the •'te i- ., ~ used fora Christmas tree farm. IV. ANALYSIS: A. CdnDarison o_f Existing and Pro~~osed__Land Use: The applicant requests a enera an naime~d zone c ange from Low- Medium Residential designation to Office Professional designation on 1.69 acres of land. The applicant has also submitted plans for project approval of a a,1~,0 square foot medical office building (Exhibit "D"). ~ ~ ,~~,~ 2 ~ 3 `~l ~}- PLANNING COMMISS TAFF REPORT GPA 87-04H 6 DDA ..i-06 - TAC DEVELOPMENT September 23, 1987 Page 3 The present Low-Medium Residential land use designation serves as a buffer between the single family residential neighborhood to the south from the commercial area adjacent to the intersection of Archibald Avenue and Base Line Road to the north. The proposed Office Professional use could also function as a similar buffer provided the site would be designed ;erssitive to the issues of setbacks, parking/ circulation, landscaping, and building design to ensure that the medical office use mould be compatible with adjacent residential uses. The church directly south of the property is within the Low Density Residential zone an6 also functions as part of the Medium intensity land use puffer zone. B. Circulation: As part of the environmental revieN, the app can was asked to submit add/tional infonaation about traffic wfiich will De generated by the project. This inforwatlon Aas not yet been received. Y. ENYIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: In preparing an Environmental sessmen s a as requested that the developer prepare a traffic stogy. After the traffic information is received and reviewed, an environmental determination will be made. Y1. CORRESPONDENCE: This Item has been advertised as a public hearing n _ e a y eport newspaper, notices were sent to all property oNners N n eet Of the oroiart N~< ...w •._ "rC~y2~ :~ 6ao ueen poscea with a 4' x 8' supplemental notification sign. VII. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission rev ew an comment on the office component of the applicant's proposal to build a senior citizen project under the Senior Housing Overlay 0lstrict of the Development Code and continue the public hearing to October 28. 1987. Resp lly sub tied, ra 1 r City P1 ner BB:MB:vc Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Vicinity Map Exhibit "B" - Existing Land Use Exhibit "C" - Existing General Plan/Zoning Exhibit "D" - Site Pian ~ ~ 3 315 ---- ---- CITY OF RANCHO CL'CA~IONGA STAFF ftEPOftT C`~. -~ _ DATE: April 13, 1988 ~-'~ ' T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission ~ FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Larry Henderson, Senior Planner II, SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ANO GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 87-04G ~ii - - reques o amen a nera an an se ail rom Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling j units per acre) to Nigh Residential (24-30 dwelling units i per acre) far 5.05 acres of land, located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19, (Continued from March 23, 1988) ENYIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT reques o amen e eve oilmen s r e s p rom Low-Medium (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to High Residential (24-30 dwelling units per acre) attached with the Senior Housing Overlay District (SHOP) to the base 4lstrict for 5,^5 acres of land, located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19, (Continued from March 23, 1988) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 87-02 - NOURSE DEVELOPMENT - A eve oilmen regimen a en e o anc o ucamonga and Nourse Development for the purpose of providing a Senior Housing Protect per the requirements of Lhe Senior Housing Overlay District (Section 17.20.040 of the Development Code, Ordinance 211) for 170 apartment units to be located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19. (Continued from March 23, 1988) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 87-02A - NOURSE DEVELOPMENT - A ree-par eve oilmen regimen a weep e Rancho Cucamonga, Nourse Development and Nest y End Investments for the eurpose of providing a Sector !'AU;l~r Protect per use requirements of the Senior Housing Overlay District (Section 17.20.040 of the Development Code, Ordinance 211) for 170 apartment units and an office medical complex to be located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19. ?~ I co ITEMS O,E,F,6,N,I,T PLPNNI NG COlMISSION STAFF REPORT RE: NEST END 8 NOURSE April 13, 1988 Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL RSSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 87-04N - reques o amen a an se amen o e enera Plan from Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to office for 1.69 acres of land, located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of 9ase Line Road APN: 208-031- , S4, S5, 5o and 57. (Continued from March 23, 1988) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND OEYELOPMENT DISTRICT - reques 'i:o amen'-tom'- eve oilmen s r c s ail iron Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Office Professional for 1.69 acres of land, located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base line Road - APN: 208-031-17, 54, 55, 56 and 57. (Continued from March 23, 1988) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEYELOPMENT REVIEN 87-33 - - e eve oilmen o sen or agar n s on acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre), located on the south Side of Base Line road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19. Associated with the protect is Tree Removal Permit 88-14, (Continued from March 23, 1988) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELODMENT REVIEW 87-34 - - e eve oilmen o a square 0o mT~-t-~e icaT oTf~building on 1.7 acres of land in the Low-Medium Residential District (General Plan Amendment pending), iocated on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road - APN: 208-031-17, 54, 55, 56 and 57. Associated with the project is Tree Removal Permit 88-14. (Continued from March 23, 1988) BACKGROUND: These projects was reviewed by the Planning Commission af~Fie~r• meeting of March 23, 1988. At that meeting, a decision was made to continue the public hearings to Aorii l3, 1998, since -nly three Pjar~r~ing Commissioners were present and additional information was desired by the Commission. In general, the Commission appeared to be in favor of the senior housing project, but was concerned over the proposal to re-designate the Archibald portion of the site to Office and to permit the development of a medical office facility. Specific issues were raised concerning both land use and the Development Agreement portions of Lhe protect. A copy of the previous staff report dated March 23, 1988 is included for information purposes as Exhibit "A". The specific issues raised concerning the Development Agreement were as follows: ~~ PLANNING COMA SSI ON STAFF REPORT RE: NEST END d NOURSE April 13, 1988 Page 3 o The Commission wanted Paragraph ld of the Development Agreement to be changed to indicate that if the federal standard for determini n~ "low income" was discontinued, "County of San Bernardino' and not the "City of Rancho Cucamonga" median i"co!ne !vou?d the.^, be used a; the new basis of determining qualified income levels, o The proposed Development Agreement targets just 50% of the proposed units reserved as rentals restricted to qualified persons of low and moderate incomes. The Commission would prefer to see a mtnimum of 75% of the units reserved for qualified persons, and to consider the possible means for fee waiver and/or reductions to then make this project economically feasible. o Project alternatives - The Planning Commission was uncertain as to their intended course of action regarding the office site. Three alternative scenarios era suggested. The first scenario would be to approve both sites for development, and subject to a three-party development agreement between the City, Nourse Development and Nest End Investments. This throe party agreement has been developed by the City Attorney and is enclosed for review as Exhibit "C". "-~"a., Gina ayrecmanc was not aenvered Co staff unfit April 7, 1988 and therefore comments by staff and applicants will have to be made at the Commission meeting. The purpose of this three-party agreement is to extend the parameters of the development agreement to control the development of the office site development to insure; A. It is developed concurrent with the senior housing project, and 8. The site development is restricted to the approved development plans per Development Review 87-34. The second scenario would be that the Commission approve the senior housing project. but not the efftce deve?ppment. If .~:~ . -" the action chosen, conditions of approval would need to ~becincluded indicating the senior housing project site cannot be built until such time as all necessary drainage and access easements are obtained over the ayacent parcel. In addition, 1f the second scenario is chosen, the Commission indicated that they would like to see the 1.69 acre parcel be shown with a master plan for future development. 31~ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT RE: NEST END 6 NOURSE April 13, 1988 Page 4 A third protect scenario is that the Commission consider the applications as one complete project and recommend denial of said development to the City Council. The specific issues raised concerning land use were as follows: Development Review Issues: A. Traffic: With the potential change in land use e~d-s~gnati ons, the Commis Sion expressed concern about additional traffic generated from the two sites. The present Low-Medium Residential District (4-8 dwelling units per acre) would accommodate roughly 39 single family units (using the mid point of the density range) and generate about 390 vehicle trips per day. The majority of these trips would occur at peak hours (8:00 A. M., 5:00 P.MJ . The senior apartment project would generate 3.3 trips per unit or 561 trips per day. It is estimated that only about 5% of the trips would be generated a4 peak hours. The medical office would generate between 900 and 1050 average daily trips with approximately 5-SO% of the trips anticipated during peak hours. Combined, the two projects would generate between 1,461 and 1,611 average daily trips with 73 to 133 entering the adjoining streets at peak hours. in evaluating the impacts for the Archibald site (medical office location) only, a residential project of ten single family units (assuming six dwelling units per acre) would generate roughly 100 average daily trips. The majority of these trips would take place during peak hours. As previously mentioned, the medical office building would generate between 900 and 1,050 average daily trips. Approximately 5-10% or 45-105 trips would be expected during peak hours. 8• en S ace: Oue to the relatively small size of the un-its, some members of the Commission felt that 50-65 square feet of private open space was not sufficient. They felt that the orejecf should prov!d€ 150 ;ouara fear. ~~ yf,vdte open space for the ground floor units and 100 square feet of private open space for the second and third floor units. In comparing this submittal with existing facilities, the 50-65 square feet proposed 15 to excess of the private open space provided for the two existing senior apartment projects. The Calmark project on Lomita Court does not provide any private open space and the Rudolph Hendrickson project on Amethyst Street provides roughly 40 square feet. ~lg PLANNSNG COMMISSION STAFF REPORT RE: WEST END d NOURSE April 13, 1988 Page 5 C. Parking: Members of the Cammi salon expressed concern a ob~the parking provided for the senior apartment project. The parking is proposed at one space per unit. The Calmark project is parked at 0.72 spaces per unit and the Rudolph Hendrickson project is parked at one space per unit. Based on site investigations conducted by staff, ample parking is provided for both projects. D. Master Plan: At the March 23, 1988 meeting, the Planning omm ss on requested that a master plan be prepared for the Archibald site (medical office building location) indicating how the area could be developed at the present Low-Medium Residential designation. To date, no plan has been received. II. ANALYSIS: City staff is scheduled to meet with the project proponen s on April 6, 1988. Therefore, additional information may have to be presented orally to the Commission at their meeting on April 13, 1988. III. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Part i of the Environmental Checklist y e applicant. Staff has completed Part II of theenEnvironmental Checklist. Upon completion of the Ynitial Stugy, staff has found no adverse impacts on the environment as a iewil of the propasea pra~ects, and recommends the issuance of a Negative Declaraii on. IV. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: In order for the Planning Commission to recomnen approva of these projects, they must find the followtng: 1. That these projects are consistent with the land use policies of the General Plan, 2. That these projects would be in the best interest of the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Rancho Cucamonga, and 3. That these projects would not result in any significant adverse imoacts to nercnns and e e ~ in th€ ,_, ,... P" P r-Y vi~~n,s. of the project site. Y. CORRESPONDENCE: These items have been advertised in The~Daily e~o>t- r~newspaper as a public hearing item, all proper yt owners w~Lh~n 300 feet of the project site were sent direct mail public hearing notices, and the property was posted with a 4 x 8 Foot notification sign per the City's supplemental noticing requirements (these items have been re-advertised and re-noticed far the March 23, 1988 public hearing). 3~~~ PLANNING COMIISSION STAFF REPORT RE: NEST END d NOURSE April 13, 1988 Page 6 VI RECC444ENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission orwar o e Ctty Council Resolutions recommending approval of the senior housing project (GPA 87-04G, DDA 87-05, and DA 87-02) for the reasons stated in the Resolutions. Staff also recommends that the Commission provide staff with direction as to the appreprta to ccurse of aztion regarding the nredical office site (GPA87-04H, DDA 87-06 ). Resolutions for both approval and denial have been includeQrfor the Commission's review and consideration. Wtth Commission concurrence, adoption of the applicable attached Resolutions would then be appropriate. Respectfully Brad Buller' City Planner, BB:LH:ko ' Attachments: Exhibit "A" - March 23, 1988 Staff Report Exhibit "B" - Develepn:ert Agreement 87-U2 Exhibit "C" - Development Agreement 87-02A Resolution o° Approval for GPA 81-04G Resolution of Approval for DDA 81-05 Resc lotion of Approval for Development Agreement 87-02 Resolution of Approval far Development Agreement 87-02A Resolution cf Approval for GPA 81-04H Re soiuiton of Denial fcr GP.4 87-04H Resolution of Approval for DDA 81-06 Resolution of Denial for UDA 87-U6 Resolution of Approval for DR 87-33 Resolution of Approval for DR 87-34 ~~ I DEVELOPMENT AOR8EM8NT NO. 87-02 eENIOR CITIZENS' 80D8INa THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of the "Effective Date" set forth herein by and between PETEA 11. NODRSE, dbe NODRSE DEVELOPMENT CO., a Bola propriatorahip ("Developer") and the CITY OF RANCHO CIICHMONGA, a municipal corporation organized and =.iisti;ty under the iaws of the State of California ("City"). W 3 T N E$ Si & T ~~ A. Raoitala. (i) California Government Code Sections 65864 et seq. authorizes cities to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property. (ii) California Government Code Section 65915 provides that a city may, by agreement with a developer, grant a density bonus over that allowed by the maximum density established in the development code and land use element of the general plan when a developer agrees to construct housing for low income senior households. (iii) Ceveloper has requested City to consider the approval of a development agreement, with a density hnn„a ~c~i.aining co cnac real property located entirely within City, the common and legal description of which is set forth in Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and hereinafter is referred to as "the 3ite." (iv) The Site is now zoned High Residential with a Senior Housing Overlay District pursuant to the provisions of City's Development Code, as amended to date hereof. Developer and City desire to provide through this Development Agreement more specific development controls on the Site which will provide for maximum efficient utilization of the Site in accordance with sound planning principles. (v) The Developer proposes to construct a senior housing residential proiect; incl'!ding law irccmC units, within the ^ity. 'said project contemplated by Developer will require an increase in the maximum density as currently provided in the Senior Housing Overlay District. (vi) It is the desire of City to encourage developments designed to provide affordable rental unite for senior residents of the City. In furtherance of that desire, the City is hereby L willing to grant a density bonus to Developer as provided by the terms cf this Agreement. (vii) On , 1988, City adopted its Ordinance No. thereby approving this Development Agreement with Developer and said action was effective on , 1988. Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires, the following terms shall have the following meaning: a. "City" is the City df Rancho Cucamonga. b. "Project" is the development approved by City comprised of one hundred seventy (170) apartment units, recreational and common area facilities, one hundred seventy (170) parking spaces and other amenities on the Site, all as set forth more fully in the site plan for Development Review 87-39 eubmitte3 by Developer and approved by City, a copy of which is attached hereto, marked as Exhibit "B" and is incorporated herein by this reference. The site plan attached as Exhibit "e" i„ui u,ies various conditions of approval which are not changed, altered or modified by this Development Agreement unless specifically set forth herein. The project also includes the records of the applications by Developer, the Proceedings before the Planning Commission and City council of City on file with the City and all such records and files in these matters are incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. c. "Qualified Project Period" means the first day on which the residential units in the development are first available for occupancy by qualified Tenants and continuing for thirty (30) years. "Qual Lied Tenants" shaii mean persons or households who ors at least fifty-five (55) years or older and are senior citizens as defined in Section 51.3 of the California Civil Coda as said sections are written as of the effective date of this Agreement. "Low Income Qualified Tenants" shall mean Qualified Tenants who also possess an income equal to or lees than eighty percent (803) of the current County o! son Bernardino 3~~ median income as determined by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937. In the event such federal determinations of area median income are discontinued, other means to determine the median income, as determined by the City, shall be established for the County of San Bernardino, at eighty percent (n09j of the area median income, adjusted for family size and revised annually. Affordable Rents" shall mean those rents charged to Los Income Qualified Tenants, which rent shall be on an annualized basis equal to or less than thirty percent (309) of the eighty percent (809) of the current median income as established for such Qualified Tenants. For purposes of this definition, rents charged for all one (1) bedroom units shall be subject to computation based on eighty percent (90$) of the median income for a two (2) person household. Rents charged for all two (2) bedroom unite shall be subject to computation based upon eighty percent (808) of the median income for all households for four (4) or more persons. "Effective Date" shall mean the 31st calendar day following adoption of the ordinance approving this Agreement by City's City council. e. xecitals. The recitals are part of the agreement between the parties and shall be enforced and enforceable as any other provision of this Agreement. 3. Interes*_ g~ property Owner. Developer warrants and represents that it has entered into an escrow cr an agreement by which it is to acquire full legal title to the real property of the Site and that it hoe full legal right to enter into this Agreement. This Agreement shall not have any effect unless and until Developer acquires fee title to the Site, which acquisition must occur on or before the Effective Date of this Agreement. Should Developer not acquire fee title to the Site on or before the Effective Date, this Agreement shall be deemed to be null and void and of no force or effect. =• vindinu Effect gj Agreement. The Developer hereby subjects the development and the land described in Exhibit "A" hereto to the covenants, reaervationa and restrictions as set forth in this Agreement. The City and the Developer hereby declare their specific intent that the covenants, reaervationa and restrictions as set forth herein shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall pass to and be binding upon the Developer's successors and assigns in title or interest to the Development. 32 4 Each and every contract, deed or other instrument hereinafter executed, covering or conveying the development or any portion thereof shall conclusively be held to have been executed, delivered and accepted subject to the covenants, reservations and restrictions expressed in this Agreement, regardless of whether such covenants, reservations and restrictions are set forth in such contract, deed or other instrument. City and Developer hereby declare their understanding and intent that the burden of the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth herein touch and concern the land in that the Developer's legal interest in the development is rendered less valuable thereby. The City and Developer hereby further declare their understanding and intent that the benefit of such covenants touch and concern the land by enhancing and increasing the enjoyment and use of the Development by Qualified Tenants, the intended beneficiaries of such covenants, reservations and restrictions, and by furthering the public purposes for which this Agreement is adopted. Further, the parties hereto agree that such covenants, reservations and restrictions benefit all other real property located in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 5. Relationshio g~ Parties. It is understood that the contractual relationship between city and Developer is such that Developer is an independent party and is not the agent of City for any purpose whatsoever and shall not be considered to be the agent of city for any purpose whatsoever. 6• Term g~ Agreement. The term of the Agreement shall commence on the effective date and shall expire thirty (30) years after the commencement of the Qualified Project Period, so long as Developer remains in material compliance with this Agreement, as from time to time amended. Upon the conclusion of the Qualified Project Period, and the expiration of this Agreement as provided herein, the Project shall be made to conform with all then applicable Development Code provisions. This Agreement shall be deemed to be terminated automatically if Developer does not obtain a Certificate oP Occupancy for the entirety of the Project within three (3) years of the effective date. 7. Restzictions .Qr1 Rental Units. All tenants, occupants, and residents of apartment unite in the Project shall be Qualified 4~onanr ~_ c.:a apartment units shall not be rented, occupied, leased or subleased to occupants who are not Qualified Tenants except as provided as follows: A person or person who is not a Qualified Tenant, and is at least forty-five (45) years of age, may occupy an apartment unit if hn or she occupies an apartment unit with a present occupant who is a Qualified Tenant J ~~ and who provides primary physical or economic support to such Qualified Tenant; A person at least forty-five (45) years of age who is the spouse of a Qualified Tenant may occupy a unit with such Qualified Tenant; and A person or persons under fifty-five f55) years of ag= may occupy apartment units as temporary tenants for a period of time not to exceed three (3) months during any calendar year. s. I~ow ncom Rental $gauirements. During the Qualified Project Period seventy-five percent (753) of the un il:s in the Project shall be rented, leased or held available for Low Income Qualified Tenants at affordable rents, as defined herein. Additionally, at least sixty (60) days prior to any increase in rental rates, as computed by the terms of this Agreement, the Developer shall provide written notice of such increase to the city and all affected tenants. 9. Maintenance ~ Apartments N,g Bentals. During the term hereof, all apartment unite in the Project shall remain rental units. No apartment unit in the Project shall be eligible for conversion from rental units to cendomiriums, townhouses or any other common interest subdivision without consent of the City council. ice. cu-lice manager. A full-time manager shall be provided on the Project site. 11. nant Co mi to Residents shall have the right to establish a committee composed of tenants for the purpose of organizing social activities and providing comments and suggestions to the Developer regarding the operation and facilities of the Project. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to restrict the rights oP individuals to organize activities and provide comments to the Developer. 12. Submission p~ Materials bpd ADDy~l Review, prior to occupancy, Developer shall submit to City tenant selection procedures which shall detail the methods which Developer shall use to advertise the availability np apartments in the Fra iect 9~~ ^ -• ^`- ing wechaniams which Developer intends to use to~limit the occupancy of the apartments to Qualified Tenants and Low Income Qualified Tenants. On or before March 15 of each year following the commencement of the Qualified Project Period, the Developer, or its representative, shall file a certificate of continuing 32~, program compliance with the City. Each such report shall contain such information as City may require including, but not limited to, the following: a. Rent schedules then in effect, including utility charges (if any); b. A project occupancy profile, including age, resident profile and number of automobiles owned by Project residents; c. A description of all written complaints received from residents; d. A certificatior. that low income requirements have been met; e. A list of substantial physical defects in the Praj ect including a description of repair or maintenance work undertaken during the reporting year; and f. A description of the physical condition and maintenance procedures for the Project, including apartment units, landscaping, walkways and recreational areas. City shall be allowed to conduct physical inspections of the Project as it shall deem necessary, provided that said inspections co not unreasonably interfere with the normal operations of the Project and reasonable notice is provided. The City shall further be allowed to conduct an annual survey of residents in the Project in order to assess senier needs. 13. Tenant Selection, Contracts gly{i Rules 9Il~ 8eau1_,a__t~on~, On receipt of an application for low income occupancy, developer shall determine the eligibility of the occupancy under the terms of this Development Agreement. Verification of tenant eligibility shall include one or more of the following factors: a, obtain an income verification form from the Social security Administration and/or the California Department of Social Services, if the applicant receives income from either nr both agencies; b. Obtain an income tax return for the moat recent tax year; c. Conduct a TRW or similar fSnancial search; d. Obtain an income verification from all current employers; and 6 3 27 e. If the applicant is unemployed and has no tax return, obtain another form of independent verification. Developer shall be entitled to rely on the information contained in the application sworn to by the applicant. All agreements for rental of all apartment units in the project shall b2 i.i writi lCj. The fozm of proposed rent or lease agreement shall be reviewed and approved by City prior to the commencement of the Qualified Project period. Such agreement shall include all rules and regulations governing tenancy within the Project. The rules and regulations shall include regulations which specifically authorize the keeping of small pets within all apartment units. 14. Termination AII~ Eviction ,Q~ Tenants. A tenancy may be terminated without the terminatior. being deemed an eviction under the following circumstances: a. The death of the sole tenant of the unit; b. By the tenant at the expiration of the term of occupancy or otherwise upon thirty (30) days' written notice; c. By abandonment of the premises by the tenant; or d. By failure of a tenant to execute or renew a lease. Any termination of a tenancy other than those listed above in this paragraph 14 shall constitute an eviction. Developer shall only evict in compliance with the provisions of Califcrnia law and then only for material noncompliance with the terms of the rental agreement. 15. Local Residency. Residency preference shall be given where possible to applicants to the Project who have been residents of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. However, that factor shall not be given priority over the other elements of QualifieG Tenant selection as stated herein. =~ °,""'d +`+',au_'=er_i~e. Developer shall keep the Project and all improvements thereon insured at all times against loos or damag± by fire or other risk covered by a standard extended coverage endorsement and such other risks, perils or coverage as Developer may determine. During the term hereof, the Project shall be insured to its full insurance replacement value. 3 ~~ 17. Maintenancg Guarantee. Developer shall comply with all City maintenance standards enacted from time to time. l8. Standards BIl$ Restrictions pertaining $g Develo ent of t~ Rea Property. The following specific restrictiers shall apply to ttie use of the Site pursuant to this Development Agreement: a. Only resiuential uses of the real property shall be permitted in the Project; b. The maximum density of residential dwelling units in the Project shall never be greater than 35.05 dwelling units per acre; c. The maximum height for the highest proposed building in the Project shall be fifty-five {55) feet; d. The maximum size Por all the buildings and the proposed square Pootage for each of the apartment types located in the Project shall be as set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto; and e. The provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes are contained in the conditions for approval of Development Review 87-33. 19. Development Incentives. The City will grant Developer the i~ilvw i~~y ueveiopmenc incencivea Lor Development of the Project: a. The maximum density per acre on the site shall be increased to 35.05 dwelling units per acre; b. The maximum number of required off-street parking spaces shall be lowered to one !1) parking space par dwelling unit; and c. City requirements for covered parking spaces shall be waived in their entirety. , 20. pros ect Desicn Amenities gpt Senior Citizens. The Project open space, buildings and individual apartments shall be designed with physical amenities catering to the needs and aesires of *he :«,_ _,. +..er~ts. Zn addition to those contlltions set forth~in+Exh ibit6"B" hereto, the following physical amenities shall be substantially included in the Project: a. Elevator service shall be provided to all upper story apartments; b. All unite shall be designed for handicap access; B 32 c. All units shall possess secured entryways off a common enclosed hallway; d. Handrails shall be provided in all hallways; e. Building space shall be devoted for tenant group meetings; and f. Recreational amenities shall include, but not limited to, putting greens and shuffleboard courts. 21. Indemnification. Developer agrees to and shall hold City and its elected officials, officers, agents and employees harmless from liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injuries, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of Developer or those of his contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting on his behalf which relate to the Project. Developer agrees to and shall defend City and its elected officials, officers, agents and employees with respect to actions for damages caused or alleged to have been caused by reason of Developer's activities in connection with the Project. This hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damage suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reascr. cf the operations referred to in this Development Agreement regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied or approved the plans, specifications or other documents for the rrolecc. 22. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended or canceled, in whole or in part, only by mutual written consent of the parties and then in the manner provided for in California Government Code Sections 65868 et seq. 23. Enforcement. In the event of a default under the provisions of this Agreement by Developer, City shall give written notice to Developer (or its successor) at the address of the Project, and by registered or certified mail addressed to the address stated in this Agreement, and if such violation is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of City within thirty (30) days after such notice is given, or if not corrected within such reasonable time as may be required to cure the k+rsach or default if sai3 Lreacb or defauit cannot be cured within thirty (30) days (provided that acts to cure the breach or default moat be commenced within said thirty (30) days and must thereafter be diligently pursued by Developer), then City may, without further notice, declare a default under this Agreement and, upon any such declaration of default, City may bring any action necessary to specifically enforce the obligations of Developer growing out of the operation of this Development Agreement, apply to any court, 9 ~~ state or federal, for injunctive relief against any violation by Developer of any provision of this Agreement, or apply for such other relief as may be appropriate. 24. ve ~ Default. Developer is in defauit under this Agreement upon the happening of one or more of the following events or conditions: If a material warranty, representation or statement is made or furnished by Developer to City and is false or proved to have been false in any material respect when it was made; b. If a finding and determination is made by a city following an annual review pursuant to paragraph 12 hereinabove, upon the basis of substantial evidence that Developer has not complied in good faith with any material terms and conditions of this Agreement, after notice and opportunity to cure as described in paragraph 23 hereinabove; or A breach by Developer of any of the provisions or terms of this Agreement, after notice and opportunity to cure as provided in paragraph 23 hereinabove. 25. ~iQ waiver gj Remedies. City does not waive any claim of defect in performance by Developer if on periodic review Citv uues not enrorca or terminate this Agreement. Nonperformance by Developer shall not be excused because performance by Developer of the obligations herein contained would be unprofitable, difficult or expensive or because of a failure of any third party or entity, other than City. All other remedies at law or in equity which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in City's regulations governing development agreements are available to the parties to pursue in the event that there is a breach of this Development Agreement. No waiver by City of any breach or default under this Development Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach thereof or default hereunder. 26. Rlghts Qf, Fenders Under thief Acreement. Should Developer pace or cause to be placed any encumbrance or lien on the n....~....~ . ...~_..~, cr dry part ihereoi, the beneficiary (^Lenaer^) of said encumbrance or lien, including, but not limited to, mortgages, shall have the right at any time during the term of this Agreement and the existence of said encumbrance or lien to: 10 ~- O l a. Do any act or thing required of Developer under this Agreement, and any such act or thing done or performed by Lender shall be as effective as if done by Developer itself; b. Realize on the security afforded by the encumbrance or lien by exercising foreclosure proceedings or power of sale or other remedy afforded in iaw or in equity or by the security document evidencing the encumbrance or lien (hereinafter referred to as "the trust deed^); c. Transfer, convey or assign the title of Developer to the Project to any purchaser at any foreclosure sale, whether the foreclosure sale be conducted pursuant tc court order or pursuant to a power of sale contained in a trust deed; and d. Acquire and succeed to the interest of Developer by virtue of any foreclosure sale, whether the fore- closure sale be conducted pursuant to a court order or pursuant to a power of sale contained in a trust deed. 27. Notice ~ Lender. City shall give written notice of any default or breach under this Agreement by property owner to Lender and afford Lender the opportunity after service of the notice to: a. Cure the breach or default within sixty (60) days after service of said notice, where the default can be cured by the payment of money; b. Cure the breach or default within sixty {60) days after service of said notice where the breach or default can be cured by something other than the payment of money and can be cured within that time; or c. Cure the breach or default in such reasonable time as may be required where something other than payment of money is required to cure the breach or default and cannot be performed within sixty (vC) days after said notice, provided that acts to cure the breach or default are commenced within a sixty (60) day period after service of said notice of default on Lander by City and are thereafter diligently continued by Lender. 11 ~ V Z 28. Action py jar. Notwithstanding any other provision oP this Agreement, a Lender may forestall any action by City for a breach or default under the terms of this Agreement by Developer by commencing proceedings to foreclose its encumbrance or lien on the Projec*_. The proceedings so commenced may be for foreclosure of the encumbrance by order of court or for foreclosure of the encumbrance under a power of sale contained in the instrument creating the encumbrance or lien. The proceedings shall not, however, forestall any such action by the City for the default or breach by Developer unless: They arc commenced within sixty {60) days after service on Lender of the notice described herein- above; They are, after having been commenced, diligently pursued in the manner required by law to completion; and c. Lender keeps and performs all of the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement requiring the payment or expenfliture of money by Developer until the foreclosure proceedings are complete or are discharged by redemption, satisfaction or payment. 29. Rent Control. In consideration for the liaitations herein yaovideu, city agrees coat 1t mall not, during the term of this Agreement, take any action, the effect of which will be to control, determine or affect the rents for those low income rental units located in the Project. 70. Notice, Any notice required to be given by the terms of this Agreement shall be provided by certified mail, return receipt requested, at the address of the respective parties as specified below or at any other such address as may be later specified by the parties hereto. To Developer: Nouree Development Co. 901 Dover Drive, Suite 110 Newport Beach, California 9;~R3 Attention: Peter W. Nourse 12 4~ 3 To City: City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Base Line, Suite C P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Attention: Duren Wasserman, City Manager 31. Attornevs~ Fees. Zn any proceedings arising Prom the enforcement of this Development Agreement or because of an alleged breach or default hereunder, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costs and its reasonable attorneys fees incurred during the proceeding as may be fixed within the discretion of the court. 32. Bindino Effect. This Agreement shall bind, and the benefits and burdens hereof shall inure to, the respective parties hereto and their legal representatives, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, wherever the context requires or admits. 33. Amolicable jig. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with and governed 6y the laws of the State oP California. 3<. partial Invalidity. If any provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legnlity or enforceability of trie remaining provisions hereof Bhall nfl* ~tf TAV WAV F.P flisrl n.i 1....l ~.~i .~~~~1. 35. ggpordation. This Agreement shall, at the expense of Developer, be recorded in the Official Records of the County Recorder of the County of San Bernardino. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the parties and shall be affective on the effective date set forth here inabove. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Datedt BY Denn s L. Stout, Mayor PETER W. NOURSE, dbe NOURSE pEVELOPMENT CO., a Sola Proprietorship Dated: By Peter W. Nourse, Owner /( ~q" 13 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ss. On 1488, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person who axacuted this instr•~srt as Mayor of the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation existing and organized under the laws of the State of California, and acknowledged to me that the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA executed it. Notary Public in and Por said State STATE OF ) se. COUNTY OF ) On , 1488, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Publ c n and for sa d County and State, personally appeared and proved to me on the bas s of satisfactory ev Bence to be the persons who executed this inefr„ma..r -- anc of NOURSE DEVELOPMENT CO, and acknowledged to ae thaL that such officers are authorized to execute on behalf of such corporation. Notary Public nand for said State ~O~ L\134\DANOURSE\R.C. 6.4 14 DSVSLOPMENT AOREENBNT NO. s7-0271 FOR 88NIOR CITIZENS' NOOSING 11ND MEDICAL OPFICB CONpLEB THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of the "Effective Date" set forth herein by and between PETBR A. NODR88, dba NOIIRSE DE'7ELOP."..°.NT CO., a sole proprietorship (^Nourse^), IfEBT END INVESTMENTS, a California Lia~.ted PnZLnerebip ("West End") and the CITY OF RANCHO COCAMONOA, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California ("City"). YISTNE~~>iTK~ A. Recitals (1) California Government Code Sections 65864 et seq. authorizes cities to enter into binding development agreements with person having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property. (11) California Government Code Section 65915 provides that a city may, by agreement with a developer., grant a density bonus over that allowed by the maximum density established in the development code end land use element of the general plan when a developer agrees to construct housing for low income senior households. (iii) Nourse has requested City to consider the approval of a development agreement, with a density bonus, pertaining to that real property located entirely within City, the common and legal description of which is set forth Sn Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference and hereinafter is referred to as "the Senior Sfte." (iv) West End has requested CSty to consider the approval of a Development Agreement pertaining to that real property located entirely within the City, the common and legal description of which is set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incarporated herein by this reference and hereinafter referred to as "the Office Site." (v) --aindicer in this Agreement, Nourse and West End are sometimes collectively referred to as the "Developers." (vi) The Senior Site is now zoned High Residential with a Senior Housing overlay District pursuant to the provisions of City's Development Code, as amended to date hereof. ~~ (vii) The Office Site is now zoned Office Professional pursuant to the provisions of City's Development Code, as amended to date hereof. (viii) Nourse proposes to construct a senior housing residential project, including low income units, within the City. said project contemplated by Developer will require an increase '' tiie maximum density as currently provided in the Senior Housing Overlay District. (ix) West End proposes to construct a two-story building, approximately 22,400 square feet, devoted to medical office uses. (x) Developers and City desire to provide through this Development Agreement more specific development controls on the Senior Site and the OPf ice Site which will provide for maximum efficient utilization of both the Senior Site and the office Site in accordance with sound planning principals. (xi) on , 1988, City adopted its Ordinance No. thereby approving this Development Agreement with Developers and said action was effective on 1988. B. Aoreemant. nuw, •rncHSr•ORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Definitions. Zn this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires, the following terms shall have the following meaning: "City" fa the City of Rancho Cucamonga. "Senior Project" is the development approved by City comprised of one hundred seventy (170) apartment units, recreational and common area facilities, one hundred seventy (170) parking spaces and other amenities on the Senior Site, all as sat forth more fully in the site plan for Development Review 87-37 submitted by Nourse and approved by city, a copy !+f which is attache3 hereoo, merited as Exhibit ^C^ and is incorporated herein by this reference. The site plan attached as Exhibit "C" includes various conditions of approval which are not changed, altered or modified by this Development Agreement unless specifically set forth herein. Tha project also includes the records of the applications by Nourse, the proceedings before the Planning Commission and City Council of City on file ~~~ with the City and all such records and files in these matters are incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. "office Project" is the Development approved by the City comprised of a twenty-two thousand four hundred (22,400) square foot medical office building, one hundred and twelve (112) parking spaces and other amenities on the Office Site, all as set forth more fully in the Site Plan for Development Review No. 87-34, submitted by West End and approved by City, a copy of which is attached hereto, marked as Exhibit "D" and is incorporated herein by this reference. The Site Plan attached as Exhibit "D" includes various conditions of approval which are not changed, altered or modified by this Development Agreement unless specifically set forth herein. The Office Project also includes the records of the applications by West End, the proceedings before the Planning Commission and City Council of City on file with the City and all records and files in these matters are incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full. d. "qualified Project Period" means: (i) For the Senior Project, the first day on which ci,e re9iaenual units in the development are first available for occupancy by Qualified Tenants and continuing for thirty (30) years. (ii) For the Office Project, the date of issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first office space in the development and continuing for thirty (30) years. "Qualified Tenants" shall mean persons or households who are at least fifty-five (55) years or older and are senior citizens as defined in Section 51.3 0£ the California Civil code as said sections are written as of the effective date of this Agreement. "Low Zncome Qualified Tenants" shall mean Qualified Tenants who -lso yusseas an income equal to or less than eighty percent (808) of the current County of San Bernardino median income as determined by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to Section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937. In the event such federal determinations oP area median income are discontinued, other means to determine the median income, as determined by the City, shall be eetabliahed 0 for the County of san Bernardino, at eighty percent (80$) of the area median income, adjusted for family size and revised annually. "Affordable Rents" shall mean those rents charged to Los Income Qualified Tenants, which rent shall be on an annualized basis equal to or less than thirty percent (3C$) cf the eighty percer... (o0°s) of the current median income as established for such Qualified Tenants. For purposes of this definition, rents charged for all one (1) bedroom units shall be subject to computation based on eighty percent (80$) of the median income for a two (2) person household. Rents charged for all two (2) bedroom units shall be subject to computation based upon eighty percent (80$) of the median income for all households for fcur (4) or more persons. "Effective Date" shall mean the 31st calendar day following adoption of the ordinance approving this Agreement by City's City Council. 2. Recitals. The recitals are part of the agreement between the parties and shall ba enforced and enforceable as any other provision of this Agreement. Interest p~ Property Owner. u. .. J.. oc w.a auu avyaaenu la lilac lc ^aS enLerem 1nLo an escrow organ agreement by which it is to acquire full legal title to the real property of the Senior site and that it has full legal right to enter into this Agreement. This Agreement shall not have any effect unless and until Nourse acquires fee title to the Senior Site, which acquisition must occur on or before the Effective Date of this Agreement. Should Nourse not acquire fee title to the Senior Site on or before the Effective Date, this Agreement shall be deemed to be null and void and of no force or effect. b. West End warrants and represents that it has full legal title to the office Site, that it has full legal right to enter into this Agreement and that the person executing this Agreement on behalf of Weat End has been authorized to do so. 4. B' d Effect qg Aoreement. The Developers hereby subject the Senior Project and the Office Project and the land described in Exh ibita "A" and "B" hereto to the covenants, reservations and restrictions as set forth in this Agreement. The City and the Developers hereby declare their specific intent that the covenants, reservations and restrictions as set forth herein shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall pace to ~~ I and be binding upon the Developers successors and assigns in title or interest. Each and every contract, deed or other instrument hereinafter executed, covering or conveying the Senior Project or the Office Project or any portion thereof shall conclusively be held to have been executed, delivered and accepted subject to the covenants, reservations and restrictions expressed in this Agreement, regardless of whether such 'nts, reservaticns and restrict iano are set forth in such contract, deed or other instrument. City and Developers hereby declare their understanding and intent that the burden of the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth herein touch and concern the land in that the Developers' legal interest is rendered less valuable thereby. The City and Developers hereby further declare their understanding and intent that the benefit of such covenants touch and concern the land by enhancing and increasing the enjoyment and use of the Project by future tenants, the intended beneficiaries of such covenants, reservations and restrictions, and by furthering the public purposes for which this Agreement is adopted. 5. Relationsh io p~ parties. It is understood that the contractual relationship between City and Developers is such that Developers are independent parties and are not the agents of City for any purpose whatsoever and shall not be considered to be the agents of City for any purpose whatsoever. 6. Term 4€ $greement. The term of the Agreement shall commence on the effective data and shall expire thirty (30) years after the commencement of the Qualified Project Period, so long as Developers remain in material compliance with this Agreement, as from time to time amended. The expiration period for the Senior Project and the Office Project shall be calculated separately depending on the commencement of the qualified Project. Upon the expiration of this Agreement as provided herein, each such Project shall be wads to conform with all the then applicable Development Code provisions. If the Senior Project or Office Project does not obtain a Certificate of Occupancy for the entirety of such project within three (3) years of the effective date of this Agreement, this Agreement, as it effects such Project which has not received such Certificate of occupancy. F.l1.ll 1 ,1P fIP OmPri •n Nn 4n~~.i ...4..J ... __ __ ______ __ __ ...............,a.. au wruatiLaily. Development pf Senigs Protect. A. Restrictions qn gentaj Units, All tenants, occupants, and residents of apartment units in the Senior Project shall be Qualified Tenants. Said apartment units shall not be rented, ~I~~ occupied, leased or subleased to occupants who are not Qualified Tenants except as provided as follows: A person or person who is not a Qualified Tenant, and is at least forty-five (45) years of age, may occupy an apartment unit if he or she occupies an apartment unit with a present occupant who is a qualified Tenant and who provides primary physical or economic support to such Qualified Tenant; A person at least forty-five (45) years of age who is the spouse of a Qualified Tenant may occupy a snit with such Qualified Tenant; and A person or persons under fifty-five (55) years of age may occupy apartment units as temporary tenants for a period of time not to exceed three (3) months during any calendar year. B• S81 Income Rental Reavirements. During the Qualified Px•oject Period seventy-five percent (75$) of the unite in the Project shall ba rented, leased or held available for Low Income Qualified Tenants at affordable rents, as defined herein. Additionally, at least sixty (60) days prior to any increase in rental rates, as computed by the terms of this Agreement, Nourse shall provide written notice of such increase to the City and all affected tenants. c. Maintenance gf Anartmenta ag Rentals. During the term hereof, all apartment units in the Senior Project shall remain rental units. No apartment unit in the Senior Project shall be eligible for conversion from rental units to condominiums, townhouses or any other common interest subdivision without consent of the City Council. D• On-si~@ Manacer. A full-time manager shall be provided on the Senior Project. E. Tenant Committee. Residents shall have the right to establish a committee composed of tenants for the purpose of organizing social activities and providing comments and suggestions regarding the operation and facilities of the sen i_or 9rninnl 1•~M1,:-- ~J- --~-~~• ••~~ y i.-. t...a cuCtion shall be deemed to restrict the rights of individuals to organize activities and provide comments on the Senior Project operation. F. Submission g~ Materials ,agd 811dll~1 Review, prior to occupancy, Nourse shall submit to City tenant selection procedures which shall detail the methods which Nouree shall use to advertise the availability of apartments in the Senior Project ~I and screening mechanisms which Nourse intends to use to limit the occupancy of the apartments to Qualified Tenants and Low Income Qualified Tenants. On or before March 15 of each year following the commencement of the Qualified Project Period, Nourse, or its representative, shall file a certificate of continuing program complizrce wit.*. the City. Each such report shall contain such information as City may require including, but not limited to, the following: a. Rent schedules then in ePPect, including utility charges (if any); b. A project occupancy profile, including age, resident profile and number of automobiles owned by Project residents; c. A description of all written complaints received from residents; d. A certification that low income requirements have been met; e. A list of substantial physical defects in the Project including a description of repair or maintenance work undertaken during the reporting year; and f. A description of the physical condition and maintenance procedures for the Project, including apartment units, landscaping, walkways and recreational areas. City shall be allowed to conduct physical inspections of the senior Project as it shall deem necessary, provided that said inspections do not unreasonably interfere with the normal operations of the Senior Project and reasonable notice is provided. TLe City shall Further be allowed to conduct an annual survey of residents in file Senior Project in order to assess senior needs. O• Tenant Selection. Contracts ~ 1es and Regulations. On receipt of an application for low income occupancy, Nourse FIIA I I nP_TPYm_1 nP_ •hn_ n_l ini,.i l iL.• .o rl .... .. --n-~=....i ... .. waupancy anger Cne Lerme of this Development Agreement. Verification of tenant eligibility shall include one or more of the following factors: a. Obtain an income verification form from the Social Security Administration and/or the California Department of Social Services, if the applicant receives income Prom either or both agencies; 4i2 b. Obtain an income tax return for the mast recent tax year; c. Conduct a TRW or similar financial search; d. obtain an income verification from all current employers; and e. If the applicant is unemployed and has no tax return, obtain another form of independent verification. Nourse shall be entitled to rely on the information contained in the application sworn to by the applicant. All agreements for rental of all apartment units in the Senior Project shall be in writing. The form of proposed rent or lease agreement shall be reviewed and approved by City prior to the commencement of the qualified Project Period. Such agreement shall include all rules and regulations governing tenancy within the Senior Project. The rlles and regulations shall include regulations which specifically authorize the keeping of small pets within all apartment units. H. Termination pn~ Eviction g~ Tenants. A tenancy may be terminated without the termination being deemed an eviction under U~r Luiiuwing circumstances: a. The death of the sole tenant oP the unit; b. By the tenant at the expiration of the term of occupancy or otherwise upon thirty (30) days' written notice; c. By abandonment of the premises by the tenant; or d. By failure of a tenant to execute or renew a lease. Any termination of a tenancy other than those listed above in this paragraph l4 shall constitute an eviction. Any eviction shall be in compliance with the provisions oP California lav and `h^=n 'nly fir ruaterial iiancompi iancfl With the term3 of tn@ Tental agreement, I. cal Residencv. Residency preference shall be given where possible to applicants to the Senior Project who have been residents of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. However, that factor shall not be given priority over the other elements of Qualified Tenant selection as stated herein. B ~ ~~ J. Hazard Insurance. The Senior Project and all improvements thereon shall be insured at all times against loss or damage by fire or other risk covered by a standard extended coverage endorsement and such other risks, perils ar coverage as Nourse may determine. During the term hereof, the Senior Project shall be insured to its full insurance replacement value. x. Maintenance Guarantee. Nourse shall comply with all City maintenance standards enacted from time to time. L. Standards s~ Restrictions Pertainine x4 Develooment o~ the Real Prqpertv. The following spacif is restrictions shall apply to the use of the Senior Site pursuant to this Development Agreement: a. only residential uses of the real property shall be permitted in the Senior Project; b. The maximum density of residential dwelling units in the Senior Project shall never be greater than 35.05 dwelling units per acre; c. The maximum height for the highest proposed building in the Senior Project shall be Pifty-five (55) feet; d. The maximum size for all the buildings and the proposed square footage for each of the apartment tvoes located in cne senior Project shall be as set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto; and e. The provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes are contained in the conditions for approval of Development Review 87-33. M. Develooment Incentives. The City will grant Nourse the following development incentives for development of the Senior Project: a. The maximum density per acre on the site shall be increased to 35.05 dwelling units per acre; b. The maximum number of rewirAd off-=*_reet parking spaces shaii be iowerea to one (1) parking space per dwelling unit; and c. City requirements for covered parking spaces shall be waived in their entirety. N• Proiact Design Amenities )~ Senior citizens. The Senior Project open apace, buildings and individual apartments 9 ~i4 shall be designed with physical amenities catering to the needs and desires of the senior citizen residents. in addition to those conditions set forth in Exhibit "C" hereto, the following physical amenities shall be substantially included in the Project: a. Elevator service shall be provided to all upper story apartments: b. All units shall be designed for handicap access; c. All units shall possess secured entryways off a common enclosed hallway; d. Handrails shall be provided in all hallways; e. Building space shall be devoted for tenant group meetings; and f. Recreational amenities shall include, but not limited to, putting greens and shuffleboard courts. O. Rent Control• In consideration for the limitations herein provided, City arreea that it shall not, during the term of this Agreement, take any action, the effect of which will be to control, determine or affect the rents for those low income rental units located in the Senior Project. s. Standards ,dDSd Restrictions Pertainina xq ~llg Development g~ thew O ce Proiect. The fallowing specific restrictions shall apply to the use of the Office Site pursuant to this Development Agreement: a. All unite within the Office Project shall be designed to accommodate medical office users. Any other uses within the Office Project shall be developed in conformance with those "Office Professional" uses as defined in Section 17.10.030 of City~s Development Code, as the same is amended from time to time; and, b. The maximum density, height, size and proposed total square footage for the buildings on the offlge y~....~. wi~u provisions for the reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, are contained in the conditions for approval of the Site in that Site Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "D". 9. Annual Review yt Office Proiect. During the term of this Development Agreement for the Office Project, City shall annually review the extent oP good faith compliance by West End with the l0 4 I ~. terms of this Development Agreement. West End shall file an annual report with the City indicating information regarding compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement no later than March 15 of each calendar year. 10. Emercencv ss ~ Drainage Easements. West End hereby agrees to grant easements across the Office Site £or emergency ~acondary access and drainage as reflected in those Site Plans attached hereto as Exhibits "C" and "D". 11. Cevelopment Phasinc. The Senior Project and Office Project may be developed in one or more phases of construction; provided, that the Senior Project is developed concurrently, or prior to, the Office Project. Until a certificate of occupancy is granted for the Senior Project, no certificate of occupancy shall be granted for any use in the Office Project. 12. Indemnif!-cation. Nourse and West End agree to and shall hold City and its elected officials, officers, agents and employees harmless from liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injuries, including death, and claims for property damage which may arise from the direct or indirect operations of such party or those oP his contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting on his behalf which relate to the respective Project. Nourse and West End agree to and shall defend City and Sts elected officials, officers, agents and employees with respect to actions :or damages caused or alleged ~~ Lnve ueeu nausea oy reason or such parties' activities in connection with the respective Project. This hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damage suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the operations referred to in this Development Agreement regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied or approved the plans, specifications or other documents. 13. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended or canceled, in whole or in part, only by mutual written consent of the parties and then in the manner provided for in California Government Code Sections 65868 et seq. 14. Enforceme ~. In the event of a default under the provisions of this Agreement, City shall give written notice to the .••y ratty (ar its auccessorj at the addreBS of the Project, and by registered or certified mail addressed to the address stated in this Agreement, and if such violation is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of City within thirty (70) days after such notice is given, or if not corrected within such reasonable time as may be required to cure the hreach or default iP said breach or default cannot be cured within thirty (]O) days (provided that acts to cure the breach or default must it ~I r be commenced within said thirty (30) days and must thereafter be diligently pursued by the defaulting party), then City may, without further notice, declare a default under this Agreement and, upon any such declaration of default, City may bring any action necessary to specifically enforce the obligations of the defaulting party growing out of the operation of this Development Agreement, apply to any court, state or federal, for injunctive rciiei against any violation by Developer of any provision of this Agreement, or apply for such other relief as may be appropriate. 15. Event ~ Default. Nourse or West End are in default under this Agreement upon the happening of one or more of the following events or conditions: If a material warranty, representation or statement is made or furnished to City and is false or proved to have been false in any material respect when it was made; If a finding and determination is made by City following an annual review on the basis of substan- tial evidence that Nourse or West End has not complied in good faith with any material terms and conditions of this Agreement, after notice and opportunity to cure as described in paragraph 14 hereinabove; or c. A breach by Nourse or Weet End oP any of the provi- sions or terms of this Agreement, after notice and opportunity to cure as provided in paragraph 14 hereinabove. 16. tty waiver .qf Remedies. City does not waive any claim of defect in performance if on periodic review City does not enforce or terminate this Agreement. Nonperformance shall not be excused because performance of the obligations herein contained would be unprofitatrle, difficult or expensive ar because of a failure of any third party or entity, other than City. All other remedies at law of in equity which are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in City~s regulations governing development agreements are available to the parties to pursue in the even*_ `hat - e ie a breach of this Development Agreement. No waiver by City of any breach or default under this Development Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach thereof or default hereunder. l~• Rights 2f Lenders Under Yhi@ Agreement. Should Nourse or West End place or cause to be placed any encumbrance or lien on the Project, or any part thereof, the beneficiary ("Lender") of 12 ~I~ said encumbrance or lien, including, but not limited to, mortgages, shall have the right at any time during the term of this Agreement and the existence of said encumbrance or lien to: a. Do any act or thing required under this Agreement, and any such act or thing done or performed by Lender shall be as effective as if done by the defaulting party itself; b. Reali2e on the security afforded by the encumbrance or lien by exercising foreclosure proceedings or power of sale or other remedy afforded in law or in equity or by the security document evidencing the encumbrance or lien (hereinafter referred to as "the tivst deed"); c. ^a ransfer, convey or assign the title of Nourse or west End to the respective Proieet to any purchaser at any foreclosure sale, whether the foreclosure sale to be conducted pursuant to court order or pursuant to a power of sale contained in a trust deed; and d. Acquire and succeed to the interest by virtue of any foreclosure sale, whether the foreclosure sale be conducted pursuant to a court order or pursuant to a power of sale contained in a truest deed. 18. Notice SS TnnAer• City shall give Written notice of env default or breach under this Agreement by property owner to Lender and afford Lender the opportunity after service of the notice to: Cure the breach or default within sixty (60) days after service of said notice, where the default can be cured by the payment of money; b. Cure the breach or default within sixty (60) days after service of said notice where the breach or default can be cured by something other than the payment of money and can be cured within that time; or Cure the breach or default in such reaaanable time as may be required where something other than payment of money is required to cure the breach or default and cannot ba performed within sixty (60) days after said notice, provided that acts to cure the b~:each or default are commenced within a sixty (60) jay period after service oP said notice of default on Lender by City and are thereafter diligently continued by Lender. 13 ~ I~ 19. Action ~y Lender, Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, a Lender may forestall any action by City for a breach or default under the terms of this Agreement by commencing proceedings to foreclose its encumbrance or lien. The proceed- ings so commenced may be for foreclosure of the encumbrance by order of court or for foreclosure of the encumbrance under a power of sale contained in the instrument creating the ancuwbrance or lien. Ttie proceedings shall not, however, forestall any such action by the City for the default or breach unless: They are commenced within sixty (60) days after service on Lender of the notice described herein- above; They are, after having been commenced, fliligently pursued in the manner required by law to completion; and Lender keeps and performs all of the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement requiring the payment or expenditure of money by Developer until the foreclosure proceedings are complete or are discharged by redemption, satisfaction or payment. zo. Notice. Any notice required to be given by the terms of cnis wgreemenc snali oe provided by certified mail, return receipt requested, at the address of the respective parties as specified below or at any other such address as may be later specified by the parties hereto. To Nourse: Nourse Development Co. 901 Dover Drives, Suite 110 Newport Beach, California 92663 Attention: Peter W. Nourse To West End: West End Investments 334 N. Euclid Avenue vntario, l:aiiIOrnla 91762 Attention: Robert Dutton, General Partner 14 ~1~ To City: City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Base Line, Suite C P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 Attention: Lauren Wasserman, City Manager 21. Attorneys' Fees. In any proceedings arising from the enforcement of this Development Agreement oz because of an alleged breach or default hereunder, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its costa and its reasonable attorneys' fees incurred during the proceeding as may be fixed within the discretion of the court. 22. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall bind, and the benefits and burdens hereof shall inure to, the respective parties hereto and their legal representatives, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, wherever the context requires or admits. 23. Aonlicable S,hy. This Agreement shall be construed in accorGance with and governed by the laws of the State of California. 21. Partial Invalidity. Zf any provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to ba invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality or enforceability of the remaining provisions hereof shall not in env wnv he ovae..re.~ ,... i.....t.....a s..._.,.... 25. Recordation. This Agreement shall, at the expense of Developer, he recorded in the Official Records of the County Recorder of the County of San Bernardino. IN WITNESS WHEREOP, this Agreement has been executed by the parties and shall ba affective on the effective date set forth herainabove. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Dated: By Dann a L. Stout, Mayor PETER W. NOURSE, dba NOURSE DEVELOPMENT CO., a Sole Proprietorship Dated: gy Peter W. NOUrsa, Owner 15 /~,'Z WEST END INVESTMENTS, a Limited Partnership Dated• gy Robert Dutton, general partner STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ) On , 1988, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and state, personally appeared proved to me on the basis oP satisfactory evidence to be the person wha executed this instrument as Mayor of the CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, a municipal corporation existing and organized under tha lave of the Stets of California, and acknowledged to me that the CZTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA executed it. Notary Public in and for said State STATE OF ) as. COUNTY OF ) On , 1988, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and- for raid County and State, personally appeared Peter W. Nourae, proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person who executed this instrument as sole proprietor and owner of NOURSE DEVELOPMENT CO. and acknowledged to me that that such person i® eythnrized to =..e..u~a or. behaii ax" such organization. Notary Publ c nand For ea d State 16 1 LI STATE OF ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On , 1988, before me, the undersigned, a Notary public in and for said Coun*_y and State, personally appeared Robert Dutton, proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person who executed this instrument as general partner of WEST END INVESTMENTS, a Limited Partnership and acknowledged to me that such person is authorized to executed on behalf of such limited partnership. Notary Public in and for said State /~ 2Z L\174\NOURSE7D\R.C. 6.4 17 F. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 87-02 - NOURSE DEVELOPMENT - A Development reemen a een e y o anc o ucamonga and Nourse Development for the purpose of Drovi di ng a Senior Housing Project per the requirements of the Senior Housing Overlay District (Section 17.20.040 of the Development Code, Ordinance 211) for 170 apartment units to be Located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19. (Continued from March 23, 1988) OEYELOP'1ENT AGREENENT 8i-03A - NOURSE DEVELOPMENT - A three-party eve opmen reemen a wren e y o anc o ucamonga, Nourse Development and West End Investments for the purpose of providing a Senior Housing Project per the requirements of the Senior Housing Overlay District (Section 17.20.040 of the Development Code, Ordinance 211) for 170 apartment units and office medical complex to be located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19. G. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 87-04H - NEST END INYESTmtNTS - A request t0 ame0d the Lana USe tlemenL OT the enera an rom Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) to Office for 1.69 acres of land, located on the west side of Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road - APN: 208-031-17, 54, 55, 56 and 57. (Continued fraa March 23, 1988) H. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 87-06 - IICJI CMI 11,ILJ11'ICIIIJ + /1 I'CltVC>L LV GIIICIIY 411C VC161 V~,IIICIIL VI>4I IL L> ap r Residential (4-8 dwelling units Der acre) to Office Professional for 1.69 acres of Land t,~,«.4 ._....c •- - ~~ or Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road - APN: 208-031-17,54, 55, 56 and 57. (Continued from March 23, 1988) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 87-33 - NOURSE utvtLUVmtnr - me development of iiu senior apartments on A.ab acres o~and-fn the Law-Nedtum Residential District i4-8 dwelling units per acre), located on the south side of Base Line Road, west of Archibald Avenue - APN: 208-031-18, 19. Associated with the project 1s Trae Resaval Penalt 88-14. (Continued from March 23, 1988) T. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEN 87-34 - NEST END inrt~inenis - me development or a z2,4uu square toot medtcat office u n9 on 1.7 acres of land 1n the Low-Medium Residential District (rueneral Plan ;vienn.en*_ • ^~n^t 1-- d oh the west side of p_n_. ,,. ,.,.ate Archibald Avenue, south of Base Line Road - APN: 208-031-17, 54, 55, 56 and 57. Associated with the project 1s Tree Rcaoval Permit 88-14. (Continued from March 23, 1988) Larry Henderson, Senior Planner, presented the staff report. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, clarified the three party Development Agreement regarding development phasi'n~g2J P1anMng Commission Minutes - 5 - ~ "~` Apr11 13, 1988 Commissioner Blakesley questioned how the low-income provision works, maximum rents charged, and the qualifications of the tenants. Ralph Hanson, Deputy City Attorney, stated that the low-income qualified tenants are BO percent of the San Bernardino median income and then the rents are at 30 percent of the 80 percent for that type of family based on HUD standards. Commissioner Tolstoy stated that senior citizens are not second clan; cit*.:cns and deserve as much open spate as anyone else. He felt that -enior citizens do use their open space and the open space provided for to this protect is not adequate. Commissioner Tolstoy addressed the lack of covered parking spaces and felt they should be same provided in the protect. He felt that this is a good protect for the location because it affords senior citizens getting to shopping centers without use of their cars, it is adtacent to a sawn shopping center with an urgent care center. This is in a far better Location than other senior housing protect within the City. Commissioner iolstoy proposed 150 square feet for open space. The amount of parking is adequate but some of 1t should be covered, perhaps one-half of the parking required. Commissioner Emerick concurred with Commissioner Toistoy regarding the amount of open space and the amount needed by seniors. Regarding covered parking, elderly people need to have same type of protection to inclement weather. Comaissioner fslerick addressed traffic concerns and felt that more traffic impacts with the medical center would occur upon that intersection. He stated he supports the senior protect but does not support the medical center protect to that iocatton. Commissioner Blakesley stated his agreement with Commissioners Tolstoy and Fmerick and he, too, felt the need for covered parking spaces. He stated his primary concerns were traffic congestion with the medical center. Commissioner 6lakesley stated he did not support the medical facility. Commissioner Emerick stated he felt the Development Agreement should De 30 years instead of the 20 year term, based upon demographic Pact. Commissioner Tolstoy staled he had reservations about the medical office facility because of tha traffic lmpacL on Archibald, especially at Base Line Road and Archibald Avenue. The immediate Base Line vicinity has a glut of office space. Additional offices will be available when the City moves out of their current offices. Commissioner Tclstov cited several iacatianc w;ah opan Ellice space. There are already medical facilities at the corner of Archibald and Base line. There 1s available space in the center for additional urgent care center space. The other two senior housing protects do not have medical offices anywhere near them. Commissioner Tolstoy does not support a medical office facility at this location and feels the property Could be best used additional senior housing or same other noncommercial use. Dlanning Commission Minutes - 7 - ~ ~ I April 13, 1988 RESOLUTION N0. ~ b ~~ '7 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING GENERPI PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 87-04G REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN FROM LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (d-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO HIGH RESIDENTIAL (24-30 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR A SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT ON 5.05 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF RASE LINE RCAC, NEST CF ARCHiBALD FYENOE, RANCHO CUCAMJNGA, CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing on March 23, 1988 and continued on April 13, 1980 to consider all comments on the proposed General Pian Amendment No. 87-04G; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly advertised public hearing to consider all comments on the proposed Generai Plan Anendment No. 87-046; SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga City Council cannot make the following n ngs: A. The PmenAment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan. B. The Amendment promotes goals of the Land Use Element. v. ine imenamrent would not oe materially inJ urious or detrimental to the adiacent properties. NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucanonga City Council hereby denies General Plan Pmendment No. 87-04G. q2~ RESOLUTION N0. ~~ ~ ~ ~S A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING DEYELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT N0. 87-05 REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT MAP FROM LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO HIGH RESIDENTIAL (24-30 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) ATTACHED WITH THE SENIOR HOUSING OVERLAY DISTRICT (SHOD) FOR 5.05 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED ON THE SDUTY SIDE OF SASE LINE RDAG, WEST GF ARCRIHALO AYENUE, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing on March 23, 1988 and continued on April 13, 1988 to consider all comments on the proposed Amendment No. 87-05; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly advertised public hearing to consider ati comments on the proposed Development District Amendment No. 87- 05; SECTION 1: The City Council cannot make the following findings: A. That this rezoning is consistent with the General Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 8. That this rezoning is consistent with the obJectives of the Development Cade of the Ctty of Rancho wcamonga. NOW, THEREFORE, SE IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga City Council hereby denies Development District Amendaent No. 87-05. Z~ RESOLUTION N0. ~ u ~ d~P A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT N0. 87-04H REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA GENERAL PLAN FROM LON-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 ONELLIN6 UNITS PER ACRE) TO OFFICE FOR A 1.69 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED ON THE NEST SIDE OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE, SOUTH OF BASE LINE ROAD, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA HHEREAS, the Planning Commission heid a duly advertised public hearing on March 23, 1968 and continued on April 13, 1988 to consider alt comments on the proposed General Plan Pmendaent No. 87-04H; and NHEREAS, the City Council held a duly advertised public hearing to consider all comments on the proposed General Plan Amendment No. 87-04H; SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga City Council cannot make the following 1•in A. The Amendment does not conflict with the Land Use Policies of the General Plan. B. The Amendaent promotes goats of the land Use Element. C. The Amendment would not be materially in,1urious or veu iu,en ai Lu Liie auj a~en~ properties. NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Rancho Cucamonga City Council hereby denies General Plan Amendment No. 87-04H. ~~~ RESOLUTION N0. ~ 0 ' 3~ 7 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A REQUEST TO AMEND THE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT MAP, N0. DDA 87-06 FROM LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL .4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) TO OFFICE/PROFESSIONAL FOR A 1.69 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF ARCHIBALD AVENUE, SOUTH OF BASE LINE RDAD, RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing on March 23, 1988 and continued on April 13, 1988 to consider alt comments an the proposed Oevelopnn•nt Oistrict Pmendment No. 87-06; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly advertised public hearing to consider all coaments on the proposed Development District paendment No. 87- 06; SECTION 1: The City Council cannot make the following findings: A. That this rezoning is consistent with the Genera] Plan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 8, fiat this rezoning is consistent with the obiec*.fves of the Development Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. NOW, THEREFORE, RE IT RESOLVED, thak the Rancho Cucamonga City Council hereby denies Development District Amendment No. 87-06. II ~~ C[TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: SUBJECT: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner ~, ~. i I i ENVIRONMENTIIi ASSESSMENT AND DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT III - reques o amen a !i eve apmen s r c p rom "FC" (Flood Control) to "LM" ' (Low-Medium Residential, 4-8 dwelling antis per acre) for a 1.05 acre parcel located north of Highland Avenue, nest of Milliken Avenue - APN: A portion of 201-271-55. I. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends approval of eve opmen strict Amendment 88-05. ii. ANALYSIS: On October i2, i987, The City Council reviewed and apps General Pian and Development District Amendments to change the land use designations from Medium Residential 16-14 dwelling ~~„ar~ "«~ a~.nl ~„n ci,...n r,.or.,,r },. i,.W_wni„m oo~a ne.,«a ,i rn_a dwelling units per acre) for a + 64 acre parcel located at the southwest corner of Milliken Avenue and Banyan Street. A 1.06 acre parcel, however, was not included in the amendments because the property was owned by the San Bernardino Flood Control District and it was not known whether the property would continue to be needed by Flood Control. Subsequently, the applicant has been in contact with the Flood Control District to resolve these issues. In discussions between the applicant and the Flood Control District, the District has indicated that the land is no longer subject to flooding due to improvement of the Deer Creek Channel and, as a result, has been determined to be surplus sand. The applicant is now in the process of purchasing the property. Also, the applicant has incorporated the i."ub acre? nit rCei info the deeign of Tnnta}iva Trar} ii7aA which was approved by the Planning Commission on December B, 1981. III. FACTS ARE FINDINGS: In review of the application, the Planning omm ss on a ena nod that the following findings could be made: A. The subject property is suitable for the proposed land use in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land uses in surrounding areas; and May 18, 1988 DDA88-05 Ahmansen Page 2 B. The proposed district change will not have a significant impact on the environment or surrounding properties; and C. The proposed Development District Amendment is in conformance •Itll I.h A. Ceae ral rl arl. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing n e a yy epport newspaper and notices were sent to all property owners wi'eet of the project site. C1 Planning Conaission Staff Report Planning ComrAisslon Minutes Planning Canwission Resolution Ordinance Approving Amendment BB:SM:mg X30 STAFF REPORT DATE: April 27, 1988 T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Scott Murphy, Associate Planner Lam...,. ~ ~9 ~'~-~;;> 7z F ~ 2 ,.. > 19 i7 I SUBJECT; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND OEYELOPMENT DISTRICT - - - reques o amen e eve opmen s rlc p rom "FC" (Flood Control) to "LM" (Low-Medium Residential, 4-8 dwelling units per acre) for a 1.06 acre parcel located north of Highland Avenue, west of Milliken Avenue - APN: A portion of 201-271-55. I. PROJECT AND SITE DESCRIPTION: A. Action Requested: Approval of Development District lYnendment an ssuance o a Negative Declaration. B. Surrounding Land Use and Zonin North - Ueer CreeK Channel; Flood Control South - Vacant: Medium Residential (8-14 dwel lina_ i,niic nor acre) East - Vacant; Low-Medium Residential f4-B dwelling units per acre) West - Deer Creek Channel; Flood Control C. General Plan Designations: Protect Site -Low- lum esidential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) North - Flood Control South - Freeway East - Low-Medium Residential (4-8 dwelling units per acre) West - Flood Control 11 euei vcro A. General: On September 23, 1987, the Planning Commission rev ewe the General P1 an and Development District Amendments to change the Land use designations from Flood Control and Medium Residential to Low-Medium Residential for a 364 acre parcel located at the southwest corner of Banyan Street and M911iken Avenue. At that time, the Planning Commission expressed concern about a small triangular piece of property (~~ I ITEM N PLANNING CDI~MISSIr" STAFF REPORT DDA 88-05 - AHMAN, ~ DEVELOPMENT April 27, 1988 Page 2 located at the southwest corner of the site that was not being considered with the amendments. The one acre parcel of land had rtot been included Tn the amendment request for two reasons: 1. It was not known whether the San Bernardino County Fioed Control District would declare the piece as surplus, and 2. That the one acre parcel of land had not been included in the legal description advertised and, as a result, could not 6e acted upon without continuing the Planning Commission meeting for two weeks and readvertising to include this small piece of property. As a ^esult, the one acre parcel was not part of the approved amendments. The General Pian and Development District Pmendments were subsequently approved by the City Council on October 21, 1987. On December 9, 1987, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Tract 13?48 located or. the 64 acre parcel at the southwest corner of Banyan and Milliken. As part of the approval, the ultimate design of the subdivision included the one acre parcel previously omitted from the General Plan and Development District Amendments. This would allow for the development of 232 single family cots. In addition, a condition was included in the Resolution that stipulated that final approval for the 232 lots was contingent upon acquisition of the one acre parcel and approval of a Development District Amendment to change the designation from Flood Control to Low-Medium Residential. The applicant has been in contact with the San Bernardino County Flood Control District and is in the process of acquiring the one acre parcel. The applicant is now requesting approval of the Development District Amendment to change the zoning designation from Flood Control to Low-Medium to allow for the full development of the 232 lots. B. Envirnnmawral assessment: Staff has prepared a^ Env',r"mertal tntttal Study and -detertnlned that the Development District Amendment will not create any significant adverse impacts upon the environment. If the Planning Commission concurs with these findings, issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriate. ~~ PLANNING CpMISSir" STAFF REPORT DDA 88-05 - AMMN_ .DEVELOPMENT April 27, 1988 Page 3 III. FACTS FOR FINDINGS: In order for the Planning Commission to approve a eve opment District Mnendment, facts to support the following findings must be made: A. The subtect property is suitable for the proposed lane use in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land uses in surrounding areas. B. The proposed district change will not have a significant impact on the environment or surrounding properties. C. The proposed Development District Amendment Ts in confonaance with the General Plan. IV. CORRESPONDENCE: This item has been advertised as a public hearing n e a y eport newspaper, the property posted, and notices were sen-t~TT property owners within 300 feet of the protect site. V. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recaamends that the Planning Commission recommen approval of Development District Amendment 89-05 to the City Council through adoption of the attached Resolution and issue a Negative Declaration. Resp lly s tied Br Bu er City nner DB:SM:te Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Area Map Exhibit "8" - Location Map Resolution of Approval x/33 ~.~ _ _ ` .VL I LM© { LM L ?,~ LM® 1 ~ ~ ~4 M ~ ~~, ~, , ~ 1 P ' O ±r~.__ _. ~ - -- - ~"J U~-_;, Y ~ . E'' ' LM . ~T~ . , ~ D ~ii rye d :.:~ :~:. e ~ ~ u _ _ .. ~e ~ o 1" ^DOGC70 LM ^ ~ ~g ^i7O•3^C CARYN LM ~ PLANNED COMMUNITY Silt y R~' V.P.C. ~! ^ T.V.P.C. .~ ~ ~- ._ ,: I ~ . Q~LM'j _ VIGTGRIAo~PLnnI{1N V.P.C. Gl ~ . W lFtTl i CITY ~~ ITE~i~ ~r ~•~ R.~~CHO CL'C~110tiG,~ rITI.F:. ~%+ ~~ PLA.\\1'~iG DI\"LSIO(` r/ `E`XHIBIT ~ SC:.~LE 7 ~7 VAGAMT ~ ~ VACANT ~N r,YFu A' .~,~ FiiOM 'FC'I 1~ ~~ lJ -LM`'~~ ~ / ~' E` V OK 3b-~ ~~~C r~~l r~ SAWi~'1~iIi1~ ~~ p'.~i'.r:t a1L~-1 z~ ~,.. _ - rr,~ ~::.,- .. VACANT ~.. ..~~i i~~ `.'C~1~Y9.r.. --='%L; 4 1. -f\ '~~ ~ ._r..L~r_Ir h r-y =- -~'~- ~- r~rAT .... ~.; ,, ~Il lltTl I CITY (~ PLA.~`I~G Dil'LSIOh ITE\1 ~~ ~1-dtS TITLE Lgylfl~.V ~~ EXHIBIT d S(;.ALE ~~ RESOLUTION N0. 88-83 A RESOLUTION OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING DEVELOPMENT OISTRICT AMENDMENT N0. 88-05, REQUESTi NG A CHANGE IN THE DISTRICT DESIGNATION FRgA FLOOD CONTROL TO LON-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) FOR A 1.06 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED NORTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE, WEST OF MILLIK EN AVENUE - APN: A PORTION OF 201-271-55 Recitals. (t) Ahmanson Development has filed an application for the Development District Amendnent No. 88-05 as described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the sub,~ect Development District Change request Ts referred to as "the application". (ti) On April 27, 1988, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucanwnga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the application and concluded said hearing on that date. (iii) A11 legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. Resolution. NON, THEREFORE, 1t is hereby found, detenained and resolved by the Plan ni nq Cammis5t0n of the City of Ranchn fnramnnm ae fnl7 wed 1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to this Commission during the above-referenced public hearing on April 27, 1988, including written and oral staff reports, together with public testimony, this Commission hereby specifically finds as follows: (a) The application applies to a 1.06 parcel of a triangular configuration, located north of Highland Avenue, wept of Milliken Avenue, and east of the Deer Creek Channel. Said property is currently designated as 'Flood Control" an the Development Districts Map; and (b) The --vrweFty LO Life BOrtH anA rect of }ho e,~n~a~t of Le i~ designated for flood control purposes and 1s improved with the Deer Creek Channel. The property to the east of that site Ts designated for residential uses under the Low-Medium Residential District standards and 1s currently vacant. The property to the south fs designated for the future Foothill Freeway and 1s presently vacant; and (c) Tentative Tract 137A8, approved by the Planning Commission on December 9, 1987 incorporated the triangular property into the design of the subdivfsion to avoid a iandlock¢d site. ~.3~ PLANNING COMM ISS? RESOLUTION N0. 88-83 DOA.. 88-OS - AHMAN....A DE'?ELOPMENT April 27, 1988 Page 2 3. The Commission hereby finds and certifies that the project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 and, further, this Commission hereby recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in oaraara ph5 1, 2, and 3 above, this Commission hereby resolves as follows: (a) That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby recommends approval on the 27th day of April, 1988, Development District Amendment No. 88-05. (b) The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve and adopt Development District Amendment No. 88-OS for that property as described in Exhibits "A" and "8", and attached as Dart of this Resolution hereof. (c) That a Certified copy of this Resolution and related material hereby adopted by the Planning Ccmnlssion shall be forwarded to the City Council. 5. The Deputy Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of Lh15 Resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 27TH OAY OF APRIL, 1988. PLANNING CONg1ISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCNAONGA I r BY. ~~ ~ ~L ~~:~. ~ i~~c~~ ZarrTjT.'-Fc e , a rman ,~ ~ ~, ATTEST: brad uu erTTT-"~epufy~ecre arm y I Brad Buller, Deputy SEtrE tdrV uE the 'rianr5 ng _rmniccidn of ire City ^f Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on the 27th day of April, 1988, by the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITiEA, TOLSTOY, EfiERICK, MCNIEL NOES: COMMISSIONERS; NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: RLAKESLEY y~~ EXHIBIT "A" Development District AmenOaent from Flood Control (FC) to Low-Medium Residential (LM) far 1.1 acres described as follows: That portion of the East half of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of Section 25, 7ownshlp 1 North, Range 7 Nest, San Bernardino Meridian, described as follows: Beginning at a point in the East line of said Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of ~ection 25, said point being distant along said East iine North 0 04' 49" Nest, 341.04 feet from the Southeast corner of said Southwest quarter of said southeast quarter of SecttBn 25; thence South 89° 06' 41' west, 172.27 feet; thence North 22 04' 30" east, 45.97 feet; thence Northeasterly, 718.38 feet along a tangent curve, concave Nest~rly harinaq a radius of 2084.37 feet and a central angle of 19 44' 49 to the intersection thereof with said East line of the Southwest quarter of the Southeast quarter of said Section 25; thence aiong said East iine South 0 18' 08" east, 738.61 feet to the Point of Beginning. Containing 1.06 acres more or less. ~(3 ~ EXHIBIT "8" v.eurt vs_seR v,c.rt 7P ~~ q, A' 9ggrs~~fp !A~:,:;~I~r~ J7rN/~4r/vr ~c.+~.~'j ~._ r. ~~ 1-' =~:il{ ~ I~ ~ ~~ ~ y FROM "FCN ree ~ ~ D ~ sr, TO `LMN ~ .. ~~ r,e,Nr ~ i /~~i .:" ~ v,C,N~ ,... J r ~NYq 4~ J 1 y . ' 1 l / • ,Y / ~~1[,C~f.~; J(~ _~ ti l 'iti~...~/ v ~ ~~~~ l y3~ ORDINANCE N0. 3y q AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA APPROVING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AMENDMENT 88-05, REQUESTING A CHANGE IN TWE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DESIGNATION FROM "FC" (FLOOD CONTROL) TO "LM" (LOW-MEDIUM RESIDENTIAL) FOR A 1.06 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED NORTH Of HIGHLAND AVENUE, NEST OF MILLIKEN AVENUE - APN: A PORTION OF 201-271-55 WHEREAS, an the 27th day of April, 1988, the Planning Commission held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65854 of the California Government Code and recommended to the City Council adoption of a change in the district designation from Flood Control to Low-Medium Residential. WHEREAS, on the 18th day of May, 1988, the City Council held a duly advertised public hearing pursuant to Section 65864 of the California Government Code. SECTION 1: The Rancho Cucamonga City Council has made the following findings: 1. That the subiect property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed distrltt in terms of access, size, and compatibility with existing land use in the surrounding area; and 2. That the proposed District Change would not have significant impacts on the environment, nor the surrounding properties; and 3, That the propose District change is in conformance with the General Plan. SECTION 2: The Rancho Cucamonga City Council has found that this pro,{ect wTTT noEcreate a significant adverse impact on the environment and approves issuance of a Negative Declaration on May 18, 1988. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That pursuant to Section 65850 to 65855 of the California Government Code, that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby approves an the 18th day of Mqv, 1988, Development District A.mtrtdment 88-05, changing the Development 0l strict Designation fran Flood Control to Low-Medium Residential for a 1.06 acre parcel iacated north cf Highland Avenue, west of Milliken Avenue, and east of Deer Creek Channel. 77~ ----- CITY OF RANCHO CL'CAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer 6Y: Judy Acosta, Junior Engineering Aide SUBJECT: ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION N0. 45 FOR TRACT N0. 13425, LOCATED EAST OF HAVEN AVENUE BETWEEN HIGHLAND AVENUE AND 19TH STREET, TO LANDSCAPE MgiNTENANCE i DISTRICT N0. 1 ~ I RECOIIENDNTIDN: It is recommended that City Council approve the attached resolution ordering the work in connection with Annexation No. 45 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 and approving the Engineer's Report. BACKGROJN DiANAL•f5 i5 Attarnan fem. r:w rc_~cl~ ;,r~~~ ;, a ,~esuiucion or aering the work in connection with Annexation No. 45 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 for Tract No. 13425, located east of Haven Avenue between Highland Avenue and 19th Street• The developer of the su6,ject tract has been notified of the public hearing by mail. The attached resolution also approves the Engineer's Report tentatively approved 6y Resolution No. 88-233. Respectfully submitted, .t ~/ ~ ~-, ~~R •JA:dlw Attachments yy/ RESOLUTION N0. ~ O ~ ~ O A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION N0. 45 TO LAN DSCADE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1 ANO ACCEPTING THE FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR TRACT N0. 13425 yururec «he rl«y Ceu.^.ca of the Cay of .°.arch0 Cuc~ cn^ya did ^r the 20th day of P.pri 1, 1988, adopt its Resolution of Intention No. 88-234 to order the therein described work in connection with Annexation No. 45 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1, which Resolution of Intention No. 88-234 was duly and legally published in the time, form and manner as required by law, shown by the Affidavit of Publication of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the Cfty Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notice of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, headed "Notice of Improvement", was duly and legally posted in the time, form, manner, location, and number as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Posting said notices, on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notices of the adoption of the Resolution of Intention were duly mailed to all Dersons owning real property proposed to be assessed for the improvements described in said Resolution of Intention No. 88-234, according to the names and addresses of such owners as the same appears on the last mailing or as known to the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, which said copies were duty mailed in the dine, form, and - ~- - ~cy~i~: .`p - - uyyc uii i~Gm u~2 nil rvavil ~i ;-iNii my mi i iic in the off ice~of thevCity Clerk; and WHEREAS, said City Council having duly received considered evidence, oral and doc wnentary, concerning the furisdiction facts in this proceeding and concerning the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefran and said City Council having now acquired ~urisdfction to order the proposed work. SECTION 1: It is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga Fhat the public interest and convenience requires the annexation to the District and the ordering of the work, and said City Council hereby orders that the work, as set forth and described in said Resolution of Intention No. 88-234, be done and made; and lLf't tf1N '!r Np i• i~~v.b Fnw .. nl..nA bM n• •An .. n..b ti l../ l •L.. Engineer i~ s'T6y finally aDDroved;~and~ ~ ~~~N~ ~~~~ "D"'L ~ ~~~N ~y L~~~ SECTION 3: Be it further resolved that the assessments and method of assessmentTfe Engineer's Report are hereby approved. SECTION 4: Be it finally resolved that said assessments shall not begfn until a t~60 percent of said tracts have been occupied. ~~~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for Landscape Naintenance District Nc. 1 ANNE7(ATION N0. 45 for Tract No. 13425 SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is in compliance with the requtrements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State o~.° California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. General Descriotion This City Council has elected to annex all new subdivisions Into Landscape Maintenance District No. i. The Ctty Council has determined 4hat the areas to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within Tract 13425 as well as on the lots directly abutting the landscaped areas. A11 landscaped areas to be maintained 1n the annexed tracts are shown on the recorded Map as roadway right-of-way ar easements to be granted to Lhe City of Rancho Cucamonga. SECTION 3. Pions and SDeclftcattons The plans and landscaping are as stipulated Tn Lhe conditions of approval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Division. Reference 1s hereby made to the subject tract nap or development plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the landscaped areas. The plans and specifications for landscaped improvement on the individual development is hereby made a part of this report to the sane extent as if sa/d plans and Wxiflra tinne wro af}arhoA he~efn SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be Incurred for parkway improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on historical data, contract analysis and developed work standards, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will equal thirty (5.30) cents per square foot per year. These costs are estimated only, actual assessment will be based on actual cost data. The estimated total cost for Landscape including Annezatlon No. 45 is as follows: Existing ni cfrirt Landscape Area 992,052 No. of D. U. 9,620 Per Lot Annual Assessment 1,056,881 x S .30 = 235 x 5.00 = 5318,239.30 = 9,691 lalntenance Distrtct No. 1 Annex New Yn dS 7n~=i 64,829 1,056,881 71 9,691 (311,064.30 1,174.00 5318,239.30 S 32.84 , / ~ Assessment shall apply to each lot as enumerated 1n Section 6 and the attached assessment diagram. Where the development covered by this annexation involves frontage along arterial or collector streets, which are 6eslgnated for Inclusion in the maintenance district but will be maintained by an active homeowners assoctatian, these assessments shall be reduced. SECTION 5. Assessment Dlacram A copy of the proposed assessment diagram 1s attached to this report and labeted "Exhibit A by this reference the diagram is hereby 9ncorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6. Assessment Improvements for the District are found to be of general beneft2 to all lots within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each unit. Mhere there 15 more than one dwelling unit per lot or parcel of assessable land, the assessment for each lot or parcel shall be proportional to the number of dwelling units per lot or parcel. The City Council will hold a public hearing to June, Lo determine the actual assessments based upon the actual casts incurred by the City during the previous fiscal year which are to be recovered through assessments as required by the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. SECTION 7. Order of Events i. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of City Engineer's Report. 2. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to Mnex to District and sets public hearing date. 3. City Council conducts public hearing, considers ail testimony and determines to Annex to the District or abandon the proceedings. 4. Every year in Nay, the Ctty Engineer files a report with the City Council. 5. Every year 1n June, the City Council conducts a public hearing and approves, or modifies and approver the tndtvidual assessments. c~~~ Properties and improvements to be Included within Annexation No. 45 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 1: TRACT 13625 MAINTAINED AREA D/U Sa: Ft• ~4. F7- -Ea: 71 19th St. --- 19,661 65 Palm Dr. --- D 47 Ring Ave. --- 4,115 3 N19htand Aye. --- 41,052 50 Alameda Ave. --- 0 29 Shawna Ave. --- 0 30 Finch Ave. --- 0 11 64,829 235 `'f Y ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. j zt . 9 c<<~(pM ~~s?r ~^ ,~., ii'r_;SrM, >; s ~• 6 v. im >^ OP RANCHO CL'CA,~IONGA ENGiNEERfNG DIVISION VICINITY ~IAP N CITS' OF RANCHO CtiCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 / T0: City Council and City Manager ~ FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer ' BY: Judy Acosta, Junior Engineering Aide SUBJECT: ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNE%ATION NOS. 42 AND I 27 FOR TRACT N0. 13425, LOCATED FAST OF HAVEN AVENUE ~ BETWEEN HIGHLAND AVENUE AND 19TH STREET, TO STREET LIGHTING M4INTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2, RESPECTIVELY RECpIIENDATION: It is recommended that City Council approve the attached resolutions ordering the work in connection with Annexation Nos. 42 and 27 to Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 2, respectively, and approving the Engineer's Reports. DACKDROUN D/ANALYSIS Attached for City Council approval are resolutions ordering the work in connection with Annexaticn No. 42 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 and Annexation Na. 27 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 for Tract No. 13425, located east of Haven Avenue between Highland Avenue and 19th Street. The developer of the su6J ect tract has been notified of the public hearing by mail. The attached resolutions also approve the Engineer's Reports tentatively approved by Resolution Nos. 88-235 and 88-237. Respe u submitted, ~` ~ ~ - -- / /' ..~L~, Attachments T~7 RESOLUTION N0. ~~ ~ ~" A RESOLUTION OF THE CI?Y COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION N0. 42 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1 qND ACCEPTING THE FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR TRACT N0. 13425 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga did on the 20th day of April, 1g88, adopt its Resolution of Intention No. 88-236 to order the therein described work in connection with Annexation No. 42 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1, wfiich Resolution of Intention No. 88-236 was duly and legally published in the time, form and manner as required by law, shown by the Affidavit of Publication of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notice of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, headed "NOtiie of Improvement", was duly and legally posted in the time, form, manner, location, and nunber as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Posting said notices, on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notices of the adoption of the Resolution of Intention were duly mailed to all persons owning real property prcposed tc G2 assessed for the improvements described in said Resolution of Intention No. 88-236, according to the names and addresses of such owners as the same appears on the last mailing or as known to the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. whi[h said conies wera duly mailed 1n tha tuna. form. and manner as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Mai iing~on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, said City Ceuncil having duly received considered evidence, oral and documentary, concerning the ,jurisdiction facts in this proceeding and ccncerning the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City Council having now acquired ,{urisdiction to order the proposed work. SECTION 1; It is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamon~at the Dublic interest and convenience requires the annexation to the District and the ordering of the work, and said City Council hereby orders that the work, as set forth and described in said Resolution of Intention No. 88-236, be done and made; and SECTION 2; The Report filed by the Engineer is hereby finally approved; a~- SECTION 3: The assessments and method of assessment in the Engineer's elf port are hereby approved. SECTION 4: The assessments shall not begin until after 60 percent of said tracts have been occupied. ~~~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Annexation No, 42 for Tract No. 13425 SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is in compltance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of Caltfornia (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. General Description This City Council has elected to annex all new developments into Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1. The City Cauncll has determined that the street lights to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within said developments as well as on the lots directly abutting the street lights. work to be provided for with the assessments established by the district are: The furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operating and servicing of street light imnrnvawn•a nn .._~... .r.nn.. ~,_._.., .t ._. .. _ streets) as shown on the Lighting DistrictyAltas~Map~wnich is an file with the City Engineer. Improvement maintenance Ts considered of general benefit to all areas in the District and cost shall be assessed an a per unit basis. SECTION 3. Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications for street Lighting have been prepared by the developers. The plans and street lights areas stipulated in the conditions of approval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Division. Reference 1s hereby made tm the sub,)ect tract map or development plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the street lighting areas. The plans and specifications for street lighting improvement on the individual development is hereby made a part of th i5 iWbflr? ?n 41,a ca„u or}nm a, iF ..IA ..1 ... ..w ~., aa__ attached hereto.. _.._ ___._ "•__.._ _., ., ,,. ,,. r.,.,, ,,,~ ,pR,,,,., ,;eri Detailed maintenance activities on the street lighting district lntlude: the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement, providing for the iiluminatlon of the subject area. ~7 SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for street lighting improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on available data, tt is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will be as indicated below. These costs are estimated only, actual assessments will be based cn actual cost data. Street Lighting Maintenance District No. i has been demartated into two zones. Zone 1 is comprised of street light improvements on maJor streets for residential improvements (single family, multi-family, condominiums and apartments) throughout the City. Each dwelling unit in this zone will be assessed as one assessment unit foe the operation of the District. Zone 2 is comprised of all industrial, commercial and tnstitutlanai pros acts throughout the City. It has been determined that one acre of land 1n industrial, cowaercial and 1nstltuttonal areas derives the same benefit as two assessment units 1n Zone 1. The estimated total cost for Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 is shown below: 1. S.C.E. Maintenance aap Size* and Energy Cost: Laaps YTD No. of Lamps Annex No. 42 ew Lamp Total 5800E 448 0 448 9500E 500 13 513 16,000E 16 0 16 22,000E 4 0 4 27,500E 17 0 17 *N1gh Pressu re Sodi um Vapor Total Total Annuai Lamp Size Lamps Rate Mo's Ma1nt. Cost 5800E 448 X f 8.93 X 12 • f 48,007.68 9500E 513 % (10,16 X 12 • 62,544.96 16,000E 16 X t12.OB x 12 • 2,319.36 22, wOL 4 X 63.84 X 12 664.32 27,500 17 X f15.31 X 12 • 3,123.24 Total Annual Mai nt. Cost • 5116,654.56 2. Total Assessment Units: YTD Assess Units before this annexation • 16,884 Assessment Units this annex per page 4 • 71 total Assessment Units 16,955 ys~ 3. Cost per Assessment Unit: Total Annual Maintenance Cost 5116'56 56.88/year/unit o. o n is n str c Assessment shall apply to each lot or parcel as explained in Section 6. SECTION 5. Assessment Diagram Copies of the proposed Assessment Diagrams are attached to this report and labeled 'Street Ll ghting Maintenance District No. 1', Annexation No. 42. These diagrams are hereby incorporated wt thin the text of this report. SECTION 6. Assessment all unitsvwlthln the Dtistrictrand thatfassessment shallnbeaequalefor each unit. Nhen units are based an acreage, assessment will be 2 units per net acre. SECTION 7. Order of Events 1. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of City Engineer's Report. 2. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to annex a District and sets public hearing date. 3. City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and determines to fora a District or abandon the proceedings. 4. Every year in May, the City Engineer files a report with the City Council. 5. Every year in June, the City Council conducts a public hearing and approves, or modifies and approves the individual assessments. y~l EXHSBIT "A' Properties and taprovenents to be included within Annexation No. 42 to Street Lighting Maintenance Bistrict 1: Assess. No. of La s to be Annexed Pro ect AtMagE -4~- Zone 1 TR 13425 --- 71 --- 13 --- --- --- Zone 2 ys~ W w w a r ~P _, v4 ~,~~ CITY OF AANCNO CUCAYON(3A ..,_. '• ' . COUNTY OF BAId BF,ItNA8DIN0 ~ '•"~ `- ~: °= ~ BTATB of cALIFORNU N Nib) 1T ASSESSMENT DIACaRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.1 ArarEnATwN NO. 42 RESOLUTION N0. (J b ~ ~~ v A RESULUT ION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION N0. 27 TO STREET LIGHTING MA ENTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 2 AND ACCEPTING THE FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR TRACT N0. 13425 WHERFAG thn fi•y I'n ~m ail ne the amity ^f Ranch `v Ca~nJfiga - Vn the 20th day of April, 1988, adopt its Resolution of Intenti on uNo. 88-238Vto order the therein described work in connection with Annexation No. 27 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2, which Resolution of Intention No. 88-238 was duly and legally published in the time, form and manner as required by iaw, shown by the Affidavit of Publication of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notice of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, headed "Notice of Improvement", was duly and legally posted in the time, form, manner, location, and number as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Posting said notices, on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notices of the adoption of the Resolution of Intention were duly mailed to all persons owning real property proposed to be assessed for the improvements described in safd Resolution of intention No. 88-238, according to the names and addresses of such owners as the same appears on the last mailing or as known to the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, which said copies were duly mailed in the time, form, and a _ ....A A.. 1~... _ ..... .. . .. ... Syy wi" ~~mu iiR nn iv"vi~ m ~94111i1g VII ille 1^ the"office~of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, said City Council having duly received considered evidence, oral and documentary, concerning Lhe jurisdiction facts in this proceeding and concerning the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City Council having now acquired jurisdiction to order the proposed work. SECTION 1: It is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamo- nga~at the public interest and convenience requires the annexation to the District and the ordering of the work, and said City Council hereby orders that the work, as set forth and described in said Resolution of Intention No. 88-238, be done and made; and ==rrsnN she acnn.t f!'ed .....he r_-:---- .-~... ..~ ~ u~y inccr ii he'r eby Finally approved; a~._ SECTION 3: The assessments and method of assessment in the Engineer's e~porf-are hereby approved. SECTION 4: The assessments shall not begin until after 60 percent of safd trac-fs ~e been occupied. y S`~ CITY OF NANCND GUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for Street Llyhting Maintenance District No. 2 Annexation No. 27 for Tract 13425 SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. General Description This City Council has elected to annex all new developments into Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2. The City Council has determined that the street lights to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within said developments as well as on the lots directly abutting the street lights. Nork to be provided for with the assessments established by the district are: The furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operating and servicing of street light h,rnvwonfc n.. l,vai ....nn«~ .. .4...w.r .._ .~~ i ..,..." District Alias Map which is on file w1tA the City Engineer. Improvement maintenance 1s considered of general benefit to all areas 1n the District and cost shall be assessed on a per unit basis. SECTION 3. Pions and Specifications The plans and specifications for street lighting have been prepared 6y the developers. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Division. Reference is hereby made to the subject tract map or deveiopmint plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the street lighting areas. The plans and specifications for street lighting improvement on the individual development is hereby made a part ~f t.hfc rapnrt re LFo ea 'L° extent a, if Said p1aR5 acid Spf~'ifiti wer2 attached hereto. Detailed maintenance activities on the street iighting district include: the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement, providing for the illumination of the sub,~ect area. ~~S SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be Incurred for street lighting improvement construction. All Improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on available data, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will be as indicated below. These costs are estimated only, actual assessments will be based an actual cost data. Street Lightlna Maintenance District No- 2 is comprised of s*,reet light improvements on local streets far residential improvements (single family only) throughout the City. Each dwelling unit 1n this District will be assessed as one assessment unit for the operation of the District. The estimated total cost for Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 is shown below: 1. S.C.E. Matntenarice and Eneruv Cost: No. of Lamps Lamps Mnex New Lamp Lamp Size" ttD No. 27 Total 5800E 1,292 22 1,314 9500E 4 0 4 *High pressure Sodium Yapor Total Total Annual Lamp Size La s Rate Mo's Mai nt. Cost 5800E 1,314 X f 8.93 X 12 - (140,808.24 9500E 4 X (10.16 X 12 = 487.68 Total Annual Maint. Cost = 5141,295,92 2. Total Assessment Units: tt0 Assess Units before tA15 annexation = 4,863 Assessment Units this annex per page 4 - 71 Tnt=1 L=ue<rn~ iini~. A o!e 3. Cost per Assessment Unit: Total Annual Maintenance Cost 5141 295.92 • 528.64/year/unit o. o n is n sir ct -~;'93~ Assessment shall apply to each lot or parcel as explained in Section 6. ~S~ SECTION 5. Assessment Diagram Copies of the proposed Assessment Diagrams are attached to this report and labeled 'Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2', Annexation No. 27. These dlagraas are hereby ineorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6. Assessment improvements for the District are found to be of general benefit to all units within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each unit. Nhen units are based on acreage, assessment will be 2 units per net acre. SECTION 7. Order of Events 1. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of City Engineer's Report. 2. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to annex a District and sets public hearing date. 3, City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and detenaines to forty a District or abandon the proceedings. 4, Every year in May, the City Engineer files a report with the City Council. 5. Every year in June, the City Council conducts a oubl lc hearing anA approves, or awdlftes and approves the individual assessments. /~~ E%HI9Ii "A" Properties and legroveieents to be tnctuded within Annexation No. 27 to Street Lighting Maintenance D1strlct 2: Assess. No. of La s W be Mnexed Pro,ect Acriaae -'JT- ~ a ~ o. TR 13425 --- 71 22 --- --- --- --- ~/5g ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGNTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. Z ANNEXATION NO. 2 7 HI~HCAHD AL'ENUE 47 46 y ]4 ~}'• i )0 I, 69 ^ 6d ` 1!1 !6 _~pV X49 F ~ 44~J7 i \ 67 r C , e/, _J SI ~~ 421 !9 27 I 63 {I \ +.2 2 72 a ~ 2 6 ° ~ !0 2 73 7 .I 63 \ yt. e X~ 63 74 37 a ~ 61 S6 a 7 ~ ~ 6 67 6 ~ 39 19 7 s '- ~~ 7 h SB •y I y~ \ ~ ~I' 4 Il iR ~B / I ~ 14 ~ ~+~ I r" I I a ` a'F' f;9 \~` ,. I o ~ I Sl ~ CITY OF xl1NCH0 CUCAIdONOA . %_~L COUNTY OF 8AN BEBNABDINO ~: `-~ , 3 STATE of CALIFORNIA N y,~> ------ CITY OF RANCHO CIiCAMONGA STAFF REPORT _ _. , DATE: May 18, 1988 -~ TO: City Council and City Manager j FROId: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer nY: Judy Acosta, Junior Engineering Aide SUBJECT: ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION N0. 43 AND I~ ANNEXATION N0. 15 FOR DR 86-43, LOCATED AT 7HE NORTHEAST , CORNER OF 8TH STREET AND BAKER AVENUE, TO STREET LIGHTING '~ MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6, RESPECTIVELY ~j RECgIMENDAT10I1: It is recommended that City Council approve the attached resolutions ordering the work in connection with Annexation No. 43 and Annexation No. 15 to Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 6, respectively, and approving the Engineer's Reports. BACKGP.OL'NO/ANALYSIS Attached for City Council approval are resolutions orderin4 the work in connection with Anno.ar;nn gc ~? ;,,-,,;e,,,; ;,,,, no. io to Street Lighting Maintenance Oistrict Nos, 1 and 6 for OR 86-43, located at the northeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue. The developer of the subject project has been notified of the public hearing by maf 1. The attached resolutions also approve the Engineer's Reports tentatively approved by Resolution Nos. A8-239 and 88-241. Res//pectfully bmitted, Attachments ~W ~ RESOLUTION N0. ~ ~ " ~ 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION N0. 43 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DJ STRI CT N0. 1 AND ACCEPTING THE FINAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR OR 87-43 WHtkEAS, the City Council of the Cfty of Rancho Cucamonga did on the 20th day of April, 1988, adopt its Resolution of Intention No. 88-240 to order the therein described work in connection with Annexation No. 43 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1, which Resolution of Intention No. 88-240 was duly and legally published in the time, form and manner as required 6y law, shown by the Affidavit of Publication of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notice of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, headed "Notice of Improvement", was duly and legally posted in the time, form, manner, location, and number as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Posting said notices, on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notices of the adoption of the Resolution of Intention were duly mailed to all persons owning real property proposed to be assessed for the improvements described ih said Resolution of Intention No. 88-240, according to the names and addresses of such owners as the same appears on the last mailing or as known to the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, which said copies were duly mailed in the time. form. and manner as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Mailing on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, said City Council having duly received considered evidence, oral and documentary, concerning the ,jurisdiction facts in this proceeding and concerning the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City Council having now acquired ,jurisdiction to order the proposed work, SECTION 1: [t is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamo~liat the public interest and convenience requires the annexation to the District and the ordering of the work, and said City Council hereby orders that the work, as set forth and described in said Resolution of Int entl on No. 88-240, be done and made; and St CIIDN [: The Report filed by the Engineer is hereby finally approved; a~- SECTION 3: The assessments and method of assessment in the Engineer's Report are hereby approved. SECTION 4: The assessments shall not begin until after 60 percent of said trac- is ~e been occupied. ~~ CITY OF RANCHO CLCAMONGA Engineer's Report for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 Annexation No. 43 for DR 86-43 SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. General Description This City Council has elected to annex all new developments into Street Lighting Maintenance Cistritt No. 1. The City Council has determined that the street lights to be maintained will have an effect upon all lots within said developments as well as on the lots directly ahutt ing the street ifghts. Work to be provided for with the assessments established by the district are: The furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and ucual maiMman.o raN nn nA .,J _J... ..e .J~__. -~. improvements on major streets a(arterf al and-certain-collector streets) as shown on the Lighting District A1tas Map which is on file with the City Engineer. Improvement maintenance is considered of general benefit to all areas in the 0lstrfct and cost shall be assessed on a per unit host s. SECTION 3. Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications for street lighting have been prepared by the developers. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Dlviston. Reference is hereby made to the subject tract map or development plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the street lighting areas. The plans and specfficattons for street iiUhilfla SIIIfIr nvM11P_nC n_n t11<_ inrirv i.lual nn..nlnn.nnna !.. L.... _~.. vy~nOK ~a cl cud pladC a paf l of-this report to the same extent as~if~s aid plans and specifics were attached hereto. Detailed maintenance activities on the street lighting district include: the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement, providing for the illunination of the subject area. ~~ SECTION 4, Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for street lighting improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on available data, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will be as indicated below. These costs are estimated only, actual assessments will be based on actual cost data. Street l i~h4ing Ma.nte^anCe District No. 1 ha; beer, daarwtzd into two zones. Zane 1 is comprised of street light improvements on major streets for re;i dentf ai improvements (single family, multi-family, condominiums and apartments) throughout the City. Each dwelling unit in this zone will be assessed as one assessment unit for the operation of the District. Zone 2 is comprised of all industrial, commercial and institutional projects throughout the City. It has been determined that one acre of land in industrial, commercial and institutional areas derives the same benefit as two assessment units in Zone 1, The estimated total cost for Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 is shown below: 1, S.C.E. Maintenance and Eneruv Cost: No. of Lamps Lamps Annex New Lamp Lamp Size• YTD No. 43 Total 5800E 448 0 448 9500E 513 1 520 16,000E i6 0 16 22,000E 4 0 4 27,500E 17 0 17 *Migh Pressure Sodium Yapor Total Total Annual Lam Size Lamps Nate Mo's Mai nt. Cost 5800E 448 X S 8.93 X 12 S 48,007,68 9500E 520 X 510.16 X 12 63,398.40 16, 000L I6 X 512,08 X 12 2,314.36 r 27,500 17 X X Jaa,OY 515.31 X X 1L 12 = OOV, 7Z 3,123.24 Total Annual Maint. Cost = E111,513.56 2. Total Assessment Units: YTD Assess Units before this annexation = 16,884 Assessment Units this annex per page 4 = 5 Tat al Assessment Units 16,889 ~f~3 3, Cost per Assessment Unit: Total Annual Maintenance Cost = E117 513,56 = E6,96/year/unit No. o n sin is r ct ~6;"89i1` Assessment shall apply to each lot or parcel as explained in Section 6. SECTION 5. Assessment Diagram Copies of the proposed Assessment Diagrams are attached to this report and labeled "Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1", Annexation No. 43, These diagrams are hereby incorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6. Assessment Improvements for the District are fo~md to be of general benefit to all units within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each unit. When units are based on acreage, assessment will be 2 units per net acre. SECTION 7. Order of Events 1. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of City Engineer's R^DOrt. 2, City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to annex a District and sets public hearing date. 3. City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and determines to form a District or abandon the proceedings. 4, Every year in May, the City Engineer files a report with the City Council. 5, Every year in June, the City Council conducts a Dublic hearing and approves, or mod ifles and approves the individual assessments. Y/ 7 EXHIBIT "A" Properties and improvements to he included within Annexation No. 43 to Street Lighting Maintenance District I; Assess. Ne. ^f Lam;^s t^ he ?.^.rez^d Project Acrea9g ~- ~^_ Zonz 1 Zone 2 DR B6-43 2.5 5 --- 7 --- --- --- Y ~pJ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0.1 ANNEXATION NO. 43 ,.v~~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCA1tONOA ~ DRB~Io--43 fr „ COUNTY OF 8AN BSRNARDINO :.;? '-. ~" ~ BTATS OF CALIFORNIA N RESOLUT [ON N0. ~ ~ 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUkCIL Of THE CITY OF RAN CNO CUCAMONGA ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION N0. 15 TO STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 6 AND ACCEPTING THE F[NAL ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR DR 86-43 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga did on the 20th day of April, 1988, adapt its Resolution of Intention No. 88-242 to order the therein described work in connection with Annexation No. 15 to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6, which Resolution of Intention No. 88-242 was duly and legally published in the time, form and manner as required by law, shown by the Affidavit of Publication of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the C;ty Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notice of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, headed "Notice of Improvement", was duly and legally posted in the time, form, manner, location, and nunher as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Posting said notices, on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notices of the adoption of the Resolution of Intention were duly mailed to all parsons owning real property oropos ed to be assessed for the improvements described in ;aid Resolution of Intention No. 88-242, according to the names and addresses of such owners as the same appears on the last mailing or as known to the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, which said conies were duly mailed to the tame form anA manner as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Mailing~on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, said City Council having duly received considered evidence, oral and documentary, concerning the jurisdiction facts in this proceeding and concerning the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City Council having now acquired jurisdiction to order the proposed work, SECTION 1: [t is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga at the public interest and convenience requires the annexation to the District and the ordering of the work, and said City Council hereby orders that the work, as set forth and described in said Resolution of Intention No. 88-242, be done and made; and SECTION 2: The Report filed by the Engineer is hereby finally approved; a~- SECTION 3; The assessments and method of assessment in the Engineer's- e~ port-are hereby approved. SECTION 4; The assessments shall not begin until after 60 percent of said trots ave been occupied. y~ 7 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMQNGA Engineers Report fcr Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 Annexation No. 15 for DR 86-43 SECTION 1. Authority for Report This report is in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). SECTION 2. General Description This City Council has elected to annex all new developments into Street Lighting Maintenance District Nc. 6. The City Council has determined that the street lights to be maintained will have an effect upon ail lots within said developments as well a5 on the lots directly abutting the street lights. Work to be provided for with the assessments est ablfshed by the district are: The furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and al eJ neon an nn .. Ht.... ...A l.y ~: improvements on local streetsyas shown~onythe Lighting District Altos Map which is on file with the City Engineer. Improvement maintenance is considered of general benefit to all areas in the District and cost shall be assessed on a per unit basis. SECTION 3. Plans and Specifications The plans and specifications for street lighting have been prepared by the developers. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of aDProval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering Division. Reference is hereby made to the sub3ect tract map or development plan and the assessment diagram for the exact location of the street lighting areas. The plans and specifications for street 1/1111 1nll ~rlMnn•Ibnnn! nn fMn ..A i..t J..~\ J... \ a ~' "_~~~ •••m•-•~•n..n. ~•• rn ina i, vual uC ~C IV~1111CIIl IJ Ile reby madC a part of nth isreport to the smne~extent as if said plans and specifics were attached hereto. Detailed maintenance activities on the street lighting district include: the repair, ranoval or replacement of all or any part of any improvement, providing for the illumine*.ton of the subject area. ~W SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred for street lighting improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers. Based on available data, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will be as indicated below. These costs are estimated oniy, actual assessments will be based on actual cast data. Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 ;s co!spr;sed of e?? industrial, commercial and institutional projects throughout the City, It has been determined that one acre of land in industrial, commercial and institutional areas derives the sane benefit as two assessment units in residential zones. The estimated total cost for Lighting Maintenance District Ne. 6 is shown below: 1. S.C.E. Maintenance and Energy Cost; No. of lamps Lamps Annex New Lamp Lamp Size* YTD No. 15 Total 58001 47 --- 47 9500E 2 ___ p *Hi gh Pressure Sodium Vapor Total Tot a1 Annual Lamp Size Lamps Rate Mo's Matnt. Cost 5800E 47 X S 8.93 X 12 = E5, 036.52 9500E 2 X 510.16 X 12 ~ 243.84 Total Annual Mafnt. Cost E5, 280.36 2. Total assessment Units: YTD Assess Units before this annexation • 439.5 Assessment Units this annex per page 4 = 5.0 nt al Ai.,c aarn nt ~V vita 444.J 3. Cost per Assessment~Unit: Total Annual Maintenance Cost ES 280.36 • E11.88/year/unit No. o Un is n str ct -'3dn'.T Assessment shall apply to each lot dr parcel as explained in Section 6. ~W SECTION 5. Assessment Dtagram Copies of the proposed Assessment Diagrams are attached to this report and labeled "Street lighting Maintenance District No. 6", Annexation No. 15. These diagrams are hereby incorporated within the text of this report. SECTION 6. Assessment Improvements for the District are found to be of general benefit to all units within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each unit. Nhen units are based on acreage, assessment will be 2 units per net acre. SECTION 7. Order of Events 1. City Council adopts Resolution of Prelimfnary Approval of City Engineer's Report. 2. City Council adopts Resolution of [ntention to annex a District and sets public hearing date. 3. City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and determines to form a District or abandon the proceedings. 9. Every year in May, the City Erigi neer files a report with the City Council. 5. Everv ve ar in dnna. iha ri+v rmi"r;t ~,_...~„~r~ .,..w i... ~.._,__ . approves, or modifies and approves the individual assessments ~ y ~~I EXHIBIT "A" Properties and improvements to he included within Annexation No. 15 to Street Lighting Maintenance District 6: Assess. No. of Lamps to be Annexed Pro ect Acreage ~ L DR 86-43 2.5 5 --- --- --- --- --- ~7~ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. (o ANNEXATION NO. 15 s~~~~~ C1T7~ OF BAIdCHO CUCA1[ONaA w :.,;; •. ~ COUNTY OF 8AN BERNABDINO , \ ~ STATS OF CALII~ORNIA ~~ ~ ._ N -~ -------- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGd STAFF REPORT _..., DATE: May 18, 1988 ~ i I i0: City Council and City Manager FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer BY: Judy Acosta, Junior En gineerin9 Aide SUBJECT: ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION N0. 19 FOR DR 86-43, LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF 8TH STREET AND ~~ BAKER AVENUE, TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 3 j RECOMIN:NDATION: it is recommended that City Cnuncil approve the attached resolution ordering the work in connection with Annexation No. 19 to landscape Maintenance District Mo. 3 and approving the Engineer's Report. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Attached for City Council approval is a resoiution order ina thn W~-!; ;; connection with Rnnexati on Nn to .c ~ y-,J, supe natntenance District No. 3 °~; ~~ oo-w.i, located at the northeast corner of 8th Street and Baker Avenue. The developer of the subject project has been notified of the public hearing by mail. The attached resolution also approves the Engineers Report tentatively approved by Resolution No. 88-243, Respectfully submitted, !~ ~ i "" / RH Attachments y73 RESOLUTION N0. ~~ ' ~ J ,~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY Of RANCHO CUCAMONGA ORDERING THE WORK IN CONNECTION WITH ANNEXATION N0. 19 TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 3 AND ACCEPTING THE FINAL ENuINEER'S REPORT FOR OR 86-43 WHEREAS, the r;ty ra u.,c+l ~f the City of Rarlcho Cucamonga did on the 20th day of April, 1988, adopt its Resolution of Intention No. 88-244 to order the therein described work in connection with Annexation No. 19 to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3, which Res o',ution of Intention No. 88-244 was duly and legally published in the time, form and manner as required by law, shown by the Affidavit of Publication of said Resolution of Intention on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notice of the passage of said Resolution of Intention, headed "Notice of Improvement", was duly and legally posted in the time, form, manner, location, and number as required by law, as appears from the Affidavit of Posting said notices, on file in the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, after the adoption thereof, notices of the adoption of the Resolution of Intention were duly mailed to all persons awning real property proposed to be assessed for the improvements described in said Resoiut ion of Intention No. 88-244, according to the names and addresses of such owners as the same appears on the last mailing or as known to the City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, which said copies were duly mailed in the time, form, and manner a m~i.ew ~.~ ~~~~ ~- Oyyc ula ilawu file Hi~idaV1L 0i md111ng on file in the off ice not the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, said City Council having duly received considered evidence, oral and docwnentary, concerning the jurisdiction facts in this proceeding and concerning the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City Council having now acquired jurisdiction to order the proposed work. SECTION 1: IL is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga at the public interest and convenience requires the annexation to the District and the ordering of the work, and said City Council hereby orders that the work, as set forth and described in said Resolution of Intention No. 88-244, be dune and made; and $E %T ii1N i• n< it Fri of nor - ^1Ved that the report filled by Lhe Engineer rs' hereby finally approved;~and SECTION 3: Be it further resolved that the assessments and method of assessment rn t e Engineer's Report are hereby approved. SECTIg1 4: Be it finally resolved that said assessments shall not begin unt a er 60 percent of said tracts have been occupied. Y 7Y CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA Engineer's Report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 Annexation No. 19 For OR 86-43 SEC?ION 1. Aathc rl4y for Reoort This report is in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, rhapter 1, Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1912). SECTION 2. General 6escripti on This City Council has elected to annex alt new developments into Landscape Maintenance District No. 3. The City Council has deternined the areas to be maintained will have an effect upon all the developments as mentioned above. A11 landscaped areas to be maintained in the annexed developments are shown on the recorded Map as roadway right-of-way or easements to be granted to the City of Rancho Cucamonga. SECTION 3. Plans and SDeclfications The plans and landscaping are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for the development and as approved by the City Engineering 01v15ton. Reference 1s hereby made to the sub.iect develnnm.nr Oi,.. ,..! •t: ;;- ;c,~,-,;, u'luy.om iur cne exact location of the landscaped areas. The plans ands specifications for landscaped improvement on the individual development is hereby made a part of this report to the same extent as if said plans and specifications were attached hereto. SECTION 4. Estimated Costs No costs will be incurred 6y the District for parkway and median improvement construction. All improvements will be constructed by developers and or/by the City. Based on historical data, contract analysis and developed work standards, it is estimated that maintenance costs for assessment purposes will equal thirty (f.30) cents per square foot per year, These costs are estimated only, actual assessment will be based on actual cost data. Landscape Maintenance Oistr}ct No. 3 has been demarcated into tac zones. Zone 1 is comprised of -varcel Map 730.9, comprised of 8 parcels, totaling 5,057 square feet. The district was formed in October 5, 1983, for the maintenance of landscaping a detention basin and storw drain within the protect. This zone will be assessed on per lot basis for the maintenance costs within the protect boundary only as stipulated in the Engineer's Report for the formation of the District. ~7~ Zone 2 is comprised of all other protects that are being annexed or will be annexed to this District. All lots or parcels within Zone 2 will be assessed on net acre basis for the maintenance of landscaped median fslands on Haven Avenue fraa 4th Street to Deer Creek Channel, Foothill Boulevard and 4th Street from west to east City limit, Milliken Avenue and Rochester Avenue, from 4th Street to Foothill Boulevard, 6tA Stree4 from Naven Avenue to Rochester Avenue and median islands on other orator divided highwdys and some parkways within the Industrial Specific Plan Area and Foothill Boulevard overlay area, the estimated cost for Landscape Maintenance District No. 3 including Annexation No. 19 is as follows. Zone i Existing District Total estimated maintenance cost ;2,070 Assessment units g Total cost - assessment unit for year and month f2,~70 5258.75/year or 521.56/mo./lot Zone 2 Existing Annexation New District No. 19 r~r=i TJ QdI e=iiina ieti annual -- maintenance area - Sq. Ft. 0 0 0 Assessment units, acres 380,632 2.5 380,634.5 Total cost + assessment unit for year and month 0 _ = 0/year 0/mo./acre Assessment shall apply to each lot as enumerated in Section 6 and the attached assessment dlagram. SECTION 5. Assessment Dlaoram ` A copy of the nrOSn;eA ae5e55S1e.^,t dia~rdm 1; aLtaCkBd P.o foie ronnn• _.~ . v=~~„ Exhibit n-, oy this reference the dlagram is hereby incorporateA within the text of this report. SECTION 6. Assessment Improvements for the District are found to be of general benefit to all lots within the District and that assessment shall be equal for each parcel for Zone 1 and shall be equal to the next acreage for each lat or parcel Tn Zane 2. y~~ The City Council will hold a public nearing 7n June, to determine the actual assessments based upon the actual costs tncurred 6y the City during the previous fiscal year which are to be recovered through assessments as required by the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, SECTIOtI 7. Order of Events 1. City Council adopts Resolution of Preliminary Approval of Ctty Engineer's Report. 2. City Council adopts Resolution of Intention to Annex to District and sets public hearing date. 3. City Council conducts public hearing, considers all testimony and determines to Annex to the District or abandon the proceedings. 4. Every year in May, the City Engineer files a report with the City Council. 5. Every year Tn June, the City Council conducts a public hearing and aRDroves, or modifies and approves the individual assessments. Y ~ / Properties and taprove~ents to be included within Annexation No. 19 (Zone 2) to Landscape Maintenance District No. 3: PROPERTIES PROJECT ACREAGE DR By-6s 2.5 SMPROYEMEN7 AREAS TO BE ANNEXED IN ANNEXATION N0. 1 Area Sa: Ft. Haven Avenue Foothill Boulevard M1111ten Avenue 4th Street Rochester Avenue 6th Street K ~o ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 3 ANNEXATION N0. IQ ``~'~^`^ CITY OF RANCHO Cl,'CAhIONGA .~°r ~~r~ ~ ~ F; '~~' ~ ENGINEERING DIVISION C, ~'~ ' VICINITY ~1~P im - --- CITY OF RANCN(i ('UCAhfGNGA STAFF IdEP08T DATE: May 18, 1988 TO: Mayor and Memtrers of the City Council FROM: Retrert A. Rizzo, Assistant City Manager BY: Jerry B. Fulwood, Resource Center Coordinator SUBJECT: Moditvinp pglicies pertaining to the Methotlotogy of Assessment within Terre Vista's Landscape Maintenance District. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council approve the Resolution modifying policies pertaining to the Methodology of Assessment within Terra Vista's Landscape Maintenance District. HISTORY On June 20, 1984, City Council approved Formation of Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 (Terra Vista Planned Community). ANALYSIS The original Resolution of Formation exempted non-residential (commercial) property and vacant land from the landscape maintenance district. Staff believes that the exemption of commercial and vacant property will eventually place a significant financial burden on the residents of Terra Vista in terms of higher assessments. In staff's opinion, the non-residential and vacant properties derive direct and indirect benefit from the Haven Avenue Median Island and General Landscaping and they should pay their fare share. Secondly, the residents of Terra Vista are being asked to pay maintenance for apart- ments and condominium parkways within this assessment distdct by reimbursing the apartment c..,,a,s for said cost. 7~ CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TV LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT May 18, 1988 Page 2 The apartments are already receiving an added benefit since apartments are assessed on halt assessment per dwelling units. By reimbursing apartment complexes for maintenance cost the City of Rancho Cucamonga would be setting a precedent since no other apartment complexes within the City are receiving said credits. !n our opinion the residents ct Tcrra vista Planned Community are being asked to contribute more than their tare share of landscape maintenance cost. /R`es/pe Il~y s/ubmitted, ' bert A R,/ q~/~ Assistant Ci~/Manager RAR JBF:sgr Attachments: Resolution Letter from NBS Lowry Letter from Brown & Diven y8l //~~~ S~~ o~i~~r~~ ENGI NEERE 6 PLA NNEFPS May 3, 1988 Mr. Jerry II. Fulwood Resource Center Coordinator City of Rarc ho Cucamonga P. O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 ~ (TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY) Pursuant to your request to review the method of assessment for the above referenced landscape maintenance district, we have been furnished the following: 1. Resolution No. 84-187 and Engineer's Report without maps. c. A proposed resolution clarifying credits and removing exemptions. 3. Letters from Warren Diven dated February 19, 1988 and April 22, 1988. The ultimate area of the landscape maintenance district encompasses the Terra Vista planned community as approved by ordinance No- 190 of the City Council. The community plan incorporates a landscape supplement. This is a large community plan to include some 8,000 dwelling units along with other non-residential usage. The community plan or specific plan sets forth the development °tandardu he uuuiir. farii:«. landscape plan, and integrates-all~facilitiesrint gas desirable community. A desirable eortonunity is further i rd is ated by the request of the project sponsor to be assured of a high quality in landscape maintenance for the enhancement of the total community. With the adoption of the conanunity plan, which includes the landscape supplement, the exclusion of non-residential properties from assessments/w/ithin the landscape Y 10920 Via Frontera • P. O. Box 28100 • San Dlego, CA 92128-0100 • (819) 485-1500 • (519) 578.7140 FAX (619)487-2068 Mr. Jerry B. Fu lwood May 3, 1988 Page 2 maintenance district may have excluded properties that do benefit from the landscape and lighting facilities. Again, we are without the benefit of maps, but some of the land- scaping is occurring within parkways and major arterial raddA inr l,~.ii n^y mC.aiaro which could would provide benefit Y.o non-residential areas. As pointed out in Warren Diven's letter, Section 225?3 of the Streets and 9lghways Code does establish the metho- dology for apportioning assessments within a district. This me*_hodology should be based upon benefits to be received by all parcels. The work program is varied, and portions of the work program may benefit some properties and exclude others. With the variation in work program from normal parkway landscaping to lighting of lacal parks, it would appear that each work program needs to be evaluated independent of other work programs as to the benefit that particular work program provides to individual properties whether they be residential or non-residential. The credits *_o .*.omeowners' associations should only apply to the maintenance of those facilities to which they are maintaining. Exhibit 1 attached is our interpretation of the existing methodoloov c~~ =••-•e ~~~=oowv,us wicnin the landscape mainte- nance^district. Again, without the benefit of maps, but recognizing the adoption of the community plan, Exhibit 2 sets forth our analysis of the properties that shauld be assessed. The degree of benefit that the properties receive for the various work programs will vary. We have basically erc luded vacant land except for trees and plantings in parkways and local street trees where they adjoin vacant property and are not being maintained. The question of benefit to vacant land is, "Does the benefit of the landscaping apply to the land or to the uses that have been constructed on the land, that is occupancy". rf the i ~.,a ~.. -_.__ _ as the property is being developed?Vthenathenexclusiontof the vacant property does not put an additional burden upon the developed property. For uniformity of maintenance throughout the planned community, and perhaps at a lesser cost to the property owners, all of the maintenance should be performed by the maintenance district. The provision for non-residential y~3 Mr. Jerry B. Fulwood May 3, 1988 Page 3 and vacant property to maintain the parkway landscaping adjacent to their property should be removed. The key to any assessment methodology is that the cost is fair. ly di_*_rib:acd - ony aii iocs or axcels in p proportion with the estimated benefits to be received. In this landscape district, we believe there are multiple benefits depending upon the work program, and that each of these benefits must be assessed individually to those properties which benefit. It should include all land within the community plan. The extent to which a property is bene- fited will vary. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact us. ~(1- .sue--. NORMAN A. NESTE Chairman js Attachments 4g`~ Exhibit 1 NBS/COWRY, INC. INTERPRaTPATION OP HXISTING MET$ODOLOGY FOR APPORTIONING ASSESSMENTS LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 Single Multi- Comm"' VaC"'' Family P.:.T•i iY" Trees, Plantings & Parkways Ne"' No' ~' Yes"' Yes Local Street Trees No"~ No`m' Yes"' Xes Local Pualic Parks No No Yes Yes Loop & Terra Vista Parkway No No Yes Yes 1~/2 Median Landscaping imajor arterials) No No Yes Yes The Greenway System No No Yes Yes Community Gateways No No Yes Yes Lighting - Park & Greenway System Na No v=° -:.~ `~' Establish equivalent dwelling units to Commercial and Vacant properties. " ' subject to maintenance by adjoining property. " ' Exclusion if maintained by homeowners' association. ~p~ Exhibit 2 NBS/COWRY, INC. SUGGESTED METHODOLOGY FOR APPORTIONING ASSESSMENT5 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 Single Multi- Non-Res "' Vac's' Family Family Trees, Plantings in Parkways Yes~~' Yes'' Yes "' Yes Local Street Trees Yes"' Yes" Yes"' Yes Local Public Parks No No Yes Yes Loop & Terra Vista Parkway yes No Yes Yes 7 1/2 Median Landscaping (major arterials) Yes No Yes Yes The Greerway System Yes No Yes Yes Community Gateways yes'°' No 'las yes Lighting - Park & Greenway System Yes" No vac v~~ '~' ab ii~L equivalent dwe fling units to Commercial and Vacant properties. " ' Delete provision for adjoining property owner to maintenance. " ' Exclusion if maintained by homeowners' association. " ' As they benefit the non-residential areas. " ' Lighting for greenway system/only. /~/ .~ ®~. BROWN & DIV EN _. o ac. eozs -.4... Aa .c. ..:e ]- ?SC+nc RANCHO SAN Tn FE. CALIF00.NIA 9>OGl April 22, 1988 Jerry Fulwood, Assessment Revenue Coordinator City of Rancho Cucamonga 9320 Baseline Road, Suite "C" Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 RE: CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO (TERRA VISTA PLANNED COMMUNITY) Dear Jerry: - '6 9'. a .i9 5 9 5 ?J5 n _5 i2'] i - 6051 d c iv_e S.OE ~ ~• ]5p ~c6D This letter is written in response to your request that our office review the method of assessment of non-residential property established for Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 (the "District"), in order to determine if the assessment methodology conforms to applicable law. All assessments within the District are levied pursuant to the Landscapi rq and Lightinc Act of 7977. ¢r .oats ~.,a .,: ,...._.._ ,. 22500 and following (the "Act"). Streets and Highways Code§y22573 establishes the appropriate methodology for apportioning assessments .tevied within the District: "The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the improvements." Any review of the assessments on non-residential property within the District must be made in light of the standard set in this Section. Before explaining our review of the assessment methodology, it must be pointed out that a quali.f led assessment engineer is the appropriate expert to be utilized in determining the most reasonable and correct methodology for levying assessments within any form of an assessment district. Our review is based upon our experience as special counsel ~O BROWN 8 DIVEN ,Terry Fulwood, Assessment Revenue Coordinator City of Rancho Cucamonga April 22, 1988 Page Two and bond counsel in working with assessment engineers, and does not purport to 6e a substitute for the opinion of a qualified assessment engineer. In analyzing the benefit to the non-residential properties within the District, one must first look at the improvements to be maintained. In the engineer's report, approved by Resolution No. 84-167 establishing the District, there were two basic classes of improvements initially inc ].uded within the District: (lj Frontage improvements including landscaping and street trees, and (2) Median landscaping. Under the assessment formula contained in the engineer's report, non-residential property and vacant property are exempt from annual assessment for any improvements, unless the owner of developed non-residential property fails to maintain its street frontage landscaping in which case, the District is authorized to perform the maintenance and levy an assessment on the property owner. Additionally, street trees or other frontage landscaping installed prior to development of non-residential property is subject to assessment if the owner fails to maintain the landscaping, and the District is required to undertake this maintenance =~v~..~l:.l :: Ly. ii, is is u~~ eaaeaawcu~ ~i uun-resLuentlal property provided for medianclandscaping. Inasmuch as the frontage maintenance is the responsibility of the owner of ron-residential property, the determination that the property does not benefit from frontage landscaping is reasonable assuming that the non-residential property does not benefit from the maintenance of frontage improvements on adjoining or nearby residential property which is maintained by the District. Again, only the assessment engineer reviewing the frontage improvements adjacent to the non-residential properties within the District can make an accurate determination of whether such benefit exists and, if so, what the appropriate assessment would be. The median landscaping presents a more troublesome problem, na ri irnlariv if hM1V mun :.a.. i~-a e.. +.,: .,.. ... ,a ~.. . ....r,...y .,a rota L, c.. uy ~h~ Die ti iCt ie in the same proximity to non-residential property gas residential property throughout the Dis tr. ict. In this case, the residential property would 6e assessed for the maintenance of the median, whereas the non-residential property similarly situated would not be assessed for that maintenance. It would seem difficult to justify a determination that there is a benefit to residential property, whereas there is no benef l.t to non-residential property similarly situated. y~~ .~ e~ BROWN 8 DIVEN Jerry Fulwood, Assessment Revenue Coordinator City of Rancho Cucamonga April 22, 1988 Page Three Pursuant to the provisions of the Act, tiro City is ragcired t .. •=lly make a determination of benefit to the properties within the District and to levy assessments against benefiting properties according to the standard set in Streets and Highways Cede § 22573. Zt would be our recommendation that the City review the assessment methodology as it applies to non-residential property to ensure that the method of assessment, as applied to such properties, does comply with the standards of Section 22573. Again, I would recommend and urge that this review include the utilization of the services of a gualif ied assessment engineer, who can provide the City with expert opinion regarding the methodology of assessments appropriate to be utilized for non-residential property. The risk to the City in utilizing a method of assessment which does not apportion assessments in accordance with benefit, is that the assessment could in fart be declared to be a special tax and thus invalid unless approved by the qualified electors. S houltl you have any questions regarding ihia letter, do not hesitate to cell. very truly yours, WARREN B. LIVEN WBD/j hf ~U~ RESOLU71ON NO. ~ ~ - 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY QF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNW, MODIFYING POLICIES PERTAINING TO THE METHODOLOGY OF ASSESSMENT WITHIN LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0.4 (TERRA VISTA). WHEREAS, on June 20, 1984, this City Council adopted Resolution No. 84-187 ordering the formation of Landscape Maintenance District No. 4 (Terra Vista Planned Community) (the "District"), cordirming assessments within the District pursuant to the assessment methodology set forth in the engineer's report (the "Report"), and ordering the !evy of such assessme.^.ts; ar!d WHEREAS, subsequent to the formation of the district, the City has administered the District and annually levied assessments therein, based upon the methodology of assessment set forth in the Report; and WHEREAS, the methodology of assessment set forth in the Report provides a credit against assessments for residential projects with homeowners associations if such associations maintained areas that would otherwise have been maintained by the district; and WHEREAS, the owners of apartmarrt complexes, not having homeowner's associations, have requested the same or similar credit currentty applicable only to homeowner's assocations; and WHEREAS, the Report provided that non-residential property and vacant property would be exempt from assessment unless the owner of such property failed to mein ovi Minn cb•oo~ i"nmenu bndenaninn enrl ~bn nioari.a ,. .o.i b. nuAn.... .., n. .~..nm„ ..._...._... _..._....y _.. __. ..-..._a_ ._..____.,....~ _.._..._ _._..._. .. _-._~_.._. ._ ~_.. _.... such maintenance on behalf of the owner; and WHEREAS, this legislative body has received recommendations from City staff and provided an opportunity for comment by members of the public regarding these two issues, and now desires to establish policies pertaining thereto. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2: That this City Council determines that the policy determination to y~..... ..~ .... . ,.foj,.... ....~.~ on areas that would otherwise be maintained bythe District was^n intended to apply only to such specific areas that would have normalty been maintained by the Distdct and IIgI any or all the areas abutting residential projects, that a great amount of confusion has resulted regarding credits to residential projects with or without homeowner's assocations; that this City Councl ~9d CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION TV LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT May 18, 7988 Page 2 hereby determines that all areas that would otherwise be maimained by the District will be maintained directty by the District; and those areas that would 11Gt otherwise be maintained by the District be maimained by the abutting property owner or homeowner's associations and that credits sha!! not bs applicable to residential projects, whether single family or mufti-family, for such areas. SECTION 3: That this City Counal determines that non-residential property and vacam property shall not be categorically exempt from assessment, but that the method of assessment to be applicable to all properties within the distdd shall be as set forth in Streets & Highways Code § 22573, and that the net amount to be assessed among all assessable bts or parcel within the district, shall be in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such bt or parcel from the improvements. ~/ CITY OF RANCHO Ci:CAMOtiGA STAFF REPORT ~ DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: City Co uncil and City Manager -~ FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer ~ BY: Paul A. Rouqeau, Traffic Engineer ~ SUBJECT: Recon~nendation to establish speed limits on Victoria ~i Street, Baker Avenue and Red Hill Country Club Orive ' RECOMMEIIDATIg1: It is recommended that Section 10.20.020 of the Municipal Code be amended to provide for speed limits of 40 MPH on Victoria Street from Haven Avenue to Mendocino Place; 35 MPH on eaker Avenue from Bth Street to Foothill Boulevard and 35 MPH on Red Hill Country Club Drive from Foothill Boulevard to Alta Cuesta Drive. BACKBROUND/NNALYSIS: Continuing surveillance of streets in the City has resulted in conducting tra'f is and engineering surveys for the purpose of e;tatl fishing speed limits acording to Sections 22351, 22358 and 40801-40805 of the California Vehicle Code. The Vehicle Code allows cities to set speed limits at other than 25 MPH nr 55 MPN in arr nr danra with ciirh ciir vovc , order to more precisely esta611sh the "reasonable and prudent" speed required under basic State speed law. This speed then becomes the basis for enforcement, eliminating the extreme discretion which otherwise could occur. Such a survey, less than 5 years otd, is also required where radar is used for enforcement. Surveys as required above have been conducted on listed streets. The surveys involved the determination of the prevailing speed of existing traffic by the use of radar, an analysis of the recent accident history and a search for any conditions not apparent to drivers which would require a reduced speed. The results of these surveys are summarized in the attached table. After review of these results, it was found that the safety record of Vir1n Cfncnf fie itA:r t d 1 is "d th - w. expec e eve a,~ e~ a are no unusual conditions not apparent to drivers. Thus, the observed prevailing speeds must be the predominant consideration in determining the speed limit. The safety records of Baker Avenue and Red Hill Country Club Drive show levels greater than expected for similar streets and volumes indicating a reduction in prevailing speeds would be more appropriate. These reductions must be accompanied by a higher level of enforcement before a drop in accident rates can be realized. 7 i~ CCSR May 18, 1988 Page 2 CONCLUSIUN: A speed limit should be established that would be considered reasonable by °^~t the dN vzrs on the street and stiii prcviee for effective enforcement. A speed limit such as this is set at, in most cases, the first 5 MPH increment below the speed that 85 percent of the drivers are doing. With accident rate levels higher than expected levels, a 5 MPH reducti an from the 85 percent level accompanied with a higher level of enforcement should reduce the accident rate to within expected levels. The proposed speed limits are expected to be exceeded by 6 to 67% of the drivers observed, thus these limits should provide an effective tool for law enforcement. Respectful submitted, ~~~ ~ r- /' ~ /. / ~~~. ~ ~ ~ RHMi PAIR: D~l'~l ~i ~ Clyde Boyd, Chairman-Public Safety Comnfssion ~~Lc~inncnl y93 v. ~ .. ~ ...... .. .. .... ...... ~. r.., ...... i d'i¢i ¢ i i O 4 M W W W W la a : a_ o_ a o_ o_ rd a_ o_ i M 1W- 1S-. U V Z 12HUM r+3¢ M M M W W O W 11 9 9 N 4 '!Oe m ST 0 m M F W W OL I .~ N N '~ .'+ .~..a r M ¢ Z M M NUJ M1 O OP~ 9 R SW- M '. S F T ^J W W O C J S V M N P L i z "w u +loc'~ ooG o 0 000 0 z .. c ~ c o 0 o c o 0 o i M 1- 4 .l N ~ ? O O T C1 .. j JS¢ Z ~U¢ G~~ M1 7 Gti~' J S ~ ^J 'J 'S t tt I Z 2 2 .. } ~ ~. F. r. w .~ r ,-r ~-. ti r, H .s ti r-, w rr G `a~P mmm m m mmm m w M W N I! fy~ S 4 N N N Ir1 G ~- O W Y P T T S P rl P m ni M K M LL w ~ W' W O 1 YI ti t0 ~ r2 T n r~i m m N m m 'Ii S Y 4 ~ M ¢ W M M1 Or S W Yl n r0 '. i `w mwa i "' ~'~' m m mmm m M R Y P T P v T P O P Y 9 V 2 - ~ _ ~ ~ O 7 O r. + a °: ~ ~ = L _ (~ V 6 t M _ ~ _ _ _ O_ O_ O_ G_ C_ Z '. 2 G M r L Z M ~_ O O G O G ~ U O O O 2 S S'I V` T N W N ' w T ~^ m f' P P T i G O .1 G O O J W% L W L 1- a _ / U Z r O a z.- - wwa',. .- i - -. .:. w h ~ : • rc :n _ s + i zz ° w z °w ' - w o w M u w ' - "v. o ~ r u ~ m In - ¢ ¢ rc ¢ ¢ s rc ¢] '¢ o ' i n aw _ m w a ~ o • '. ~'ntu w w "c.u iJa I[ ' ~S! l I. • V U J w MM +~ K C W 7 +i a Z 6 ~OW W Z L 0 y Y. K O J O ,-r O O a ', 0 S 0 V Z ' O¢ W O 2 L y W L y L 2] m Z L J R' C J L pp y • Z 2 1 III J w ~ n~[ L i P U O O O O d L J M J T n a [ a O N O ~ N ? Z O E ~ P rna 0 a' L S J ~ S 9 VL 7 i $°ma L O T CO ~ O N T N > 9 6 Y a t O ] 9 O V ] G % L O _ N r ~Viy ° ~ s° ~ O C 9 9 O ]' i N J C a J O _ O n:o `c a r, `c i.. ~ a L ~ n ~ 0 o a C a_ C L C ] D 4 L 0 9 J9 a O 1 V ~ N G 9 r .. 3 `]OL ] 9 Y n ~ IOi 0 0 r 9 G 0 O ~ « « O O « r p P 0 O O « [ O 9 V O O O O 40' WO' 10' N Yl tt tt IX VI x x n n m ,o W r.. ~ N m¢in ~~n azv n a aia~L z s z L L z J L m mm m T > mm P11m n n a a o n i.. ~ zo n°uu n U pO ~ ~ J 9 u] L IX L ti 0 IXT O M U J r [ IXW H_~+O OS6 W S~ C Y LL ~ _6 O y ./ O O JZ O¢ LL Om O N ` e W_ ¢ Y W L f O O O IX 6 L J r+ W' 2 J j n N J I Oy n SS p pp qi Lp Y P~ t L/ U 9 O C O N 2 O 5 WZ¢O'/ J yW~^'~O4 ORDINANCE N0. 3 SO AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, SECTION 10.20.020 OF THE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY CODE, REGARDING PRIMA FACIE SPEED LIMITS UPON CERTAIN CITY STREETS A. Recitals (i) California Vehicle Code Section 22357 provides that this City Council may, by ordinance, set prima facie speed limits upon any portion of any street not a state highway. (ii) The City Traffic Engineer has conducted an engineering and traffic survey, of certain streets within the Cf ty of Rancho Cucamonga which streets as specified in Part B of this Ordinance. (iii) The determinations concerning prima facie speed limits set forth in Part B, below, are based upon the engineering and traffic survey identified in Section A (ii), above. B. Ordinance NON, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGR DOES HERESY OROA iN RS FOLLOViS: Section 1 Section 10.20.020 hereby is amended to the Rancho Cucamonga City Code to read, in words and figures, as follows: 10.20.020 Decrease of state low maximum s eed. It is determined by City Counci reso ution an upon a as is o an eng veering and traffic in~aestigation that the speed permitted 6y state law is greater than is reasonable or safe under the conditions found to exist upon such streets, and it is declared that the prima facie speed limit shall 6e as set forth in this section on those streets or parts of streets designated in this section when signs are erected giving notice hererof: Oec tared Prima Facie Name of Street or Portion Affected SDeed Limit (MPH) I Archibald AVei1Ue - Bdnvdn to Nnr+H nnri cn 2, Archibald Avenue - Fourth St, to Banyan St. 45 3. Arrow Route - Baker to Haven q5 4, Baker Rve. - 8th St. to Foothill Blvd. 35 5, Banyan Street from Beryl St. to London Ave. 35 8. Banyan Street - from west City limits to Beryl Street 40 7. Base Line Road - Carnelian to Haven 40 yes CC SR Ordinance May 18, 1988 Page 2 Declared Prima Facie Name of Street or Portion Affected Speed L', mit (MPH) 8. Base Line Road - Hermosa to Haven 45 4. Base Line Rcad - West City limit to Carnelian 45 10. Beryl Street - Banyan to end 45 11, Beryl Street - 800' n/o Lemon to Banyan 40 12. Carnelian Street - Foothill to end 45 13, Center Avenue - Foothill Bivd, to Church St. 40 14, Church Street -Archibald Ave. to Haven Ave, 40 15. Church Street - Haven to Elm 40 16. Eighth Street - Grove to Haven 45 17. Etiwanda Avenue - Foothill to Highland 45 18, Grove Avenue - Eighth to Foothill 40 19. Haven Avenue - Highland to Wilson 50 20. Hellman Avenue - Foothill to Alta Loma Dr. 35 21, Hellman Avenue - 500' n/o of Manzanita to Valley View 40 22, Hellman Avenue - 6th to Foothill 45 23. Hermosa Avenue ~ Base Line Road to Nilson Ave. 45 24. Hermosa Avenue - Wilson to Sun Valley Dr. 40 25. Hermosa Avenue - Foothill to Eighth 45 27. Highland Avenue - Amethyst to Archibald 35 28. Highland Avenue - Archibald Avenue to Hermosa Avenue 35 29, Highland Avenue - Hermosa Avenue to 800' west of Haven 45 30, Hillside Road - Ranch Gate to Amethyst St. 35 31, Lemon Avenue - Archibald Ave. to Haven Avenue 40 32. Lemon Avenue - Jasper St. to Beryl St, 35 33. Ninth Street - Baker Ave. to Archibald Ave. 40 34, Red Hiil Country Club Dr. -Foothill to Alta Cuesta 35 35, Rochester Ave. -Foothill B1. to Base Line Rd. 50 36. San Bernardino Road - Vineyard Ave. to Archibald Ave. 35 37. Sapphire Street - Banyan to end 45 iapuhirF $i.rphi. - 19tH to iannn, did 39. Spruce Avenue - Elm Avenue to Base Line Rd, 40 40, Terra Vista Parkway - Church to Belpfne 40 41. Vittoria Street - Archibald Ave. to Ramona St. 35 42. Victoria Street - Etiwanda Ave. to Route 15 40 43, Victoria Street - Haven Ave. to Mendocino P1. 40 44. Victoria Park Lane 35 y9~ CCSR Ordinance May 18, 1988 Page 3 Declared Prima Facie Name of Street or Portion Affected Speed Limit (MPH) 45. Victoria Windrr>WC Loop /nerth g gni~fhi .5 46. Vineyard Avenue - Church to Base Line Rd. 40 47. Vineyard Avenue - 6th St. to Foothill Blvd. 45 48. Whittr am Ave. - Eti Wanda to east City Limit 40 49. Wilson Rve. - Amethyst Ave. to Archibald Ave. 40 50. Wilson Ave. -Archibald Ave. to Haven Ave. 45 51. Wilson Ave. - Haven Ave. to 200' e/o Canistel Ave. 40 (Ord. 169 Section I (part), 1982: Ord. 39 Section 5.1, 1978). Rancho Cucamonga 5/82 124 (i) Both sixty-five (65) miles per hour and fifty-five (55) miles per hour are speeds which are more than are reasonable or safe; (ii) The miles per hour as stated are the prima facie speeds which are most appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic and are speed limits which are reasonable and safe on said streets or portions thereof; (iiil The miles per hour stated are hereby declared to be the prima (iv) The Traffic Engineer is hereby authorized and directed to install appropriate signs upon said streets giving notice of the prima facie speed limit declared herein. Section 2 The City Clerk shalt certify to the passage of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be publisheA as required by law. Section 3 The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same to be published within fifteen (15) days after its passage at least on Lc iii The uaii'v nenitri. a nawcnanor ni ncnora_7 rirrnl.~:rr r~~n~:.;...w :.. •t... ~~. pool ~~~~~~ ~~ City of ntar o, a n ornta, and circulated in the City-of Rancho Cucamonga, Californfa. DATE: May 18, 1988 CITY OF RANCHO CLJCAMONGA STAFF REPORT ~p G~MONC K` 9 ~ n xl, ~ a h }I F c- ~.` 12 - ~ =-_197__- TD: Mayor, Members of City Council, City Manager FROM: Joe Schulte, C~~omyymt)tiity Services Manager BY: Kathy sorenseg~'~`~enior Recreation Supervi r SUBJECT: Tournament Re<equest - District 21 Little League REQIIEST FOR ACTION: Consideration of request by Citrus Little League to host the District 21 play-off tournaments at Red Hill and Heritage Community Parks. BACRGRODND: Attached is a request from Citrus Little League on behalf of District 21. They are asking permission to hold playoff games here in Rancho Cucamonga as well as sectional play for the senior (older boys) league. Staff has contacted Roger Birdsall. District ~~ Administrator, to obtain the following information: • Younger boys play would tentatively begin July 13 and run thru July 27. Fields requested are Red Hill and Heritage Parks. • Senior boys would tentatively play July 17 and Finish on July 29. Field requested at Red Hill Park only. • Sectional Play-offs for the senior boys would begin August 1 and run thru August 6. Field requested Red Hill only. • Games are scheduled to start at s:ao g,m. and 8;04 p.m. everyday. (Sunday usage is very rare). Moat games last one and a half to two hours. According to Mr. Birdsall 753 of the games era completed within one and a half hours and 90$ are completed within two hours. Lights are turned off ae soon as games are over. Security lights will be needed to clean the area. The tournaments will request y9~ Little League Request May 18, 1988 Page 2 the extension oP the lighting curfew to 11:OC p.m. on the little league fields at Red Hill and Heritage with a midnight curfew on the senior field at Red Hill. Ae the play-offs progress fewer games era played therefore there would not be double headers every night. Probably only during the first week or so. Additional bleachers would be needed for spectators. Mr. Birdsall stated that seating would ba necessary for at least 200 people per game (100 per aide). wring the period of time potentially requested there would be a need for 16, 16'by 5 rows, bleachers (eight at Heritage and eight at Rsd Hill). The rental cost, paid by Citrus, would run about $4800 according to Brown i,rannscanc uompany. 7'ne oleachera could also be borrowed from area schools. All arrangements for the bleachers would need to be made by Citrus Little League with approval by the Risk Management and Park Maintenance offices of the City. Issues regarding park and field maintenance will be discussed with Citrus Little League by Park Maintenance and Community Services. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Community Services staff recommends approval of the Citrus request with the following conditions: •a ~__~_ g can a`-rt efts"r 9:d5 p.m. It is the responsibility of Citrus Little League to enforce this rule. The Muelc and Amplification Policy shall be adhearad to for the duration o£ the tournament. The coat for monitoring City policies shell be the responsibility of Citrus Little Leaqus. y~~ Little Leauge Request Hay 18, 1988 Page 3 it shall be the responsibility of Citrus that al: refuse ba picked up after the game and deposited in the appropriate receptacles. If additional trash pick-up is required, those costa shall be the responsibility of Citrus Little League. • 7,dditional parking requiramnnts shall be coordinated with 111ta ioma High School by Citrus Little League to avoid on street parking problems. • Insurance at a minimum of $1 million dollars shall be required of Citrus for the duration of the tournaments with the City of Rancho Cucamonga listed as additionally insured. Respectfully Submitted, 1 /~A1 . Joe chultZ, Co unity 6ervices Manager JS/ks ebb CITRUS LITTLE LEAGUE P.O. Box 149 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 9t 730 April t5, 1988 Kathy Sorensen ,.pe City ~of Rancho VCucamonga^ Dear Kathy: .~.itru5 Little League b'^ apprcacho td hca' Ih15 y'ear~5 DiSt(ICt 2t Au ..tar Tournaments for bothyVLittle ^League anc Senio! League. Tournament play for both little league acd senior league begin July 11, 1988 end run through July 30, 1988, excludirg Sundays. These dates fall within our contractual time line. As we all know there is a 10:00 pm curfew on the lights at Red Hill Park. It would be necessary to have the lights available until 11:00 pm for the little league field and for the senior league field it would oe necessary for lights available until 12:66 pm. These times are a precaution to allow for any delay and does not indicate that lights would be an at those hours. I here is also the need for admtional oleacners at Dorn the uaie league and senior league }fields. I understand the sensitivity of this request at this time but believe that the exposure of Rancho Cucamonga and the beautiful facilites at Red Hill Park to the cities in Southern California during these tournaments could only have a positive effect. Thank you 'or your consideration in this matter. Since ely v6ur~, I~6~ U ~1 v~P~ Racky~-R'eynold~, President Citrus Little League cl ,q~~CE` cc: Dennis Stout, Mayor, P,ancho Cucamonga c o~ p,Q ~` Robert Rizzo, Assistant City Manager, Rancno Cucamonga o^';,°ti, JQ ~(. Rodger Birdsall, District 21 Administrator '~,~ ~ti ~ ~~ Q ~/h is BB `tC';o~4q',~oy S Cq ~~ -- - CITY OF RANCHO CtiCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Robert A. Riuo, Assistant City Manager BY: Jerry B. Fulwood, Resource Center Coordinator SUBJECT: Citv of Rancho Cucamonca's Guidelines and Policy for Financinc Infrastructure by utilizing Assessment and Community Facilhies Dis+.dcts. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council approve the Assessment and Community Facilities Districts Guidelines and Policy by minute action for Financing Infrastructures. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: The City of Rancho Cucamonga has formod a tots! of five Assessment and Community Facilities Districts with two more pending. Therefore, a general Policy Statement with aoolicable ouideiines is being provided. The attached Policy Statement will insure that consideration is given to critical issues prior to the formation of any Assessment or Communhy Facilities District. Respe Ily submittJed, ~' ~~1 Robert A. Ri2ZC~ Assistant Ctty Manager RAR:JBF:sgr Attachment: Declaration of City Council Policy ~~~- CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DECLARATION OF CITY COUNCIL POLICY SUBJECT: Policy for use of Community Facilities Districts and Assessment Districts to Finance Public Improvements I. PURPOSE This policy is intended to serve as a general guideline for the City's use in reviewing proposed assessment districts. These guidelines are purposefully intended to be general and the City reserves the right on a case-by-case basis to determine the appropriateness of the use of assessment district or community facilities district financing. Tha City also reserves the right to select and directly supervise all engineering, finanda!, legal and other participating consultants. Financing instruments shall normally be used to finance the cast of constructing public facilities for which there is a significant public need. The City will also consider whether the improvements to be financed have the concurrence of present and future owners of other benefiting property who will be assessed to pay for such improvements. Community facilities districts will normally be used to Tinance drainage facilities where as assessment districts can be used for drainage, and other improvements as approved by City Counai. The Citv will exercise a fiscally conservative approach to the use of assessment districts and community facilities districts financing in order to maintain the City's good financial standing and minimize any financial risk to the City. The individual financial impact of each assessment financing and the cumulative impact of all assessment financings upon the City's credit and its contingent liability will be carefully evaluated. All expenses incurred in evaluating and formation shall normally be advanced by participating landowners whether or not such expenses are chargeable fo or fundable out of a particular assessment district. 11. FINANCING OBJECTIVES t. The improvements should provide the broadest possible public benefit among the residents within and immediately adjacent to the project area. 2. The public benefit should not be detrimental to surrounding properties. 3. The improvements should be perceived and easily recognizable by property owners as being a needed and necessary public benefit, to the greatest extent possible, not only the properties within the project area, but the surrounding community as a whole (i.e., job creation, increased governmental revenues, local economy, increased property values, public convenience, etc.) r~3 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DECLARATION OF CITY COUNCIL POLICY Page 2 4. The project should be publicly financed only when it can be demonstrated that: a. There is a recognizable public need for the project. b. There exists a reasonable necessity to proceed now with the project. c. This is the only cost-effective means for financing the project, and other sources of financing are either not feasible or available. d. The risks of defauR have been minimized to a reasonable level. e. Tha proponents have the financial and managerial resources sufficient fo assure successful completion of the project. 5. The project's financial bene!its outweigh the costs of future, local governmental services. III. POLICY DECLARATION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA 1. :Nhere, in the City's opinion the public facilities and services of a residential development represents a sicniticant public benefit. this development will also be considered. 2. "rhe proponents will provide written assurances to the City that aII prospective buyers of property within the District shall receive full disclosure regarding the District's spacial tax levy. 3. Projects shall be at the stage where alt the above criteria can be adequately assessed as well as the proposed method of apportionment of any special tax and other fiscal issues addressed. 4. Atl statements and materials related to the sale of District bonds shall emphasize that neither the faith and credit nor the taxing power of the City of Rancho Cucamonga is pledged to the payment of bond payments. v. Theie i5 irG nwmwo paymo"it vr, Gi let :.va, u,o vnr pia nig assessment and/or community facilhies districts. Expenses not chargeable to districts are borne by project proponent. 6. Facilities shall be funded in accordance with the provisions of the Improvement Act of 1911, the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, and the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982. 7. The assessment district bonds shall be issued in accordance with the 1911 or 1915 Bond Acts. 5U'~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DECLARATION OF CITY COUNCIL POLICY Page 3 8. In the evert the acquisition provisions of the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 are utilized, the City and project proponent shall mutually agree upon the facilities to be acquired and the method of determining the construction costs to insure that future owners of the property will be assessed only for reasonably incurred costs. 9. Il an aiea Gf ilow da'vbtapi,ibnt, pr3pbrty Ownbro mUSt dBrriOfiStrat6 thbir financial ability to meet all assessmeMS and/or speaal taxes before build-out has taken place. 10. There are no prior liens other than property taxes on the property or, if they exist, they will not be overly burdensome to the property owners. ~J --- -- -- -CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA : ~:;~~: ~, STAFF REPORT ~~` DATE: May 18, 1988 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM Robert A. Rizzo, Assistant City Manager BY: Jerry B. Fulwood, Resource Center Coordi.m_tor ~ i SUBJECT: Setting Annual Special Tax for the Community Facilities District No. 84.1 ' Dav Creek Drainage Svste for the amount of $350.00 er ac e. RECOMMENDATION: I Staff recommends that City Council approve the Resolution Establishing Annual Special Tax for the Community Facilities District (Day Creek Drainage System) in the amount of $350.00 per acre. On June 26, 1984, at an election held, the property owners within the boundaries of the District authorized the District to incur bonded indebtedness in the principal amount of $t 8,000,000. This allowed the District to finance Certain public capital drainage improvements within the District. Addftionally, the property owners approved a maximum special tax rate of $55n nn ner artro~ tnic Woc r~ ..a~. a~• ..~~~~..~~ ~~a interest on the bonds issued. EVALUATION: The current rate of $350.00 per acre is still sufficient for the District to meet its financial obligations for fiscal year 1988/89. Therefore a tax rate increase for the Community Facilities District 84-1 is not recommended for fiscal year 1988/89. Res~p~e fully submitted, ~U./ ~/ f~obert A. o Assists ity Manager RAR:J9Fsgr Attachments: Resolution Yearly Status Report ~h RESOLUTION NO. C,~ g - 3~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 84-1 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, (hereinafter referred to as the "legislative body of the local Agency"), has initiated proceedings, held a public hearing, conducted an election and received a favorable vote from the qualified electors relating to the levy of a special tax in a Community Facilities District, all as authorized pursuant to the terms and provisions of the "Mello Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982", being Chapter 2.5, Part 1, Division 2, Title 5 of the Government Code for the State of California. This Community Facilities District shall hereinafter be referred to as COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 84-1 (DAY CREEK DRAINAGE SYSTEM) (hereinafter referred to as the "District"); and WHEREAS, at this time, bonds have bean authorized for purposes of financing the project facilities for said District; and WHEREAS, this legislative body, by Ordinance as authorized by Section 53340 of the Government Code of the State of California, has authorized the levy of a special tax to pay for costs and expenses related to said Community FacilRies District, and this legislative body is desirous to establish the specific rate of 4he special tax to be collected for the next fiscal Vear. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2: That the specific rate and amount of the special tax to be collected to pay for the costs and expenses for the neM fiscal year (1988-89) for the referenced district is hereby determined and established as set forth in the attached, referenced and incorporated Exhibit "A". SECTION 3: That the rate as set }orth above does not exceed the amount as previously authorized by Ordinance o1 this legislative body, and is not in excess of that as previously appr~:ed by the Guslified slsctors of the Distrct,. SECTION 4: That the proceeds of the special tax shall be used to pay, in whole or in part, the costs of the following, in the following order of priority: A. Payment of principal of and interest on any outstanding authorized bonded indebtedness; B. Necessary replenishment of bond reserve funds or other reserve funds; ~~ CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT 84-1 May 1$, 1988 Page 2 C. Payment of costs and expenses of authorized public facilities and public services. D. Repayment of advances and Loans, if appropriate. The proceeds of the special taxes shall be used as set forth aoove, and shall nct be used for any other purpose. SEGTION S: The special tax shall be collected in the same manner as ordinary ad valorem property taxes are collected, and shall be subject to the same penalties antl same procedure and sale incases of any delinquency for ad valorem taxes, and the Tax Collector is hereby authorized to deduct reasonable administrative costs incurred in collecting any said special tax. SEGjJON 6: All monies above collected shall be paid into the Community Facilities District funds, including any bond fund and reserve fund. SECTION 7: The Auditor of the County is hereby directed to enter in the neM county assessment ro!I on which taxes wit! become due, opposite each bt or parcel of land effected in a space marked "public improvements, specal tax", or by any other suitable designation, the installment of the special tax, and for the exact rate and v nvwi. Jf wiv :~ , i ~w,..nw w .., :v.Z ...:~.^. .^.N~Fn.I C..6~6N "M. SECTION $: The County Auditor shall then, at the close of the tax collection period, promptly render to this Agency a detailed report showing the amount and/or amounts of such specal tax installments, interest, penalties and percentages so collected and from what property collected, and also provide a statement of any percentages retained for the expense of making any such collection. ~~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA MELLO-BOOS COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 84-1 DAY-ETIWANDA DRAINAGE SYSTEM YEARLY STATUS REPORT MAY 198$ s~/ BACKGROUND On ,tune 26, 1984, the electors within the boundaries o} Community Facilities Distriq No. 84-1 authorized the District to incur bonded indebtedness in the principal amount of $20,225,000. In August 1985 bonds in the amount o1 $18,000,000 were issued to finance the constrrction and installation of public capital drainage facilities to serve and provide drainage protection to property located within Community Facilities District No. 84-1. In March of 1986 the area between Milliken and Rochester and Highland and the northerty City limits was annexed into the Distric! as Annexation No. AE-1. The annual special tax rate for 1985/86, 1986/87 and 1987/88 was set by City Council at $350.00 per acre. Under the Loan and Pledge Agreement the Redevelopment Agency has contributed $500,000 each year. During fiscal year 1987/88 construction of Phase I improvement began and are nearing completion. The construction contract is administered by the County of San Bernardino. Construction contract payments to date total $5,337,959. Additional expenditures for various costs outside the construction coMrad total $88,298.47. Plans and specification for constn:ction of Phase II have been completed. The Coun'ry will be requesting bids and hope to be under construction for Phase fl by late summer. FISCAL YEAR 1088!69 The current rate of $350.00 per acre for fiscal year 1988/89 along with the Rodovnlnn...n..~ w_..__.. _. _.,. .. ..-__ ---~-•-r^-••• . y.,~wr wuu ruuauu u~ eaao,uuu wru provde sufficient funding to pay debt service in the amount of $2,413,000. S/v CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO.84-? (DAY CREEK DRAINAGE SYSTEM) EXHIBR "A" The Community Faalities District has been divided into two zones: ZONE "A": General areas to be served by the drainage facilities, exclusive of Zons "B". 2, ZONE ^B^: A limfted area, being only partially served by drainage facilities. Zone "8": consists of those properties bounded on the south by FOOTHILL BOULEVARD, on the East by ROCHESTER AVENUE, on the North by BASELINE ROAD, and on the Wesl by the prolongation of MILLIKEN AVENUE. The rate, method and formula for the levy of the speael tax for the respective zones, being Zone "A" and zone "B", is as folbws, based upon an estimated bond amount of $18,000,000 payable over a period of twenty (20) years. ZONE "A": $350.00 PER ACRE. ZONE "B": $350.00 PER ACRE FOR ? 90 ACRES. For the purpose of defining the maximum special Tax, "ACRE^ shall mean acres nnnlnlnnll :n 14,n n.nn n111,n ..n.nnl nn "INn....:nnA ..n:n~ ILn nn.n Ln... ~L.. ... ._ ._ r.....,.~ ." .. ........... ......y ........,..., ..., .,,,....,, ..,, .,.o latest San Bernardino County Assessor's maps. .s~ LEOEMO: u~u u.un oouuou. r~I: ue.uns aru ru ouownou •.-re /rse<.w /.r as- vav<m aer r m /o o.rr~ ~,.ww r is i~la~ ~rc7.- ~r ~< ~drr u~ r C/rr Y M.KN< rosNwaY.r F m ov /Ar s/vm YrTf dr Luc'ASl tW M'R it/ p/ / [YM(/f[L. /rM 1 ~y~ .~ b/v r //A01Y fUM.rM%.I ~FiFrI}GYU+ ~p 162M' 'I/dV NI A/, ~~ .IL J[YL%ON M/T C//Y .'NA~f/C )}/ (//Y Y AfACyO (.T.MYI~~ f/ /P / fM/ ilt:M, ALCM/~ ~ ~pI//,WP SMY 10 !(eY.IJXJ MV G[VD A Af f64N0 I/ C<II.I/N t G//Jll /.I(/C/ Kf dI/f K/ Jf ~ ~ dY-J//M/Aa lilA yAN .! 1/fM., 4/O .CMS y.Il ~. !i[1'.+KO C/ AS (//Y fb/ACK A! C~{~ll.l' wiiLllMtV /.IQ(P '(%ry C~ . /V Lv l.6C VXf C ~6I w•uxo sv ~ < fir. nu :Aff1 wYSY1IMN ' 4YX/'f//Y flfRT EXFII~IT A s~a ~ i .w~.n~ .r I fomloAnr wu YfllO nOOf COW11wITY fACILIT1Ef OIfTRICT NO. ft-1 CM W MIICIIO CUCAMONOA COUMTr W fAM f[nMAnDIMO~ fTAT[ Of CAINOnM1A ------ CITY OF RANCHO CL-CA~IONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 18, 1988 ` T0: City Council and City Manager ~~ ~~~, FROM: Russell H. Maguire, City Engineer i BY: Betty Miller, Assistant Civil Engineer I SUBJECT: USE OF CONOEMNAT ION TO OBTAIN OFF-SITE RIGHTS-OF-WAY FOR N N- L W H - A sta request or City ounce erect on concern ng the use of possible li ~ condemnation proceedings to obtain off-site street rights- I of-way associated with the development of a proposed tentative tract located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and Summit Avenue (APN 225-181-4, 6, 7, 8 and 43; 225-201-28) I. RECOMIEMDi1TI0N: Staff recommends that the City Council approve i^ concept pens ible future condemnation action to obtain off-site rights-of-way necessary for the development of proposed Tentative Tract No. 13808. II. ABSTRACT: Staff is requesting City Council direction concerning the use of possible condemnation proceedings to obtain off-site rights-of-way for East Avenue associated with the development of proposed ' Tentative Tract No. 13808, located at the southwest corner of East Avenue and Summit Avenue. I[I. DISCUSSION: The developer of the proposed Tentative Tract is being required to obtain off-site rights-of-way for the improvement of East Avenue along the frontage of a Not A Part lot fronting on East Avenue and surrounded by the Tentative Tract (Exhibit "B"). These improvements ..- -f `he ^tructi of curb quttEr •ideWalk, and posse"',y anyequestrian trai^1, which are shown in detail~on Exhibit "C". The Subdivision Map Act, Section 66462.5 (Exhibit "D"), states that, once a Tentative Map has been approved, the City cannot withhold approval of the Final Map because rights-of-way for off-site S/3 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TENTATIVE TRACT 13808 - LEW IS HOMES MAY 18, 1988 PAGE 2 improvements have not been acquired by the Developer. Therefore, the City is essentially forced to acquire the easement for the Developer (through negotiation or condemnation) or the requirement is automatically waived. Normally, staff requests that all off-site rights-of-way 6e obtained by the Developer prior to scheduling a pro,{ect for a Planning C o,'eei csion hearing. thi; case the Geve Toper anticipates resistance from the owner of the Not A Part lot, who has been unsupport ive of their development plans in the past. East Avenue is to be realigned westerly within the tract to provide a 4-way intersection at Summit Avenue (removing the current offset), It is the only north-south secondary arterial street planned between Gay Creek Boulevard and the Oevore Freeway (I-15) (Exhibit "E"), and will serve a rather large area both within and north of the City. It is pro,lected to carry 20,000 to 30,000 vehicle trips per day north of Highland Avenue by the year 2010. That volume is equivalent to the current traffic experienced on Base Line Road or Foothill Boulevard between Archibald Avenue and Haven Avenue. In addition, the Planning Commission is scheduled, at its May 11, 1988 meeting, to decide if a Community Equestrian Trail is to be added on the west side of East Avenue. The trail will require an additional 8 feet of dedication bringing the trail within 1 feet of the existing house, as compared to 15 feet for the street only ... ~... . If condemnation is necessary, the Developer will be responsible for all costs incurred, including the cost of obtaining the rights-of- way. IV. CON CLUS[ON: Staff feels that the use of condemnation is reasonable in this case, because the realignment of East Avenue is essential to the circulation element of the Etfwanda Specific Plan. Respect y submitted, `% P i rte' ~." ~ ~. Attachments: Exhibit "A" Location Map Exhibit "B" Tentative Tract Map Exhibit "C" Proposed Right-of-Nay Exhibit "D" Map Act Section Exhibit "E" ESP Street System 5/~ o` N CITY OF t'rEl~; TT ti3aoa RANCHO CUCAMONGA T1TLS VICINITY M R P ~~ @IOII~EERIId(i DM$ION ~~`• A 5 /S - %C Z.r~-:Tr T..r-.~ 7-- - - ..• ... ,' ~ r .. - --- a -- VV ~ e :•:.••: t~~ •.ey r:nvc' rn.•~r',ar_ urir •.. ~. a I"~".`:. _ r. _ e __.. ~. ~ ~ ~~ e ~ e m o ~_' ~xIST7N6l~T r ' ~ e... _e. e e .9~. .. a. ~i . " K','n^ ~ f~ i e _ .. ,, - ~ e' - - -- a ~ - ~ ..~ ..~ •~.""I M~ ~ ~ ~.i. » ~. e ~ ill ~f+ :..r _.. v iF}}, In _~ 1 ~~//'f\\W~ ~ V N CITY OF 1TF.M: TT 13608 RANCHO CUCAMONGA T1TJt.E; TENTATIVE MAP ENGII~EERIIdG DMBION ~1'i`• N D ~~ S/~ ~ ? ''~ IW i _ ~ - ~ I, ~ - ~ STREET ~, ~ I0. I J U . S I o \ ^ .cn ~ ~ 7 I I I ~ l~ 4~ I h N I ~ K W Ij~ I W N ~ N~ SO'11'!./ /S/~pO' i I I W D c.~/~eG ~ ~ j '' ' t ~ ~ I ~~~ ~F Pis - 8 ~ I ~ h i iI I M BX/ST//VG ( W~TRA IL hb[/JE I j ~ _ ' I ~ 1ih~ W O I T-- ~~ '` ~ ~ ~ I SiDEwAU< ON Ly ~y L I I A Q ~~ ~~ , ~ ~ wir our ~ ~ h II I. ~ REAIJGN- I u , I ` I MENT K/" IL __ HOUSE ( ~/ ~ ~ ` ~ I ~E ~ ~~ I ~,.~ Llf/V ~ seD fl 4 I~ \ CEN7E7LUNE I ' -I ~ i _~ ~isnn/G for ~rri~ ~ I i ' CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGINEERING DIVISION ! ". 34 rrEec; TT 13608 N T~,E;PROPOSED RIC+HT•OF•WAY EXHISBIT: ~~ C ~~ 5/7 66a63,5. Approval of final map carlrrol be nluaed becauu of till-site Im~ proaameni requirement tie land not brbngMg to srrtsdis;sion p local agency gun county, orutyand county shall not postpone orrefuse approval of a anal map bacauu Me subdmtler nos failed ro meet a tentative map contlition which requires the subdiwder ro constnKt or install offsrte improvements on land in whim neither Me subdivider nor [he local agency has sufficient tithe or interest, including an eas!ment or licenu, at Me time the tentative or final map is filed wiM the local agency, ip pennrt the ~mprovement6 to be made. In such cases, the city, county or ury and county shall. within 120 days of the filing of the final map, pursuant [o Section 66157, acquire by n<gotia[ion orcommence proceedings pursuant toTitle 7 (commencing with Section 1330.0101 of Part 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure to acquire an intercu in Me land which will perms the improvement to be made, including proceedings for immediate poser Sion of the property untlerArtide 7lcommencingwiMSectitin 1355.1101 0l Chapter 6 of such tiNe. In Me event a city, caunry, or city antl county fails to meet the 130~day time limitation, Me condition for conurucion of offsite improvements shall be condusivery deemed to be waived. Pdorto approval of the final map Me city, county, or city and county may requue the subdivider to enter into an agreement to complete Me improvements punuan[ to Section 6bIb2 a[ such time as Me city, caunry, or ury and county acquires an interest m the land which roil! permit the improvements to be made. Nothing m this section precludes a cih. counrv ~r rav and ...••..~• r.~_. wywnng a suomw0er to pay the cost of acgmnng pNsrte real property interests rpwrcd in connection with a subdivmon. "Offpte imprpvements," as used m thu section, does not include improvements whrch are necessary to assure replacement or construction of housing for persons and families of low or moderate income. as defined m Section 10097 of the Health and Safety Cod<. (Amended, Chapter 910, Statuses of 19871 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA EIdGIIJEERING DIVISION ~~; TT 1388 ~,; jtIYOIVlSIQN MAP qCT ~~ w ^M ~~~ /' _ .^r_ ~ ~ .~ ti :;-' ~;~ ~, ~ ~I Y CI'PI' OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGINEERING DIVISION \~ 'rcnf:TrayF Ne.13806 ' •wrE -- -_'\ -_- Tj -- / ,~~ ~! ,~ DC ,~ /'~ • Freeway Access i~ Major Arterial ~ Secondary Arterial ~m~""Wn' Special Design -- Collector ,~~~ c ~,~, Local Streets SYSTEM 5-6 iT rte., TT 13808 ~ITTI,E; ELP: STREE7 SYSTEM .~ E~~ EICI~IT: 5 /~ - CITY OF RANCHO CtiCA~10NGA STAFF REPORT r- 9 /~ DATE: May 18, 1988 T0: Mayor and Members of the City Council rRDn: Bfdd Buiier, Cf ty Fianner BY: Debra Meier, Associate Planner SUBJECT: TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE UPDATE I. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council review and scusai s EFe issues and provide staff with adequate direction~to prepare a final scope of work for this work program item. II. ABSTRACT: In response to City Council's concern regarding the ex s ng Ordinance requirement for preservation or replacement of Eucalyptus trees on private property, staff would like to initiate Council discussion of potential amendments to the Tree Preservation Ordinance. III. BACKGROUND: The existing tree preservation ordinance provides the 0 ow ng policy where Eucalyptus trees are concerned: Preservation - It is the intent of *.he ordinance to perpetuate a w n rea system through protection of selected Blue Gums. Re lap cement - When the Blue Gums cannot be protected due to s e ewe opment constraints, poor health, etc., they are replaced with Spotted Gums along the established windrow grid pattern. The following factors have brought about reconsideration of the existing policy: A. The spreading infestation of the Eucalyotus borer beetle: The Eucalyptus Longhorn borer bPPL1P i< now 3 well established pest in Rancho Cucamonga. The beetle threatens the continued existence of the historic windrows and all other species of Eucalyptus in the City. Unfortunately, by the time symptoms are visible (branch die-back and general dec11ne1 the trees are too far gone to saved. The most susceptible trees are those which have become stressed for one reason or another, primarily because of lack of waterlog. Healthy trees usuaily produce enough sap to drown newly-hatched larvae. But once cut from pruning, topping, or branch drop, no species of eucalyptus wood is immune to attack. S ai CItt COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TREE PRESERYATION ORDINANCE UPDATE May 19, 1988 Page 2 8. Council concern for placing replacement and maintenance burden u onu on ~esT-dent where trees are save in t~ rear yar The Ordinance presently requires preservation of existing eucalyptus windrows. Historically, the eucalyptus windrows wzr•e planted along a 330' x boo` grid pattern which typicaiiy results in the trees being located in the rear or side yards of single Family residences. The Ordinance requires replacement planting in cases where the trees must or should be removed. The Spotted Gum Eucalyptus, 15 gallon size, are required to be replanted 8 feet on center, and properly staked, to re-establish the windrow character. L'. The potential water shortage which could accelerate borer ee a pro em• The last two winters produced very little rainfall which stresses Eucalyptus windrows. Nindrows depend primarily upon rainfall for their water needs. The trees tend to be neglected by homeowners who either don"t water the trees, or surface water by sprinklers which do not promote deep roots for stability. The insects prefer to lay their eggs in these stressed trees or in recently cut or fallen eucalyptus logs and branches. Sma11 diameter trees often die during the first year or attack, and large ones succumb fallowing two or more successive years of infestation. IV. OPTIONS: The following options may be considered regarding the u1= <Ttus windrows: A. Preservation on Private Pro ert - The intent of this option wou ma n n e n egr o the current tree preservation ordinance, thus providing for widespread preservation and enhancement of the established windrow character. One advantage of this option of course is that the established windrows are mature trees that contribute to the unique environment of this community. At the sank' time the nature of the existing Blue Gums is a disadvantage to widespread preservation of the species. They are extremely hrtttle, prone to limb drop and toppling, and grow to a height of nearly 200 feet. The nature of the tree makes continued maintenance necessary for good health and appearance of the tree. The cost of hiring a professional service to prune is about (225.00 per tree. In Alta Lama a typicai single family lot could have 10 to 20 trees along a side or read property line, costing f2,225.00 to 54,500.00 per year to maintain. ~~~ CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TREE PRESERYATION ORDINANCE UPDATE May 18, 1988 Page 3 Replacement of Trees on_Private Property - With this option the 81ue Gum w n~ rowiis cau eTd r~emoved~'rom private property when replaced by an alternative Eucalyptus species. The advantage to replacement rather than preservation in place allows greater flexibility for the individual property owner with regard to tree placement. in addition, alternative species of Eucalyptus can be planted that are far less prone to the problems of the Blue Gum and are also better adapted to fend off borer beetle attacks. Replacement trees can also be provided with a deep root watering system that encourages longevity of the tree. One disadvantage to such an option is that city wide enjoyment of the windrow effect is not evident for many years. C. Preservation on Public Land Only - This option would allow Tndi sc rim na e~ ~ remov~o'F r- e~ private property, relieving individual property owners of the burden for maintenance of the windrows, while trees within public rights-of-way, easements, trails, etc., would be actively preserved. Therefore the maintenance can be accomplished through assessment districts by the City. The primary disadvantage to this option is that nearly all of *.he existing windrows, with the exception of select areas of Etiwanda, are located in the path of future street improvements, making preservation extremely difficult if not impossible. D. Replacement of Trees on Public Land - This option would provide For EFe rep acenen o wi~rows along public rights-of-wdy, easements, trails, etc. As with replacement elsewhere, the greater flexibility with respect to tree locations and species is a big advantage to this option. Again, the most notable disadvantage to replacement is the loss of the aesthetic value of the existing windrows until the replaced trees have had a chance to reach maturity. V. SCOPE OF THE REVISIONS: The Tree Preservation Ordinance was a op e o mp emeni-tile goais and policies of the General Plan and Etiwanda Specific Pan which encourage preservation of eucalyptus windrows as an Important part of the City's history and character. Therefore, any changes to the basic policy of preserving/replacing windrows would affect the General Plan and Etiwanda Specific P1 an. Staff would recamaend that the scope of this study be itmited to Eucalyptus and that the Tree Preservation Ordinance not be changed regarding preservation of other heritage trees, such as palm, oak, sycamore, and pine trees. ~~ CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TREE PRESERVATION ORDINANCE UPDATE Ma,y 18, 1488 Page 4 YI. SCHEDULE: The previous tree preservation ordinance amendment took nn newmonths to complete. Based on the general areas of concern - borer beetle infestation and maintenance of windrows on private property -and the potential controversy surrounding the Eucalyptus tree Issue, staff anticipates that arty amendments at this time could take equal or greater tine to complete. Staff estimates that this stuQy would require five person weeks over a period of several months to complete. Resp lly submitted Br e ~ City P anner BB:IXA:mg ~ a~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DAic: nay 1„ 1999 T0: Mapor City Council FROM: Deborah N. Brown, Counc ilmember SUBJECL: CONSIDBHATION OF eECURSTING PLANNING COMMISSION TO INVESTIGATE THE POTRNTIAL OF ALLOWING CHILD CABS PACILITIES UNDEB A CONDI- TIONAL USE P88lLIT IN LIGHT INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL COTDIB_H_CIAL. AND RETAIL ZONBS WITHIN THB INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC PLAN AREA During the past five months I have been working on a Child Care Commit tee which has been inves [igeting the various types asd methods of delivering child care within Rancho Cucamonga. I would like to have the Planning Commission investigate the feeeib ility of allowing child care in the Indue[rial Specific Plan area under a conditional use permit. Th ie would be in the light industriel~ industrial commericel~ end retail area e. Attached for your reference is me[erral tna[ nae oeev comp iied vy a~ai: e..~ ~..~ ~...... ....._ committee during our tenure. I look forward to discussing this matter further with the City Council at our Hay 19, 198E meeting. hk i,ii : •.a nnn~:ni ~ .m nv:~ .IIE ~i ORA~i D Ubi Date: May 6, 1988 To: Lauren Wasse-ia-, City Manager q;% From: Paula Pachon, Administrative Assistant Su6ier_t: t7p.9ata - Ch il~7 ~~re rnr.P!ltton ^'`,;~r. ~+~.~\~ ~5~~ `)" r~w ~ `-~ t-~ ~ ~, last week the Child Care Com-'_ttee met to review the findings of the Employee Child Care Survey. The Committee concurred with the analysis that was accomplished last month and has acceoted the report that was provided to you on April 7, 1988. Zn addition, the Committee h=_s decided to continue to gather in?oraation on what/how c~her municipalities, e.g. Los Angeles County, Irvine, ar=_ 3oing to provide child care benefits/services to their employees. Particular emphasis will be placed on what effor.s the West End cities are doing regarding child care. Las t'_y, the Committee .*.as expressed ar. interest in m enaring a directory of child care services Prom the inforaation gathered through the telephone survey of child care providers that was done earlier this vear. Z will be meetinc in the near Future with the City At~orney to discuss any concerns he may have of the Committee developing and disseminating such an inventory of child car=_ services available in Rancho Cucamonga. As always, if you have any questio.^s or concerns rsgardi.^.g the direction that the Committee in taking I would welcome meeting with you. PP/tp cc: Robert Rizzo, Assistant city Manager Soa Schultz, Community Services Manager Child Care Committee Members S~ C:TI" OF P.A\CHO CL'CA\it~\G:~ bIEIIOR:~~iDtii1l M- '%- 'rte _ -: ~ ,,-- C~; Date: April 7, 1988 ~-'~--' To: Lauren Wasserman, City Manager ~^/ I From: paula ?achcn, Administrative assistant I Sab'ect: Cpdat=_ on Ch`__3 Care Ccar.tctrsa Activities ' Cver the past sort a preliminary ana_ys_s of the employee c iid care survey »as accomplished. grief ly, the analysis of the 101 survey forms that were returnee (205 were disseminated - 498 response rate) has showed the following: • T.`.e major :y of employees that responded to t=_'survey use either a child care center (23&) or a baby-s. ter (23&) to care Eor their children during working hours. • 5_xty-six percent (60%) of the respondents stated that they were "very satisfied" with t^eir currant child care arrangements; only • T.*.a average amount of tine per weak that an employee's child(ren) was in a child care program/center during non-summer months (January-*Say) was 25.5 hours. During the summer months (June-August) this figure rose oriy slightly to 27.6 hours per week. (The di_faranca being that it appears that child care is used during the school year Eor junior high school children more that during t::e summer months. ) • Thirty-nine percent (398) of the respondents indicated that on the average they were later -- _" 7aar =1 - - va - - `ld car pzoblems.na FOrty-six percent (468) stated that they were not late at all last year due tc child care problems. • The question on days missed ~du• tc sick children yielded the following - 478 of th• respondents stated that they missed between ~~ iaaren Wasserman Aari1 7, 1958 gage 2 1-3 days. Converse:y, 78 of to responding employees stated that they missed be _wee.^. 6- 10 days oz we r:t and 28 of Cb~ eatioysss missed moss than i0 davs of work last year ..tea ,.o s s.c.t c..__-,-eaJ. • h;.a_;; as:ted whe=her emn'ovees wet=_ -- r=_s-=_, _., a emulcyer s~onsored~ _ ._me day ca:=_ program%ce,^.tar e= a lcc=_-.icr. co rver.'_eat - Ccr~ Ea_1 t: e aspcrs es were a_acst ec•.:a;'_v d:/:de3 w'_ 34°s "very _.~ sst ^"; 738 "somewhat interested"; and 77t "act interested". • When aske3 about employee irtarest in a City part-Cme day care center/p^gram .._ resnors es did not show much va^ at_or.~ :we^t7-nine percent (2?8) were "very interested°; 778 "somewhat interested"; and 748 "not interested". • Nearly 608 of to employess who rssnorded to the surrey were in favor of a day care credit as part of the City's benefit TF:c f~mii-o hnvovor drn^n o.i ¢l ightly to 428 when employees were askec if they would choose the credit if they had to give uo an existing benefit, e.g., visicr. plan, dental plan. • .`.e top 7 features -hen choosing day care arrangements that "were important to responders of the survey wets: (1st) lower fees; (2nd) closeness to work site; and tied for (]rd) access to child(ren) during working hours and quality of the program. Zt is my opinion that while there has been much talk citywide about dissatisfaction concerning employee arrangements for their eti i.ldlrenl's day care that the survey results do not seem to supoort this notion. Sixty-six percent (6s8) of the respondents indicated that they were "very satisfied" with their currant child Cara ar_angaments. By contrast, only 1/3 (338) of the employees who responded to the child care survey warn "very interested" in a City sponsored day care center/program. Interestingly however, is that nearly Sot of respondents were "very interested" in a day care credit to help defer part oL their child care expanses as part of the City's benefit package. 5~-g Lauren Wasserman April 7, 1998 gage 3 In add-pion, the results of the surrey lead me to conc'_ude that it is not the day care arrangements per se that ean_loyees era currently using where dissa*_isfaction lies but it is the cost of such programs. therefore, if private i::diu' ry __ home pr_ ___ era c,.rran sat fy.nq e-elovees ch-1d care needs wit^ procrams a.^.d centers for to care of r c ildren per :ens ±_ City ceuld best same tn_ needs of~is e. ployees by providtag them wi'_h a chi'_d care cr=_dit to help with the financial costs of such arrancements. What 2 have provided ycu in the last two paragraphs are my reactions to the survey results. As I have just completed the analys's of the data my next steo will be to call a meeting of the full Child Care Committee for sometime next wqe:< fcr their review of this information. In addition at th is meet irg I envision the Committee beginning to explore and develop possible recommendations to Management of where we should go from hare. Zf you have ary cuestions concerning this information or the direction that the Committee is taking I would welceme meeting with you. cc: Robert Rizzo, Assistant City Manager S ~' I Satisfaction With Current Child Care Yt7 9•cCeG ~ICIA . ~,.. _~_, ~\ .:9BxNi~ '. ,_ "„/' 'Sc- Su ..e. Tetei <_uneys=200 Soc¢: icr~onaee•:Oi "~a Ana~a 3eaaeeaea.H J 3(ethod of Child Care ae!e¢:ve Bear-nt a ~'~^*~1~ 0 f2Ci.~.~/ `0\~111u ~N Scouss xw~~~~, ~~~ j14)A ~._ecsec ga^e Care ~__. `~,;I~~i'ji .,.. l __ ___ w, otrsr ~~_/ ' TocLL s.~.-ieya~2M dasoomes~.o: 53~ Dut% Cate ~IiO ~~utiCe x-~ I' y~ '~ X0''1 " Y_- ?a.Q~i~u:} _ _ ]p . r Ywm~ A::as..._ .... .~ .... _... ie 3i iUn~'~'fa205 ioed Pae .vgat0l S'~3~- -acs Lace Due [o C:!d Care Pr~cier..s ~mr. m\111 ~ ~~,paaromm~a , ,V \a~eamNN~. •ar ~.a. cxts r~ ~mmwmwmr ~,\~, ~ ._, ,,, Tow surv<•n.zas m,., y~,,;,,,~,.:o: Dac; Dlissed Due to Sick Child: an t-a a+;r. ddtni~(dh`d 1\tWWAI~C~R1F;dWGT -,~..,, \pNwtmmma~n. ~' ,: ~-s Ua)' w ---~ i _-,c r.r.~~~_- Tow Su.-~eva~203 Low Res-ONex•'.O: "VO ,:nsxe~' 9emaoaes+:Z S'~~ Child Care Por dick Children c sin:, ~om~ ,/~M"1,~ i6~~ Alec-mee S:nv Yame / " *~1~ e\ Sav ;{ame - ;. (161 ; ... h1, \ .:1' C y ~_ ~ ~ - ~ ocSe: .,: .. von-,ori:af 5:oum~' ._i c:,:. ,:ar.. e: Survwn=aos Tocu 3eroamee.:0i "`le Ann<: neaQnvn+.M J ;r.tarest in FuIl :ime u^ac C>ra X1 µ~1``\'.\1\. 11: ~ \. p4 ';Ny~u~i~~r;nv' 1a1.. ~'"U~~F ~ 1 ~ ~ rew ~rr~m+:o: "VO A~~-' ic~vavn+SB ~~ Interest in Part 'Cirne Day Care d o~nmce . c<r. YLG :atererz , "1~,nX1~10~~', :.ur.... (z9~ ~: ' ~ .. ia'i.. ~ ~(ah1~d~ ,u ^n,~:~;Pi: A `'~' i / VO .L1 •~5: (^.i l.: my s ~-zn T.,~~ a~.:en5u••.0: ••YO ACine:' :itfoN2x~30 5'"3~ Hours of Child Care F.zquirzd Per O'zek ..~ :a .a - ao m „aG1Pd0\1\d'. CY' ~YlAfl1Hp1ApVC4~P? a ••• - m aa. u m„ a m f..... Mr1N,~wy~~ - as "Wy~'i" ~ I cr.e.. v _ ram. .,s., ... ~ J. .. tout suncva=205 tocai ineouaea.:0: ~3 $ Hours ci Chad Care F.equired Pe: 15ee1: e rf.-:a ma _s is .a,.. m ~. ., w~ef-~..v.c :c i n.me,r.f. i.ul ~ :x n.a.,,~n (famf~ + a. Gnan+. (sut ~,e ..nan r. ~..~._r ~ ; . ~ ::=~~y ....ur.. tOU1 Sorrea.2p5 Toro aescavc•:0: 53~ ~a` ~3tz S~T~ C,jOa \n {t~PC .a 4,~,. pug\6~ P~~ 6^ tY~~~tA N n~y'v e.^~ to^a~® p'N ~ '~,d ~tM~n LLc~r ~ y ptD~ . N'' etf ?~+ 5~ sy 0'• a;y=~~ jo..u ~u ~, u~° q~so ~~, qo 7 .~ :;j iH 1 a~. a N; .~ • ~:„ .~ 1~ ~..vG :.. ?'. I .x.e.,