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 About1991/07/03 - Agenda Packetcis cotnvrr~~~, e~F~vne L i \J1 i~ t\ i/ L i CITY OF IiAACHO CUCAMONGA REGULAR MEETINGS 1st and 3rd Wednesdays - 7:00 p.m. July 3, 1991 Civic Center Council Chambers 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 sat City Councilmembera Dennis L. Stout, Mayor William J. Alexander, Councilmember Charles J. Buquet, Councilmember Diane Williams, Councilmember Pameia J. Wright, Councilmember sss Jack Lam, City Manager James L. Markman, City Attorney Debra J. Adams, City Clerk City Office: 989.1851 P Jy `~ City Connell Agenda © July 3, 1991 1 All itrr aubeitted for the Citp Comcil ends gnat G in ~ .rite ag. The deadline for suheiittiaq thus itre it 5;00 p.a. on tae Wednesdap prior Lo the eating. The CiLp Clerk'• office reeaiwr ali ouch Ltrr. A. CALL so nano 1. Roll Call: Buquet _, Alexander Stout _ Williua _, and Wright _. D. ANNOONCA®iTSiPR8881PTATZONB 1. Presentation of Proclamation Mcogniaing July ar Park and Recreation Month. 2. Preeentatlon of Proclamation to the Villa Del Rey Retirearont Homo for their support of the D.A.R.B. Program end participation in "Adopt-A-Crentlperent Day.^ c. COYIeRirrsmrnre This is tae LLe and place far the general public to addrea the Citp Council. State lar prohibits tae Cilp Comcil frr atltlreuiag anp Lsa not previouslp included on the Agenda. The City Council sap receive lertiaoap and se! tae utter for a subaequea! sating. Conesntr a[e !o W linitM to five minuLaa par individual. D CONarum re Ths folloriag Conant Glemer itra are ezpectW !o be routine and non-controversial. Taay rill be acted upon by tae Comcil at one tin rithout dissuasion. Mp itr up be reroved by a Comcilueber or eeeber of the audiead for dimuwion. 1. Approval of Warrant e, Aagieter Noe. 6/12/91 and 6/19/19; 1 and Payroll ending 6/6/91 for the total amount of $2,346,179.23. 2. Appravel of Nille Aci Agreement 91-01 - Lord House, a i2 proposal to implement the uea of the Nills Act io reduce the property tax on the historic property located at 6791 Hellman Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga. piOfi City council Agenda .IUly 3, 1991 y 3, Approval of Mill• Act Agreement 91-OZ - Hippard Aanch, 27 a proposal to implement the uea of the Mil la Act to reduce the property tsx on the historic property located at 131@1 Victoria Avenue, Rancho Cucamonga. 4. Approval to release a Real Property Improvement Contract 28 and LLen Agreement for 5751 Cabroea Place, located south of Wlleon Avenue and west of Naven Avenue, submitted by Randolph and Sandv Davie. ABSOLUTION NO. 93-177 34 A RESOLUTION OF THB CITY COUNCIL OP TNB CITY OF AANCHO CVCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, 'RELEASING A REAL PROPERTY IXPROVEMSNT CONTRACT AND LIEN ACRBENBNT PRON AAHDOLPH AND SANDY DAMS 5. Approval of Agreement for Inetallat ion of Public 31 Improvement and Dedication between Felipe Reese and the City of Rancho Cucamonga Eor Sidewalk and Wheelchair Ramp improvements, located along the western and northwestern portion of the Reece parcel for the sierra Hadre Avenue-Ninth street to 310 feet south of Chaffey Street alley project. RBSOLUTION NO. 91-17@ 32 A RESOLUTION OF T[D3 CITY COUNCIL OF T[i8 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAHONGA, CALIFOANIA, ACCEPTING AN AGREEl~NT FOR INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC IMPROVHHBNT AND DEDICATION FAON FELI PA REESE AND AUTHORISING TH8 MAYOR AND CITY CLEAR T'O SIGN THE SAME 6. Approval to authorize the Mayor to execute an Owner 33 Participation Agreement (CO 91-039) with FOOthill Associates. 7. Approval to award and authorization for execution of a 34 Professional Services Agreement (CO 91-040) fox Bridge Inspection for Arrow Rcute Bridge Improvements, located at Cucamonga Creek, For the amount of $15x000.00, to be funded from Systems Development Account No. 82-4637- 5738. e. Approval to execute 2mprovsment Agreement Extension for 35 Tract 13338 Landscape, located on the south east corner of Hermoaa Avenue and Manzanita Drive, eut.aitted by Eayoun Development. 4' City Connell Agenda July 3, 1991 3 RC60LUTION NO. 91-179 3i A RS60LUTION OP TH8 CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP PANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEl~NT AGAEBHBNT EYTENS ION AND IHPROVBMBNT SBCURI TY POR TRACT 13318 LANDSCAPE 9. Approval to raleaee bonds for Tract 9400, located on the ZR north ^ide of Banysn Siraat Wtwwn Bwryl Strwt end Carnelisn Strwt. ReleBea: Faithful Performance Bond $ 28,000.00 Labor and Matarlal Bond $ 14,000.00 10. Approval to relaaee Haintananea 6uarantw Bond for Track 39 13463, located on the eouihwast Corner of Victoris Park Lane and Fairmont Way. Ae lease: Haintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) $ 48,751.00 E. CONSSIPf ORDINANCES Tha following Ordinavws haws had public hwriage at the tine of first rudin9. Second rwdivge are arpected to be routive and non-covtrovereial. They rill W avtad upon by the Comeil ai ove ties without dieeueeiov. Tba City Clack rill reed Lhe title. Any itu can ba reaoved for dletuedov. 1. CCNS IDERATION OP BNVIRONNENT AS SSS NT A. SPBCIPIC PLAN ANENDNENT 91-03 - CITY OF nary NO Cnrnwnwn_a - A request to amend the Industrial Atea Specific Plan to modify the Extensive Impact Commercial Uee and to add the Indoor Wholesale/Retail Commercial Uee and its related development Criteria within the Specific Plan area. Staff recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. OADINANCB NO. 668 (second reading) 40 AN ORDINANCE OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THS CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA, CAL IPOANIA, APPROVING INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN A14{NDMENT 91-03, ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS FOk TNS INLOOR WNOLSSALE/RETAIL COlNfEACIAL USE, MODIFYING THE DEFINITION OF EYTENSIVB IMPACT CONMEACIAL UBE, AND HARING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT TH&RBOF City Council Agonda July 3, 1991 4 2. CONSI DERATION OF APPROVING FUNDING AVAILABLE PROM SOUTH COAST AIA WALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT lSCAOMDI ORDINANCE NO. 449 (second reading) 44 AN OAD INANCB OP TH6 CITY COUNCIL OF TFIB CITY OF ]UNCHO CUCAHONGA, CALIFORNIA, 83TABLISNIMC A lbBILE SOORCE AIR POLLUTION REDUCTION PROGRAM P. ADVIRTIBm PUBLIC BEaRINUE Tho tolloMisg ilea baps Wm adPOZliaod and/or poalad u public haaringa a raquirad bF laN. Tha Chair rill opm tba uotiuq to raeoiFO public toali~oay. 1. q7 RESOL UTION roR TH6 ANNUAL LBVY OP ASSBSSISNTS WITHIN 6. ] AND B POR FISCAL YEAR 1991/92 RESOLUTION NO. 91-180 50 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COVNCIL OP THE CITY OP PANCHO CUCAHONCA, CALIFORNIA, TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS NOS. 3, 2, 3A, 30, 6, 5, 6, 7 AND 8 FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991/82 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPB AND LIGHTING ACT OF 3972 IN CONNECTION WITH LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCB DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5, 6, 7 AND 8 2. CONSI DERATION TO APPROVE ANNUAL ENGINBP.R'S REPORT AND 141 RESOL UTION FOA THE /~NMIA, LEVY OP A33835HENTS WITHIN ST3,RB T__LIGHTIN6 M.aINTENI4NGE DISTRICTS N03. 1. 2. 3, 4. 5, 6. ] AND S POA FISCAL YEAR 1991/92 pESOLUTION NO. 91-181 143 A RESOLUTION OP THS CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN STAEBT LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 AND S FOA FISCAL YEAR 1991/92 PURSUANT TO THS LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 IN CONNECTION WITH STRBET LIGHTING MAINTENANGE DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 AND 8 P Clty Connell Agenda July 3, 1991 5 3. CONSIDERATION OP ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE 2J2 PARCEL MAP 13593 - LUNA - An appeal Of Lhe Planning CammLrlan'• dacLeion to require that Parcel 2 take ocean from Northridge Driw for a roidential eubdiviaion of one acre of lnnd 1nLO tro paruL in the Vary Lor Rseldantial Dlatrict located on the north side of Northridge Drive, wet of Maven Avenue - APN 201-182- 29 related flle~ Variance 91-Od). (APPIIS.AET EEpoiE2E THIS ITEM oR COamrwen~ RESOLUTION NO. 91-382 327 A A680LOT;ON OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF TF~ CITY OF MNC110 CUCAMONOA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVINO A pEQOEST PON A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, NOlHISA 13693, TO SUBDIVIDE 3.0 ACRE INTO TWO PARCELS IN TIR VHRY I,OW RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, LOC7ITBD ON TR6 NORTH SIDE OP NORTIRID06 DRIVE, WEST OP HAVEN AyENDE - APNS 201-382-29 4. N ID TION OF THS ENVIRONMBNT ~ INITI * TWY. P AT6 ANO II. POR THE PROPOSED HAVEN AVBNU6 REMBILITATION 330 ANp NIDENING PROJECT - !TH 9TREET TO NORTH OF FOOTHILL 344 RESOLUTION NO. 91-153 A RBSOLUTION OP THS CITY COUNCIL OP TFDI CITY OP RANCHO COCAMONCA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE BI7VIRONMENTAL INITIAL STORY AND ISSUANCE OP A NEGATIVB DECLARATION POR THE PROPOSED HAVEN AVENUE REHABILITATION AND WIDENING - 4TH STREET TO NORTH OP FOOTHILL BOULEVARD O. PUBLIC HEIIRIN08 The foliating item have no legal publication or posting requlreeeota. The Chair rill open !be Heeling to rneiTe public testiHOaY. i City Council Agenda July 3, 1991 6 i 1. CONSIDBRATION OF DEVELOPlHtNT REVISN 89-18 BOOTH - M 30.5 appeal of certain conditions of approval for the davelopawnt of a building contractor's office and storage ysrd totaling approximately 8,500 aquas feat on 1.35 scree of lend in the General Industrial District (Subarea 13) o[ the Industrial Aree Specific Plan, locnted at 9037 Charlu SmitA Avenue, eat of Rochutsr, north O[ 6th Strsai - APN 229-271-61. RESOLUTION NO. 91-184 3]~ A RESOLOTIOM OP 1'~ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANG CUCAHONGA, CALIPOANSA, VPHOLDINC TH6 PLANNING COKK26SION'9 APPROVAL OP DEVELOPtDSNT AEVIEN 89-18, SVBJECT TO TH6 CONDZTION9 CONTAINISD IN PLANNING COtQ/IBSION RESOLUTION 91-49, AND DENYING THE APPEAL POR TID2 PROJECT LOCATED AT 9037 CHARLES SMITH AVENUE, IN TXE GENERAL INDVSTRIAL DISTRICT (SOBAREA 13) OF TH6 INDUSTRIAL AREA BPSCIFIC PLAN, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN SUPPORT THSR80P 2. ~jj15IDERATION OF REOUE5T POR REFUND POA PORTIONS OF 3]3 BANKS. JR. - Located on the south aide of Vlcioria Street end e80i Of 6tiwanda Avenue. (COntiauW frog June 5, 1991) N. CITY MAIUIOER'8 ETA!! REPORTS Tha folloriag itua do sot legally require say public testisoay, aitaough the Chair sap open tae seetiag for public input. NS OP S ON POR STATE 3$] LZBAAAY ORTPT APPLICATION RESOLUTION NO. 91-185 391 A RESOLUTION OF TFIS CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF PANCHO CUCAHONCA, CALIPORNIA, MAKING APPLICATION TO THE CALIPOANIA STATB LIBRARY FOA CAL IFOANIA LIBRARY CONSTRUCTION AND RENOVATION BOND ACT FUNDS AND MAKING F INDING& IN SVPPOAT TNEAEOP ' City Council Agenda July 3, 3991 7 2. CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE EXECUTYON OP IMPAOVBIRNT 39 •~ AGABEMENT. IMPROVEIRNT BECNAITIEB AND OADLPINO THE AruRY_~TION TO TArDSC.•PE MPINTENRrCe DISTRICT NO 1 A. sTAQHT LIONTINO RAINTEN1lrCE DISTRICT IfOS. 1 Lw^ ~ !OR ANBNDINO TRACT 10210. L%~~TEp ON THE NORTH aIDE OR ALMOND AVENUE, NEST OP SAPDSIAE eTAEET, 8[ISMITTED SY 3 FIRST MOTEL INVESTMENT CORPORATION. A DELANARe COAPORATIONi AND AEI.EASE 01 TIR IMPROVEMNNT AOAEElDIMT aNp 2rPR(N/p0lNT SECIIRITTRN trm enR+T~ __ _ __ ACCBPSED BY CITY COIYCIL ON NOVENNER 1Q' 1985. AND AELBABE Of TAE INPAOVEIOlNT AOREtlRI1T AND IMPAOVElRNT SECDRITIEH_LOR UMDEAORLIUIe)INO OTILISIEB ACCEPTED EY TBE MTV COUNCIL ON OCTOB_*P 18 1959 SUSIIITTED SY NO IC DEVRLOPMBNT COMPANY. A GENERAL. PARTNER O/ SKYLINE I, LTD• AssotuxzoN No. 91-les 395 A AasoLDTZON or TSS clrY cooxezt or TNa CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONCA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES POR AMENDING TMCT NO. 10210 AND RELSASZNG TBS IMPROVBMBNT AORBBlBNTS AND SBCVRITISS PRSVIOOSLY ACCEPTED RESOLUTION NO. 91-157 ~ 396 A R850LUTIOM O7 TNS CITY COUNCIL OP TFR CITY OP RANCHO COCANONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING TBE ANNBXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY 1V LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 ANO STREET LIGHTING NAII7TENANC6 DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 POR TRACT 10210 I. COUNCIL EUBINESB The follori¢q slat hAa Rua rrquuLEd b2 the Citp Council for diswedoa. The/ Ale aoi publie huriaq 1ted, Elthough the Chair up open Lhe Neetiag for public iaput. No Items Submitted. City Council Agenda July 3, 1991 8 J IDERT!-ICATIOIf 0- IROIE !'OR REST MEETTNO This is the tisa !er Cil7 Cnuacil to identify thr itae that wish t0 disease a! the next rating. Thaea ilaaa Mill not bs disemaad at this rating, o{ly idwtiliW !or the nart rating. - n~inrnNa IRDM TER PVELIC Thi• is the liaa and place for !ha yaRaral pnblin to adds{{ Lha City Coaoeil, state lav prohibit{ the City Cauneil from addre{eing en7 i{{ne no! pra~ion{ly i{elade6 Oa the Agenda. The Cit7 Comcil ry teatira Netlaony end eat the rlNr far a {ub{aquant retin9• Caranta are to G 11aleM to lice .inutae par indiddual. ~ ADJOURMIRMT NEETIND TO ADJOURN To EIECDTIVR {EBeIOM TO DIECO{e P6R{OIDIEL IUITTEAb. I, Debra J. Adams, City Clerk of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, hereby certify that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on June 28, 1991, seventy-two (72) hours prior to the meeting per Goverment Code 56993 et 10500 Civic CentOr Drive. r June 5, 1991 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES pgcular Meetln0 A regular meeting of the Raneho Cucamonga city Council was held on Nednasday, June H, 1991, in the Council Chambers of the Civic Center, located at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, Callfocnia. The meeting was called to order at 7t05 p.m. by Nayor Dennis L. Stout. Present were Councilmemberet William J. Alexnnder, Chazlee J. Buquet II, Diana WillLams, Pamela J. Wright, and Mayor Dennle L. Stout. Also present were: Jack Lam, City Manager; James MarlOnan, city Attorney; Linda D. Daniels, Deputy City Manager; Jerry B. Fulwood, Deputy Clty Manager; Rick Gomez, Community Development Director; Olen Jones, Sr. RDA Analyst; BYad Bullet, City Planner; Miki Brett, Associate Planner; Joe O'Neil, City Engineer; Mike Olivier, Sr. Civil Engineer; Dan James, Sr. Civil Engineer; Betty Hiller, Associate Engineer; Walt 5tickney, Associate Engineer; Bob 2etterbetg, Pu61ic Works Maintenance Manager; Jeff Barnes, Parke/Landscape Maintenance Superintendent; Joe Schultz, Community Services Director; Jim Hart, Administrative Services Director; Ingrid Blnir, GIS Supervisor; Duane esker, Asaietent to the City Manager; Diane O•Neal, Management Analyst TS; Susan Hickoy, Haragaaant Anaiyst I; Cnlef Dennis Hlchael and Deputy Chief Lloyd Almond, Rancho Cucarnonga Fire Protection District; Capt. Hruce 2einer and Lt. Jos Henry, Aancho Cucamonga Police Department; and Debra J. Adams, City Clerk. . • • . . r S. ANNOUNCENENTS/PRESENTATIONS B1. Preaentat ion of Proclamation Commemorating the 40th Anniversary of the Blood Bank of San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. Mayor Stout presented the Proclamation to Bill Sauter of the Blood Hank. Mr. Sauter thanked the City for its participation in the blood drives that have occurred in the poet. B2. Introduction by Captain Bruce 2einer, Rancho Cucamonga Police DepartmenC, of Lieutenant Joe Henry, A-9 Handler Danielle Frenchr and her partner "Rocky." City Council Minutes Jura 5, iS9i Page 2 Mayor Stout introduced Captain Bruce Eelner, Rancho Cucamonga Police Department, who Lntroduced Lieutenant Joe Nenry, M-9 Handler Danielle French and her pnrtner ~ "Rocky." . . • x C. COMNUNIGTIONe FNON THE PDBLIC C1. Mre. Wolff, Hickory Circle, stated her wall has been pointed with graffiti many times in the peat, and asked if she would have to pay to have Lt removes. Rick come z, Community Development Director, etnted the Public Works Division has a policy of trying to maintain the areas adjacent to public right-of-wsys within the utility corridors and right-of-ways of the railroad crossings which would be in the public view, and added this would include Mze. Wolff'e wall. c2. Mike Doveeeya, 6869 Rovoto in the Victoria Community, felt there should he batter coordination of the CCBR'e with the developer and Clty organizations and repreeenlatlvee. He epeciEically pointed out radio antennas and eetelllte dish antennae. He euggeetea the Clty Council agendize this for a future meeting to work out better coordination for nil those involved. Mayor stout stated this subject involved the Planning Commission and cable companies. He euggeeted Mr. Doveeeya work with Aick Gomez, Community Development Director, and Jerry Fu lwood, Deputy City Manager, and stated .Tames Markman, City Attorney, would need to look at the CC6A issue ae tar ae the City getting involved with this matter. C3. Tom Spencer, 11199 Delawares read a prepared statement regarding CC6R•6 for the Victoria Planned community. )A copy ie on file in the City Clerk's office.) C4. Elliott Hannah, 30300 Arrow Route, et ated he did not agree with AB 2920 ae it relates to credit cards and the requirement to show identification for the use of same. He added he would like for the City Attorney to take action on this matter. C5. Patrick Collins, fi596 Et iwanda Avenue, eiated he has read the report regarding the City establishing Lis own Police Department instead of contracting with the Sheriff's Department, and did not understand why the Ctty would want to try to fix something that ie not broken. Mayor Stout stated the City Council has not discussed this matter at a public meeting and was not ready to make a decision. He stated there would be public hearings held on this matter. C6. Phil Deatherage, 6564 Etiwenda, stated he wanted to correct a statement he had made the previous evening on the police issue. He eiated the Chamber hoe not taken an official stand on the matter and wanted to state Chet their preliminary analye ie is that the in-house police force Se not in the City Council Minutes Junes 3, 1991 Page 3 business community's interest et thls point in time. He stated thin la not an ofticial statement ne ha had said it was at the previous eveninq'• ~ meeting. Mayor Stout stated he was in receipt of a Communication from the Chamber this date stating Mr. Deatherage was not in a poeitior. to state the Chamber's position. Hr. Deatherage ndded he felt our police Force was "strapped" and thought the City was having a problem in this area. C7. Rent Crowley, Rancho Cucamonga Chamber of Commerce, stated that on March 12 the Chamber delivered to tae Public Safety Commission a lint of concerns which included an initial summary of findings, nothing more. Ne ndded no official position hoe been made, but that they just wanted to participate at the Commission level. Ha stated he tend a copy for the recortl. • f • • • R D. CONSENT nar.~wnav Jack Lam, City Manager, etatetl that item N3 would be removed from the agenda and would coma back on a future agenda. Jack Lam, City Manager, added that on item D5, the correct Resolution No. was 91- 157 instead of 91-134. •••••• D1. Approval of Minute e: April 11, 1991 May 1, 1991 Hay 15, 1991 (Stout absent) D2. Approval of Warrant e, Register Noe. 5/8/91, 5/15/91 and 5/22/91, and Payroll ending 5/9/91, for the total amount of $1,924,595.34. 03. Alcoholic Beverage Application for On Sale Bear & Wine Eating Place for La Salsa, GC Restaurants, Incorporated and Villareal Reetaurani Group, Incorporatetl, 10709 Town Canter Drive, Suite 110. D4. Approval of Names far the Spotte Complex Interior Streets as reco~mnended by the Park and Recreation Commission. n5. Approval of Destruction of city Records and Documents which are no longer required ae provided under Government Code Section 34090. RESOLUTION N0. 91-157 A RESOLUTION OF THB CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING TH6 DBSTRVCTION OF CITY RECORDS ANO DOCUMENTS WHICH AA6 NO LONGER AEgUIRED AS PROVI06D UNOEA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 34090 city Council Minutes June 5; 1491 Page 6 De. Approval to expend $1,500.00 to acquire anti-graffiti signs from Be-Tio to be funded from asset eaLaure account No. 70-276-511. S1T81 Rm10VED FOA DIBCU88IOB 6Y COUMCILI®OIBR NILLIAMB. D7. Approval of annual loan transaction between the City of Aancho Cucamonga and the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency. DS. Approval to find the Barmakian Company, developer for Tract 13886 and Parcel Hap 11394 in default of their Improvement Agreement dated February 8, 1990 and extended to Hay 8, 19917 and authorize legal staff to cause the developer's e...ef., no.min o i.. m..annw rnm...nv. sasn wn noon Nn.'w On i9 i0-E wnd 983116-5, to correct all exiaiinq improvement daEicienciee end complete sll remaining improvements pursuant to the Agreement, approved plane and apecificatione. NBSOLUTION NO. 91-156 A RESOLUTION OF TNB CITY COUNCIL OP T11E CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, FINDING TIOI BARBARIAN COMPANY IN DEFAULT OF TF18IA IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT FOR TRACT 13886 AND PARCEL MAP 11396, AND AUTHORI ZINC LEGAL STAFF TO CAU38 THB DEVELOPER'S SURETY COMPANY TO CORRECT EYISTING IMPROV%MENTS AND COMPLETE ABMAINING IMPROVEMENTS PURSUANT TU THE AGRBEI~NT D9. Approval of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Aancho Cucamonga officially protesting San Bernardino County'e illegal offset of County Booking Fee Charges against City Property Tax and other revenuee. ABSOLUTION NO. 91-135 A RESOLUTION OF TH8 CITY COUNCIL OF THfi CITY OP RANCHO WCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, OFFICIALLY PROTESTING SAN SHRNARDINO COUNTY'S ILLEGAL OFFSRT OP COUNTY BOORINO FHH CHARGHS AGAINST CITY PROPERTY TAY AND OTHER REVHNUES D 10. Approval of Payment of City Loan (CO 88-005) In Full. D11. Approval of a Joint Powers Employee Benefit Authority (PAPS) (CO 91-031) as meeting Federal Government requirement that employees not covered by a retirement system 6e covered by Social Security effective July 1, 1991. D32. Approval to amend Contract No. 90-169 with PRA Services, Inc., Aeeeeement District Management for an additional amount of $7,000.00 from Special Punde Account No. 33-4131-6023. D13. Approval to Vacate a Portion of Vincent Avenue including the adjacent 10- foot wide sidewalk easement, located north of Jersey Boulevard, east of Rod Oak Street. City Counoil Minutes Jere 5, 1491 Page 5 RESOLUTION NO. 91-136 A RESOLUTION OF TN8 CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, BUNNARILY ORDERING THE VAGTION OP A PORTION OP VINCENT AVENUB INCLUD INO THE ADJACENT 10-FOOT WIDE SIOEWALR BASPJBNT 014. Approval to accept Reel Property Improvement Contract and Lien Agreement from Joe and Cnrla Bentivegna for a single family residence, located at 7805 Sierra Vista. ABSOLUTION NO. 91-137 A ABSOLUTION OP THB CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALI PoANIA, ACCEPTING A RBAL PROPERTY IMPROVBMBNT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGABS!lENT PROM JOE AND CARLA BENTIVEGNA ANO AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLEAR TO SIGN TED; SANE D15. Approval to reject all bide for the Sierra Madre Avenue Street improvement, located from Arrow Route to Ninth Street. D16. Approval to award and authorisation for execution of Contract for Arrow Route Bridge Improvement Project (CO 91-032), located at Cucamongn Creek for the amount of 5370,410.26 ($336,736.60 plus 101 contingency), to be funded Erom Systems Developaent Fund, Account No. 22-4637-8738 and FAU Fund Account No. 24- 4637-8775. D17. Approval and execution of Pzogram Supplement No. 5 (CO 91-033) to Local Agency -State Ma eter Agreement No. STLPP-5420 for the State-LOCal Transportation Partnership Program between the Cit}' of Rancho Cucamonga and the State of California for the Construction of the Milliken Avenue Underpass and Street Improvements between 6th Street and Jersey Boulevard. The Supplement sate the State reimbursable portion of the project at $996,096.00 and the City's portion at $3, 645,63d.00. Reimbursable funding from the supplement agreement shall be deposited to the SB-140/Fund 35 Account. RESOLUTION NO. 91-138 A RESOLUTION OF THS CITY COUNCIL OF THB CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND SIGNING OP PROGRAM SUPPLEI~NT NO. 5 TO LUCAL AGENCY - STATE NASTER AGREEMENT NO. STLPP-5420 POR THB STATE-LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM POR TH8 CONSTRUCTION OF THE NILLIAEN AVENUE UNDERPASS AND STREET IHPROVENENTS BETWEEN 6TH STREET ANO JERSEY BOVLEVAAD D16. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extension for Tract 12870, locatod on the north side of Highland Avenue between Etiwanda Avenue and Eaet Avenue, submitted by Daly Home e. City Council Minutia J UIIH J, 1991 Page 6 RESOLUTION NO. 91^139 A RHSOLUTION OP THB CITY COUNCIL OP THH CITY OP RANCHO CUCRNONGA, CALIPORNIA, APPROVIIG IMPROVHMBNT ACAHSMENT HXTBNSION ANO INPROVEMSNT SHCUAITY POA TRACT 12870 D19. approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extension for Tract 12895, located on the west aide of Baker Avenue between Foothill Boulevard and Arrow Route, submitted by Rancho Citiland Development. owenurmrnw w,. _r___ A RESOLUTION O! THH CITY COUNCIL OP TRS CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA, CALIFORNIA, AYPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGRBEIaNT SXTHNSION AND SNPROVEMHNT SECURITY FOR TRACT 12895 D20. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Hxteneion for Tract 13281, located ont ha northwest Cornet of Baea Line Road antl Rochester Avenue, submitted by Covington Homes. RESOLUTION NO. 91-141 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THS CITY OF RANCHO CVCAHONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SBCURITY POA TRACT 13281 021. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement 6xtene ion for Tract 13336, located on the northeast corner of Archibald Avenue and Carrari Street, submitted by Friedman Homes. RESOLUTION NO. 91-162 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP TXE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND INPAOVEMENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 13336 D22. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Sxtennion for Tract 13461, lOCated on the northeast corner of Victoria Patk Lane and Renyon Way, submitted by Grupe Development. AESOLVTION NO. 91-143 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IlIPROVSMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SHCURITY FOR TRACT 33441 D23. Approval to execute Improvement Agreement Extension for Tract 13&73, located on the northwest corner of Victoria Park Lane end Atwood Street, submitted by Atwood Victoria Joint Venture. city council Hinui~a .....0 5, iS93 page 7 RESOLUTION NO. 91-146 A RRSOLUTION OF TFIlS CITY COUNCIL 08 TN8 CITY Op RANCHO , CUCAMONGA, CALIroRNYA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGAEBMENT 6XTBNSION AND IMPAOVBMSNT SBCURITY POA TRACT 13873 024. Approval to execute Improvement P.greement 6xteneion for Parcel Map 9498 4th street Medians, boated on 6th street east of Haven Avenue, submitted by Reiter Rinker Catewey/Haven Gateway Partners. A RESOLOTION OF THH CITY COUNCIL OP TNA CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA, CALI roANIA, APPROVING INPROVENBNT AGREEMENT BXTENSION AND IMPROVEPDINT SECURITY roA PARCEL MAP 969& 4TH STRBET MEDIANS 025. Approval to execute Improvement Agreameni Extension for Parcel Map 11410, located on the south aide Acrow Rouie between Haven Avenue snd Utica Avenue, submitted by Utica-Haven Associates. ABSOLUTION NO. 91-146 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONCA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITY FOR PARCEL MAP 11410 026. Approval to accept Improvements, Aeleaee of Honda and Notice of Completion for Parc¢1 Map 9498 Haven Avenue Nediane, located on Haven Avenue at 4th Street. Aeleaee: Faithful Pertormanca Bond {Street) $ 65,500,00 AEEOLUTION NO. 91-147 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTING THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FOR PARCEL HAP 9498 HAVEN AVENUE MEDIANS AND AUTHORIZING THE FILING OP A NOTICE OF COMPLETION FDR THE WORK 027. Approval to Release Maintenance Guarantee Bond for Tracts 9399 and 9400 located on the north aide of Banyan Street, between 8ery1 Street and Hellman Avenue. Release Tract 9399: Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) $ 4,900.00 Release Tract 9400: Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) $ 2,500.00 City Council Minutes June 5, 1991 Pages 8 D28. Approvnl to Reloaae Naintananca Guarantee Bond for Tract 12662, 12935-dd Landscape, located on the southeast corner of Milliken Avenue and Banyan Street. Release: Maintenance Guaranies Bond (Street) $ 82x200.00 ~ D29. Approval to Release Maintenance Guarantee Bond for Tract 12936, located on the west aide of Hillview Loop at Rettla Peak Place and Mt. Palomar Street. Release: Maintenance Guarantee Bond (street) $ 10,800.00 D30. Approval to Aeleaae Naintananca Guarantee Bond for Tract 12938, located on ri,v ........:...c c_ ____. ~ wew r,ru:o_ between Mineral Yenk Court and Mammoth Peak court. Release: Maintenance Guarantee Rond (Street) $ 13,960.00 D31. Approval to Aeleeee Maintenance Guarantee Bond for Tract 12939, located on the east aide of Nillview Loop at Tioga Poak court, Pikes Peak Court and Rattle Peak Places, Aeleaae: Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) $ 8,506.00 ^32. Approval to Aeleaae Maintenance Guarantee Bond for Tract 12963, located on the giant aide of Hillview Loop at Pikes Peak Court and Tioga Peak Court. Aeleaae: Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) $ 10,900.00 033. Approval to Releases Maintenance Guarantee Bond for Tract 135fi0, located ort the west aide of Netherlands View Loop at Mt. Sterling court and Ht. Lassen court. P.e lease: Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) $ 6,500.00 D34. Approval to Aeleaae Haintenartce Guarantee Bond for Tract 13662, located on the east aide of Beryl Stree! between 19th Street and Hamilton Avenue. Release: Maintenance Guarantee Bond (Street) $ 21,000,00 D35. Approval to Set a Public Hearing Oate of July 3, 1991, for an Environmental Assessment Review for the proposed Haven Rehabilitation Project, 4th Street to north of Foothill Boulevard. RESOLUTION NO. 91-148 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP TH8 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFOAN IA, APPROVING AND SETTING A PUBLIC NEARING DATE OP WEDNESDAY, JULY 3, 1991, FOA THE PROPOSED HAVEN AVBNUB AEEIABILITATION PR0.IECT, 6TH STREET TO NORTH OP FOOTHILL BOULBVAAD ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT REVIEW City Council NLnutae June 5, 3991 page 9 D36. Approval Preliminary Engineer's Reports and Setting a Public Hesrinq for July 3, 1991, to levy the annual assessments end approve the Preliminary Engineer's Reports for Lsndaeape Naintananca Diatrict Noa. 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5, 6, 7 and B. ~ AESOLOTION N0. 91-149 A RESOLUTION OF TFffi CITY COUNCIL OP THS CITY OF AANCEI0 CVCAMONGAr CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLBCT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 6, 5, 6, 7 AND B POR THE FISCAL YEAR 1991/92 PURSUANT TO Tk7B LANUN1;aYLMS :.'.."., LI ;'« I:'^ "^"" nlr 1977. AND OFBRRING A TIIB AND PLACE OF NEARING 0&lECTI0N3 TidRBT0 RESOLUTION NO. 91-150 A RESOLUTION OP THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF AANCNO CVCAHONGA, CALIFORNIA, OP pABLIMINARY APPROVAL OP CITY ENGINEBA'S ANNUAL REPORTS POR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1, 2, 3A, 38, 4, 5, 6, 7 AND 8 037. Approval of Preliminary Engineer's Aeporte end Setting a Public Henring for July 3, 1991, to lsvy the annual aeseeemente and approve the Preliminary Engineer's Aeporte for Street Lighting Maintenance Diatrict Noe. 1, 2, 3, 6, 5, 6, 7 and e. RESOLUTION NO. 91-151 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OP THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LHVY ANU COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN STREET LIGHTING NAINTBNANCE DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 A17D 8 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1991/92 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OP 1972, AND OFFERING A TIRE AND PLACE FOR HEA[tING OBJECTIONS TNEAETO RESOLUTION NO. 91-152 A RESOLUTION OF THS CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP RANCHO CVCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, oP PRELIHINAAY APPROVAL OP CITY ENGI NEHA•S ANNUAL REPORTS POA STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCB DI STAICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, d, 5, 6, 7 AND 8 MOTION: Roved by Alexander, seconded by Williams to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception o£ Item D6 and with the corrected Resolution number ae stated above. Motion carried unanimously, 5-0. ...~"" DISCUSSION OF ITEM D6. Approval to expand $1,500.00 to acquire anti-graffiti signs Eros Ne-Tip to Da funded ima asset aei:ure aceounL No. 70-276-511. City Connell Minutes Ju.^.e c '941 Page 30 Councilmember Nilliame questioned where the eigne would be placed and questioned if 100 eigne would bo enough. ~ Mayor Stout suggsated possibly more eigne could be added if necessary. Councilmember euquat suggested the •Lgns be coated with anti-graffiti materiel eo that they cannot be marked on. MOTION: Novad by WLl liame, seconded by Suquet to approve Consent Calendar Item No. D6. Motion carried unanimously, H-0. • a . . ~ Q. CONSENT ORDIIUNC68 S1. FNVIAONMENTAL ASSBSSMENT A_~ INDUSTRI PE IPI P N NDMSNT 91 02 CITY OP RANCNO CUCAMONGA - To define end establish development CYLteY is for recycling uses within the Induetriel Area 6pecifie Plan. Debra J. Adamer City Clerk, read the title of Ordinance No. 447. ORDINANCE NO. 467 (second reading) AN ORDINANCE OF THS CITY COUNCIL OP TH& CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVE NC INDUSTRIAL SPECIPIC PLAN AMENDMENT 91-02, ESTABLISHING REGULATIONS POR RECYCLING COLLECTION ANO PROCESSING, AND HARING PIND INGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF MOTION: Moved by Wright, seconded by Suquet to waive full reading and approve Ordinance Na. 447. Motion cerr!od unnrtirtrously, 5-0. x e s. ADVERTI66D PVBLIC EEARINGc F1. CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE ANNUAL ENG IN6 R'S PPORT AND RSSO TION FOR THB ANNUAL LEVY OF ASSESSMENTS WITHIN TH PA_R AND CREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT Ef 5-PD1 Statf report presented by Joe D•Neil, City Engineer. Councilmember Williams aeketl how many unite have been added to this Assessment District since ire inception. Jerry Pulwood, Deputy City Managsr, stated approximately 3,000 EOr a total of 27,000 parcels of land, which includes vacant land and dwelling unite. Councilmember Wright stated eha found a discrepancy from when this was originally approved and what was in the staff report where it states on page 100A, second to the last paragraph, last sentence, ^Projectione for future yoare indicate City Council Nlnutea emu.^.e 5, 1991 Page 11 these maintenance costa will not decrease but will increase at an estimated annual rate of 99.• She stated the original brochure, from when thla was approve , nd Gated just the opposite by stating it was anticipated that coats will decrease. She asked what has changed, besides Sncraaeed coats in water and electricity, to call for en increase in the Assessment District. Jerry Fulwood, Deputy Clty Mannger, stated when this District use formed there was a lot of vacant land, and it was felt that ae the properties developed, they would eubdivlde and hopefully there would be more single family unlto to oCfeei the cost. Me stated this happened to same degree, but not as was anticipated back in 1985. He stated when this District wee ftraT. fo.mon. •~.„ n.h~ ....... ,_... ...... approximately $900,000.00. He ataied at that time the City had vary iLttle money eo staff did a thorough analysis and found additional dollars. Over the years thle hoe subdivided and revenues have 1»qun to generate, but it has not gone over the inflation rate. Hs stated that was why in 1956 the naeessment rate was reduced to 533.50, and then the following year it was raised. Ma stated then the parka came on line, and the opportunity to raise the rates. He stated in 1987 he raised the point that aeeeeemente might need to be raised, because there were challenges with this Assessment District. Councilmember Wright stated that the etafE report referred that in the future of poseiGly including some capital costa, and stated in referring to the original brochure of 1985 it mentioned maintenance being a part of this, but that the total coat could not be increased. She naked Mr. Markman if the capital improvements in the future could necessitate having to reestablish the bonds. James Markman, City Attorney, stated he did not think eo, but stated the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 allows a district to include other capitalized projects if the Council ease fit after a public hearing, that they have to be tleecribed in an engineering report it they are improvements, not maintenance. He added they are allowed to aeeese, in addition, to cover this. He stated the City is authorized to aeeese for all the maintenance and for additional improvements if they sae fit. Ceuncilmember Williams asked if an action is being made that Se changing the policy, because she felt it would never qo higher than $35.00. James Narkman, City Attorney, stated it was legal to change this if the Council wanted to. Mayor Stout opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing the City Council were: Joe Jutt, 6858 Val inda, stated he felt when the 1972 Act was enacted, the public was against it. He stated he did not think the 548.00 amount was that large of an increase, but wondered how much higher it would go. He asked if there would he further increases after 1991/92. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer, stated the maintenance coats would continue to go up approximately 9a per year. City council Ninutas 3uaa 5, 1991 Page 12 Sonny Cinzero stated todsy was [he first time he had aeon anything in the paper about tM awessmsnt increaw, and telt there should be avers notice to the public. He atsted the increase wee calculated at more than 91. a Councilmember Buquet stated that unfortunately the City dose not have s lot of control over the stories that go in the paper which would inform the residents about such things ae the aeaeaemeni increase. Hr. Cinzaro Eelt somehow the word should qet out to the reeidenta. Be stated he ie not egeinsi the increased aeaeeeraant, but the way it was __: _.~^^a ~^ the nublic through the City Council's deeieion. Councilmember Buquei stated if the aewssment was not increased for tM parka, the level of service would qo down and tM parks' appearance would not W what the reeidenta vould want !t to be. Hr. CLnzero reiterated he did not feel there was enough notification to the reeidenta about thin public hearing. Ed Hedney stated he did not have a problem when this aeeeeement district was formed, but now did not agrw with the increase. Ha felt the CLty should cut back In other areas instead of having the increaea. Bill Alexandor, asked for a copy of the 8ngtneer'e Beporte from 1985 through 1991. Staff stated the information would be provided to him. Bill angles, 6375 Sapphire, stated ho tlid not approve of paying for the increased assessment just Eor the recreational user groups to benefit. He felt the sports groups were tearing up the fields which required repairs by the City. Ha felt a fee should be chargetl to the veer groups to help maintain the fields that they uee. He asked that the Council look at a:l income sources before raising the tax on SS-Ph. Patrick Collins, 6596 Etiwanda stated he did net want the City to change its parka program. He felt the parka were very important fot the children to play in. He also added he ditl not think fees should ba charged to the user groups. He concluded by saying he did not have a problem in raising the tax if it was justified. ,Tim Henke, stated he did not think the increase was too much according to the Consumer Price Index. .Tim Frost, city Treasurer, felt there should not be any hidden agendas by the City Council regarding this matter. There being no further response, the public hearing was cloeed. city Connell Mlnutee June 5, 1991 Page 13 Councilmembar Wright stated she felt this matter should have been publicized more in the newspaper eo Chat the residents would have been more aware of what was, happening. She stated that the people should be able to vote on this aeeeeement increase along with the ones coming up in July. She felt the City Council nestled to look to sea Lf the reeidente could afford the increased aeeeeement. Councilmember Williams pointed out that when this Assessment District was estaDllehed Ln 1985, it wee the underetandLnq that there would not need to be an increase Ln the aeeeeement. She felt the reeidente should be able to give input for this Assessment District taxing policy. Councilmember Alexander stated as elected officials, the Council should be making these decisions, and did not feel every time a controversial matter came up that it ehculd be put to a vote of the people. Me felt the Clty council needed to make a decision and ^bita-the bu11eL.' Councilmember Buquet stated he did not like how this Aeaeeament District was originally established, but felt the City Council needed to go ahead and make the decision. Mayor stout stated there was nothing anyone can do abut the deciaian that was made in 1995, and that it tlid not matter who was on the Clty Council at that time. Na stated he agreed with Couneilmember Alexander ne far ea the City Council making the decision now ae elected officials of the people. Councilmember Wi ll lame stated she had no problem with the increase, but felt the policy a' a whale was what bothered her. Mayor Stout stated he felt that communities such as Victoria, or the larger Assessment Districts, should possibly identify what level of service they wanted Ear their landscaping, but that the City should determine the coat. Me euggaetetl that a report pe sent to the reeidente identifying what the statue was of their AeseaemenC District, list the options, and ask them what they would like the City to do, but he did not feel that process should be done on the eroaller ones hecauee of the coat factor involved to do this. Count ilmember Wcight stated a mail-in ballot like what was dons with the CFD'e and the mobile home parka was what she was talking about. MOTION: Moved by Wright to put the aeeeeement increase for 65-FD to a vote of the people via City mail ae was done with the mobile home park ballots. Motion failed due to lack of second. Councilmember Duquet felt there needed to be a policy created ae it relates to aeeeeement increaeee. Ne did not think it should go to a vote of the people every time a hard decision needs to be made 6y the City Council. Ma felt there mould be something in The Drapevine, prior to the tax bill coming out, about the proposed increase and any future inexeaeee that might occur in the future. city Council Mlnuisa June 5, 3993 Page 16 RESOLUTION NO. 91-153 A RBSOLUTION OF THB CITY COUNCIL OP TH6 CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSBSSNENT6 WITHIN THE PARR AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 85-PD (HEAITAOB ANO RED HILL COMMUNITY PARES) MOTION: Moved by stout, seconded by Alexander to approve Resolution No. 91-153 antl to set the assessment at 552.00. Mot Lon carried 4-3 (Wright no). CouncilmeadHar Wright etetad she was votinc no because whw fal• :• ewnn:w wa _. vote of the people, but not that she was necweearily against the increase. ~ • ~ Mayor Stout called a recess at 9:15 p.m. The meeting was called back to order at 9:36 p.m. with all Councilmembara present. • x C1. CONSIDERATION OF wvOUEST FOR F ND POR PDATioNS OF DAAINAG% PEBS FOA 13181 VICTORIA STREET - MR. JAwvS % sRS. R. - Located on the south aide of Victoria Street and east of Et iwanda Avenue. 5t aff report presented by Dan James, Sr. Civil Engineer. Mayor Stout opened the meeting for public hearing. Addressing the City Council wee: Sim Banks, 13181 Victoria Street, stated he felt hie oircumetancee were different because other projects that were pending had other things they needed to accomplish before they received their permit, but stated he did not have anything to accomplish. He stated he had met every requirement placed on him by rho Clty, and asked that the City deem hie application ae complete and accepted which would entitle him to the refund. There being no further input, the public hearing was closed. Councilmember Wright asked if there had been other appeals regarding this eeme matter. Staff responded stating they were not aware of any. James Markman, Ctty Attorney, stated that Mr. Banks had met the City's raga iremente before this policy was established. He pointed out to the Council that other individuals might possibly apply fora refund of the fees ai a icier date and that the decision made at this meeting might be setting a precedent for the future. City Council Ninutss Juno 5, 4491 Pages 15 Councilmember Baguet stated because of the elrcumetencee of this project, and because he was not concerned about the precedent that might be set, he felt a ~ policy regarding n tlmeframa should be created ee to when the fee should go into effect. Counc ilniember Alexander staled he would like to know more of the impacts of this before he makes a decision. Mayor Stout asked Mr. Markman how he would state the policy as Lt currently exists. J e riar kmnn, uuy attorney, ateted the present policy ee expressed in the ordinance la that when samsons has a permit issued that the then current drainage fees have to bs paid Ln order to hnvo the permit issued. He added it does not matter how big ar small the project is or the amount of time n project was in design review. Mayor Stout stated he does not understa:ad this well enough to make a decision, as was stated by Councilmember Alexander. Councilmember Buquet £elt there needed tc be criteria eatabl!shed relating to the size of the project also. Jsck Lam, City ManagOr, suggested that staff develop something io define the situation as it relates to Mr. earke and io also check into the possibility ae to the affects of what might happen in the futures with matters of this nature. Mayor Stout slated he would like to Bee a policy Bet and for it to be followed for everyone. He suggested staff wort. up several policy options and the precedent implications of each one of them for the Council to look at eo they can select what they want ae a policy. He stated then once a policy was selected, 91r. Ba:.ka' aibuation could be applied to tae policy. Councilmember Buquet felt the size of Mr. Banks' project was something that should be considered also. NOTION: Moved by Wright, seconded by Alexander to continue to the July 3, 1991 meeting with the direction ae etnted above. Motion carried unenimouely 5-O. • Y R • } e. CITY MANAGER'S STAFP RRPORTS ITEM REMOVED PROM AGENDA City Councll Mlnutea June B, 1991 Fags io M2. 540NSIDHAATION OP COUNTY IVER - Preliminary Plan of Development, Naetar Tentative Tract e, Tentative Tract Nape, and Pinel Plan of Development for 1,239 single-family unite and commerclnl, school, park, and open apace on 1,111 acres in the Aancho Cucamonga Sphere areal reaueat for w ui cne urry•a raquerta to the County Planning Commfaeion and Board of Supervieora. Staff report presented by Miki Brett, Associate Planner. Mayor Stout opened the meeting for public comment. Addraeaing the City Councll wee: Jaa DSIO[io presented information to the Council pertaining to the Unlvereity Crest project. He felt things could be worked out eo that this was a win-win situation fox ell parties involved. Mayor Stout asked Aick Gomez, Community Development Dlrector, if he felt the loiter Mr. D1IOric pravlously referred to, which was about a meeting they had attended with Bob Nickelson, was what was diecuaeed at that meeting. Rick Gomez, Community Development Dlrector, stated he felt the letter was distorted in many ways and that some of the topics mentioned in the letter ware not even diecuaeed at the meeting. Joe DiIOrio stated he would withdraw the letter because he was not aware it had incorrect information. Mayor Stout stated that Counctlmamber Baguet was also to have attended the meeting with Mr. Mickel eon, which Hr. Nickelson had requested, but could not due to an emergency. He also pointed out that there had bean a meeting with him, the full consortium, City staff antl Jon Mike le. Mayor Stout asked Mr. Lam if the City has had diecuaeione with the County ae far ae the property tax exchange rate being offered. Jack Lam, City Manager, stated many cities in this County have historically battled the County over the share of property tax that actually gate transferred to the cities. He stated what happens ie that the County allows annexation, but gives very little property tax back. He stated Aaneho Cucamonga gets 4.5 cents back from the County for each dollar. He stated the County has arbitrarily taken the position to cut this amount in half, which he has received information from the CAO~e office about. He stated one cannot aeewoe when you look at the financial resources needed for an area with pollee protection outside the City, and once it ie inside the City, everyone also has to agree to tranefet the adequate amount of money to support those services. Cily Council Minutes June 1391 Page 17 Joe DiIOrio stated ha agreed with this statement. Jack Lam, Clty Manager, stated that the park in the Caryn community was voluntarily provided because the County did not have any requirements for parka and was intended for the purpose that Mr. DiICrio had previously indicated. He stated after. the agreements hnd been signed, the Etiwanda School District needed more land for the school than what wac available, and the school letters were held up, and consequently a chance of litigation or the project might be held up inaef inttely. He added at that point the etty asked for an equivalency as a donation toward a future park, and in return for that, the school situation was resolved, Lhe school letters were released end then construction began. Me eddsd e~ -- t•`• ••~~ ••~~ ~~~•. , i,e was not sure now tnet would have t4xned out, but poeeibly,in litigation ww There heing nC further input, the public comment section waa Closed. Councilmember Buquet asked if the fees established in the Mello-Roos cover the long term potential for annexation in terms of fire protection. ChieF Michael, Fire District, stated ae far ae the Mello-Roos Coamunity Facilities District 88-1, which is the north Etiwanda area, and also CPD 85-1, the Ease currently being charged were designed to meet the capital ae well as operations and maintenance needs for a fire station in that region. He stated there were some areas that were not covered in the CPD'e, i.e., maintenance of green belt areas, and setbacks. Councilmembar Wright asked if after hearing Mr. DiIOrio's conuoente if it changed any of staff's recommendations. Brad Buller, City Planner, and Jerry FL lwoodr Deputy City Manager, stated no. Jerry hlwood, Deput}• City Manaqer, stated 'there were comments made in terms of the fiscal impact reperte that were not similar with major dieagreemente in terms of concept a, and the impact on the City ir. terms of police and fire, and also there were new drainage standards that the City would be impacted by which were not accurately r¢f lected in those reports. He stated the City has Communicated these concerns with the County and has requested that they work with the City on providing a new fiscal impact report eo that it would reflect the impact their decision would have upon the City if those properties were annexed into the City at a future date. He stated this same concept was applied to the financing of infrastructure because the City Council has conservative and strict standards on financing; therefore, any financing that occurred within the County would also fall within the basic guidelines of Rancho Cucamonga. He stated the City does have concerns with police service and the tax transfer rates. Ha added one reason the police CFD was formed was to help compensate because sufficient funding could not be obtained from the County if those properties were annexed into the City. He stated the Clty was being very conservative and prudent with their dollars in doing a fiscal impact report. He stated staff was looking to purchase a program to do their own fiscal impact reports in-house which could be presented to Council on an ongoing basis, thereby reducing the coat of contracting for the service. City Council Ninutas June 5, 1991 Fags i6 Ccunclla:embsr Alexander caked it the City was bending at ell to help nettle any difterencea on the requirements for this project. Jerry Pulwood, Deputy Clty Nannger, etatad the Clty hsa bean willing to discuaa key issues to nee if they could find a comfortebla position ao it cou18 G presented to the City Couneil. He stated that from the financial or fiscal impacts, in many cases staff has expressed concerns For developing n comparative fiscal impact report that would reflect the diffarencea of University Create version of the plan, eo it could be looked at aide-by-side to analyze it. He felt it would be reasonable to do this with the County, but it wan shot down by the developer and the County because they felt it would hold up the project and um~. a nee uv~ unvnnnary. Councilmembes Alexander ateted if thin wan developed in iha County it would still have an impact on the city, end would like to see everyone work together. Mayor Stout etatad he did not think the City Council wan ready to make a decision on this project until both the City end the County have completed their 6peeific Plana. He etatad what he felt etatf was asking the Council to do was ask the County not to approve the project et this point. Brad Buller, City Planner, etatad what frustrates the City wne that the tract was going forward with the County and that the City was trying to respond to an action that was being pushed tarward, and that ell the City was asking for was the time to talk. Ne stated the City staff waa being criticized for not representing the policy makers of the community. He stated staff was not being allowed the opportunity to see whet wne being proposed so that it could be presented to the City Council. He stated staff Was aupportinq the Resolution being presented to the Council at this meeting. Councilmember Buquet stated after looking at both the City's and Nr. DSIOrio'e Resolutions, ha did act think there was that muvh difference. He etatad ne has an uncomfortable feeling wtth all that ie going on with this project. Council m:.^her Wright stated the City Council has previously directed staff to work nn the annexation, and now feole there are undermining tactics going on. She felt staff should go forward with this plan. Mayor Stout stated he thinks the Clty Council should follow staff's recommendation which was what the Council originally directed staff to do. RESOLUTION NO. 91-155 A AE50LUT ION OP THfi CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, AEQVESTING THE SUPPORT OP THE SAN BEANARDINO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPEAVISOA9 AELATIVS TO THE CITY ACTIONS TO ANNfi% THfi BTIWANDA NORTH SPHERE AREA MOTION: Roved by Stout, seconded by Wright to approve Resolution No. 91-155. Motion carried d-1 (Alexander no). City Council Minute June 3, iSSI Pegs 19 Councilmembar Alexander stated that was not a slam On staff, only on an opinion Yhat wns azpreeeed ear3ler. ~ • f f R f Ii xo Items s^bmictea. f f f k• R J1. councilmamber Wright caked for a report on the method used to remove the dead eucalyptus wood because of the borer beetle nttaek up on Carnelian, and asked if the accepted guidelines were used for removal of borer beetle infested wood. f . a R. Co1011MIGT ON8 PROM TBB PUBLIC al. Joe Dilorio addressed the council again on hie philosophy on the information he presented on the 6tlwanda North matter. He informed the Council of the schedule for the County meetings that have taken place and that are set for the future. K2. Richard Hartz, 8745 Luraline, stated he was present at the previous City council meat ing and was directed to talk to Captain zelner snd has not received any results from the Sheriff's Department. He stated he would like to write a letter to the City Council about these matters for the City council to Y.eep o.^. file, and would let the matter drop unless the Council felt otherwise. councilmember Buquet stated he would like to see a response on the letter once it ie written. K3. Councilmember Wright stated she would like to apologize to Beth Gaston of the Inland Vallev Daily Bullet~,7, that she was not criticizing her personally, only the Editor of the newspaper for not giving more publicity on the Assessment District issue. She asked Beth to respond to this matter. Beth Gaston explained that she did not receive all the information in hex agenda packet in time to get an article Ln the paper any earlier. She continued to explain the chain of events of why this dial net get in iAe paper until Tuesday. She stated she was willing to pui Bancho Cucamonga articles in the paper, but that eteff or Council needs to let her know what they wculd like in there. • • a • city Council Nlnutea ,.ones 931 Pages 20 NOTION: Moved by Alexander, seconded by Milliame to adjourn to executive saoalon to discuses pending litigation with American Snauranca and personnel matters. 6xecut Lve seeelon to adjourn to •3une 13, 1991, 7:00 p,m. in the Trl-COmmunitiea Conference Room for a budget workshop. Motion carried unaniaouely, 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 11:38 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debra J. Adams, CNC City Clerk Approved: S iNw 1 yiw ¢~ C;O SV w iOy pia 6 rJ u •[ ~<_ •Y •O ~O •w •> Op0 N ±•00 NOA OOi'pON00000N•w0000NN•OOOnIN FPiNNNOhO•NO••wN000PVNONNNP •N+w •NrOw w11<wm~>NwNN^WNwNM•wNNaFNVVO •O N m w V NVNON V O • wN N wOw w w a N n w n n tP^PrPT •YP• N OwMNINVwPewNN•NOhPPOwNNVNVhOPOwNN•N•h_N_POJNN•NiF ^PS HM=~~~iiiii<i<ihhhhhFhFFFir{Yf Yf FPPPPPPN WPF~S.SOOM wwww Yww wwwwNMwNwwwMwwgwwwwwwwwwwnlwwww O•NNNYii VOiM Vi1 Vi1 Yi1 gIINjNNNMNMyij~yijNNNNNNNNNNNNMMNNNMMYi111i1N NNNNNI1VI Nli11 W W•1 IPI 1 iNN •• •• • • h S \ J N N i p y y Vi O LN • O NN • V Y •CO•w1r N •i Y V VF y O_ Y • O O ••V•PNN M VN JI i •J ~ : V \\ Y Y YN < Y M \ ) N\\ ~W WM r N it J N f W Y O r~riiv v rl:v Wi ~ r rro u p s i r W '" •V VOi;VVV WNV MM O IJl NNF ; 1V Y ~ 2 N>W~ 1~ WN ~~<N i YW_VNN M Oh M p O O~`\` O OL V_ JM N{ N JYOW O O i•J I\n J H W ~ ~rWi Y 6W0 F JY WIJ i i HiViOL VhY-M09 N y•Yh G iL WVY W <9 ~~7~ O~< W iJ{ L Py{ NLiW'J i•h< ~w - .1 OOYW V W Vy- Fi - W_Yh 1 'O<ii YYYOOif it WMNYyO Y 6i Yii i L V ON Y\V << O/{NM\y{IY yr ~iO F{OY<Y Y O OYL W iaV <ZLi a0 i -LLMWihL 7pWMWL ~ VWYJ LN:Y WWW i Y'J<V rMY<WFFLWVNYO <{OY iiJ{V F_F_ W{h06 ~ L1 D sN `SOy y°JWW iYaWOFYWh LNMMYF OhM NWM~ _<WN SNNO SOO { {<Y 10=Jyy\O{OYW iWV< iWt i9 1 JwY hiMi __ tii < <LL iJrN~ ViwiW O 900 F WV J<fYM <WVFOO LJVMVM JV < JOOhV Y OL- { • i ~~LMrr<rY i i<Oyi YJNt FLJViIJ<JWMWJM C f VW>< Y<i0 9iY09WMY9NihlfJ9i:VYMJYOYt> FaJ • WWW N W~YO OW)W<YOi1W<WFOf~~<iNLiIM~JJ>SWWO>JNirOU~ L Y J h'•h< Y>Ori~<WrYYW•<OiM~~J-i<LLO))Yf•9Wf<iL6 W ~ p j W N ~ L wO ww N ~ OW[ > V N Oh wW NiiN i i iY YN yM Yl1 =tWN V N r O a Nr i t N LM <jpYO NON ,] -<MW i S W' ~r ~ _ •i1W € use JMi ~yl~i i"~u ~ s ~ W ~ ~.: u is N rw i Y <Y uu-N 9N N: e~ J N.sw Y W NN WWpy if VMii~J FrJr fNN i Ni • M 1.>iY O MOiW Of iNMYN YyNi -rrW> YH~OW h W W Wy Y«V NhNWii r Wi><YiOVV i¢D iV LYNN WWZOW y NiMN-rIiYVYF NJNOFJ<WJwaJ •fN O OW> > NWiM :NWJi >ya~~MrO< r <VY NYLrY`FyQ J.WL •=W ~WOri >~rWW~JNi~SO M Y W 1NW • <W.OW r Z >M 7i J{yW N1M<rY N LiNVOWVVMMiW 00~-Nr w •Y O » p OM Oii <YL i 00 •yYMJYNO{WLJ:~ yy J ri< V ; =t WFYIYN ~M<tWWWW Y• W« Y<WVhi w J _ VOOr<I/liYYYYYVVeVe i•ryM yY LY w Ofw V ~~ J JNFw <rOVJ-NNMMM<YYf~frLJSN~YYr00<OW J.Wiiauri0 SWy - ¢YYY VV•YWWOYM>M>W W_W_W__W WY-<MNMNrFFV`±J „ Ur l f< OYyVYYYOJi ii-YYNNNN70 r..+J¢¢~ NYN < YLii t<ff«<f««<Vr<IV 1f«•<t«<OOaPi00VOV F:e O OMOw NyNNNNM•OOONwOPPNNOOwOwNFNVNMP inn P sNN• •NFNONNNOOOOPwONOTNwOOww• T ~hw P NFry wP<iOPPMr000PINNNPryOPP•OOVan • ON N'ON NiiiN iMMN<N ...w . E E .. W. Y. :; Pep•aewlaoNOnho•NpNOehe•eNOOSO••ah••NSin•na•••o•Nnp hPes•eNN•eaNNNnh«N>nano•wnhe•ehNPN•whNan.~~~±~NOhsNN ~ VOPNnwONIPNnnMPONNOPnnNONMnNON I. NI~IYMPON•NONNhNNN nPnnNrINVPMNnMNn„n~NNO10VhViMVMaNNVNn~N•VMhNNVNM~ryyN N NNa N :aV• =«NnnNN O :J VON N N n ~ NN « M A < V O ?:N Ur! O<O L} ZL~ <pM ONL J V V L •i •O ,i ~W •> L ~fPONNnINahfPONNnIMiM•POMNnIMVh•OONNNINVMOPONNNINaM• Wy=0000.00aO•NN N 1y ryryry~1 ~1 N~1 1^~ VVIIIIIV NNNNNMNNNNNNMNNNNNNN N NN N IVN NI'IN NNN NM~NNNNNNNN sVVVViiViVVVVVVVVVVVVaaaaVVVVVVVaVVVVVVVVVVaVVVVVVVV ONNMNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNMNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNMNNNMNNNNNMMNN i _ __ Y O • O O Y• • 00 V AL V D N M W N •~ Nh w ~ O • M O N N V V_ h• J N O_S n O N Yie n 1~ • e N ~ S V S s r~ L S S w S S jYNN~ Y W• • y1 1"' ` s N Mi N O fWiVV VV W N W W i W i YUN~e N iV hp i W ~ < N OW •M • • N • i<U W Y YN W i W Y • i WV ~ Y J• J VViO i N VNW i0• _ WV iN • • • LnWi V WMF ~ O iOV N 00 NWN L ~N U Y 00 N xWY ` UO N=N UOW i NW W fN M M WOi 'JiW J WO J J :N Vi J'W YW JO J J NJi 1 iJ JN O ON LN N W _h OY J VN • i 1 J 1 Y <_Z (_00• <W V ON •W 4 Ni L OL VSO •W •WVNY V if• OPN LyN PMM U W NLLNFP O Nyy yy ONN LN L Op0 ZOiYW=ZJS S~NYVW 9 Oho aONNiipi~~YON C J _O V_OMO <1\My OOOWNOJi v`Y OONfLO y0 Waap< J\NV WWN F DiVN>i 4 Y N OW O iL0 YV i iYVV_V_ VO NNO VY. VWL Z<OLJ YIVY< VYLMYO V LYMLWL W~J • VL ~i2WM0 YV WZIONp>i i>JWYNO~yWhi VO<>OVOMWWW •~O OpM 7iNWNWM YWiiYNLH.1> MfWM LY i ZWOiNN FOMNZYjwNNO hriVWhWY'JON iYVYL IV MNVNhOWNN JKV i~i\SYhsiNWiiiyYNNMMJVh>VUiF11~W>Z lWMi i`` ZWtf i MWMN{Ji>NOWi iF YiWNNWNpJWO VYZ W~WCY iJJ 3NW FLO_1 iNY YOWf ZtZhiW<MWWWi iZ O LNOfhMi i OWYVVNYNi + WY j iMVYNVOYi ZNNihNN<J JIP VhWPWOLf OOY<h OiM Z4W« JLNJVW < 9N<WNOLi« JVJNO OON < JUViNLWJUiNDJOLVLYJ < Y JOLJOOMYYMLNYLYLV ZhiiJ=JL <_ 'JfOWfMO<LMOZttZ OFi<WNZiMylO<LY<NLYiiN• ViNWMOZ i'iDl VO VNWWWMNYWWO ~OtOYN'01f NLYWIIiOL>ONYNIOf ~0i0> iOWtRiLO IO~uNONLSi•V< Ni f u Z M N L• WO J S i Z i Y iY LJN • i M W N W M« Oi VN ~ N ~ W O o `~ w a~ eN yWiu NY w o s ii rYii ` U N O O< `i pY }DO ~J pOi J L ~~Y11 JNV• `O 1.1 iMN S~Y~N • ZS V ~LN NNYYMN~1 WMM N Y C SL3y 9 N OL< NyMi ~Jp O WWMZ<WO N f W M YZ iJ0 YYiNW<VZYNO ZiOV• V S6VrJVWWNWiM}OVVN • LWO i OOW iZpYWi <WiJiVWMYWN W• wMM W_OZfJOYn ~W~JOV VJOOZ ZFJyy OiYppiN::fi ppWZ y ~ W VS «>iJ~L<LWi JN~Zii~ JY ZNN y~NLhVVWN~<O ZMhMJ hVf<Mf ZNNLNLOMLYON « O 9V `O< Y ONf> Vi<VWiZiY ZNWY i~W W YiLJiZOVVL 1 W ii i}YYZZiNUJWWy1 N J 0011 MhVW MZ O JNLiZWJV NWWWW 2'J iDZ 2 2 NW •iNOM JViZVtfLZ J~~JN •O 9pN<MN~iNhYZf OfV hhN O W YfYWYNtMWN iZOLi<Zif i0 IZVOL`YJ'JW »JMii} VZZNOV •Nifi<O J• JZn ff WiaOY 1yi Y LMShNnJ~LL VO« Z>f<wY WuWZVYOVWWW\< MhOOYWUY Vi0 i`JZiWV i~i•VYWJLLZhiVY}ONOYWYOOJJ SiZOM2WWW L: ~L iOWNNOOO00000<WWWWWWUMMOi<ONN<WMWNJOOOOWWYZN VVVVVVUVUVVVVVVVOOOOpO00000pWWWWLLLLiLLL LIL VVVVYiSS Op10NnPNNOONMVw000NNMNnPMinOV•NnNiN•aNO011NaNNFN NOMONMOOYOOONANaNPPVr1000NNI~.NVNPMNNNNOMNINJNnNN~NaPN N •Vn.IV N VONNOOVNNY NPNMMNiiNNNNHNNaVNINIM Nw•a~NN• P O~OnNI••N~FINiMNe eelN•°•/NI•F•r01.OYV>OOIMVYMNMJOiNIwNN+M OIh100NON! nNiNihN°°°w•OO~~NFNi{lONw~le il°••~rNMlNNi•°VS•OiNwPnO nV wN NNNON! NN •NNNN OYNVVNMNN NNNMNw wNNw° N N • • • ••• ••• • •• • • N N w NNY N^w N NN M N •N N u ~Na Sk 7lY VFI N g~° se°p i Y LNUY• pNa J w L u i• <• L• WiNlwl•NMM n110•NM~1O1 ~YL y~N•.NP+:.O>+M+Y+OwNN•N••01••11l•eNNN•N:___w•w•Li1.NN•Z~w'F•P NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN CI FIN NNNNNNN~~N~NNNNNNNNFFNNN li{iiiiiViiiViViVVi O'•ViO iiNiiieV lfVVOi00iiOrOOVOVVV'I O NNNMNNNNNMNMNNMNNNNNNNNPNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNMNNNNN Y V •• O W•• y•O •••• • 14 N • pL1 f y i W > Zi >Mi LN •Ot0> Y •P Y N O O O YM•PNi •N rPN •V r 'iI ~ OVY ~ fMr~Y•P• V VNYr\p Y"W N VN NnN • iN• NM O f••O>nM •. i• Y\ Y i e•N+• N_ UOYJH• h L ':S p .~ W 3 i• P N •ON JM •MOi• N hi >O Y•••I• h> > YJ YJYIpp• M J wVp OW MWYN YYYLYWYON~wFhlwWW ~•°WW W if FVI ~J MNM V JNJ >i Ji i 90i>YLJJhIJiL iVl^i i JYY\J > Y YYWY<N •f~W WWV<YYZ1f O~N••1~•«YNIYwN{ W{•>~\•V WW V NINMIINNLI•N\• • LN•NNN NMLLp Ni• •YWNr {tY OW \ D< JV i N<W ~ O> WIDDN•D i\VLLO J 00~+=Y>• > °iliz•o.°eo•1°111i°e alhu or°O°°.i°eei.°ii p>'oe o~i°VN11- irir°• o Y Y'J>b•WFY •f 00\FOLyYPY\1LL iL>YW\YYfyyyjh~j h7iL Yi•OYWWMMWiM Y<h Wy /ShrVO ll pp yy ••11 yyr ~j { WNii'J NNOWNJV>~~iNJIMrM~YWr•YhMiN1NJNN Na~Wpif Wi'J `hL< JP~y `f MMWf~M>F•W•ii<•IY~~JY Y•i/WZM>VMMOMiN~WJi~Y°i•OYWVi Y { 9J M WY NN r{><f JWJZO Y WNrYM < JJi{Y p\>JJVLJOVJNNYJW(JO NL•rYLJJY ZOiJJ JhY•r Y_Y_•h_rV•NL r eaV<NY<YYfOOYrLe~JYfiVYYY Yr «NZhYD« L<irYL W 7YYY'J >~\fYY!>M~VWWW~•N~Litr000\OWL »iit•LYLtWOI~NZOit>Y p{NtNLYOL>rJ00 u s z t a u~ o iii < ra zw y• a N y r °WSl N r. r hu pY{ a M • F V W •D U W i YJ Z e •pZ W L NV •i• JJ M M~Y i V WO IYi wtf M< 'J J VW' O JN ji iY{ ° • O y W si` p y V V >U i N Y MV1~ M W JS S •WY ~MJ N N V F I ~ > L L/M V h F• { Y wW O J N • iW0 e Y JM L 2 Y VL Z • p <YY OOh WipY OYW YW NYW • NSr WV • O L O _U_ _•°_h LYW if MNJ Mi hWY iY lZ i W O YV N V>N•i »YW• LJ rN ILMp V_'_JO •.irN Y VO•Z >f iY< OW'JNJ N J>Y•~•1>WJ yLy<~{NN ~WW Z <YWWY Vp=iYJVNNY••OMDYyfi<•IV%WWrGi C~OF /Oi••Nh WJihN~W 9L7 WLLNWJ\JWWNNrW •N O VONO LiMLWiN Y><YY OY NY° NiF<NWr{rN« OiaWLiNLLOJWY• riyh WN<L<O J p 6J wi 'J<V9YYL> L• NLYOLOO• pY{i Y< _MV J•M Dy<Y JWJ lNrJl10<ha01•YWNN>VUWrr~i •p JMOOrL JW •W N~w O <r Y L Z OV <Z {WJY•OON <NNrO~1WNIiN J<r` WOrYM• 00 WjJWYYYW •~r<WNNhY•JYp~iaMY <SJYYMY{VFYiiihOi •Y > JN»pLWOVJ N« MNi<iDiiZyVVYYrYi iOerM OWInVO LZZSLZZZMM•LiM 7'17YW•StY JJJJJJJJiZZLLZZZLiLLLLLLLLZiZZ00 P•OwPNO•NN•.1w NM1~w M•nPNMNwwANNN wI1N•~hMNNNNPPwNOhNnN PPp •Wh wroee•w~wwnryoepP~PhNPN =hPwNwNeh•~+•N •wMwwN • •••N ••• NN NNwNNN••• nYN • 3 E .; .6 W. u. 6t i OOMONNMOONNWONOVNNN O TNMryfh~H~N.Il NgN~N~~N =f: Hw wN f N N N N O 6 A A JONNNfNfhNwMwNFlf NfwIwONNNVM<wiwINNNINfhOwONNOwO^NNfN WRRRRRRRRRRNNq#gRRRMRgRpqpR:IRxRRRRRRRRR.^I.^IXXAXXRN:~.N,Rx ONMNNN NIIVIMNNNNNN MI~MI101 IOM1NNMNNNNMiNNNI~NNMNMNNNNNNMII<1N wYWiM MN f Y O M ?NP u~~ YI YN f~0 ip0 O N ONW Ja w y° V i _ _ y •WIO O O i OM O10 UN w N • N N J i n J Yw w N1 N V i> M Y Y i r F r_ O J~ %I G VN Ww ~JN N i W N `i W yNNWi NNJ Orir i=i MOi OFi L ui L OMWw ~~Y ~?wii WMih N Ni JON J<> •J ff > f >W} J WJOJY NOYNN Y ii WN\iW <NYO ~W• O OML'J N •W ~}O y O: WNS OYf Ni NWOeW MW iYW N WiiO W>p WWO FYW\< iJJOfV ONw V `O Y IY OON ~ pMi JN ~ W90 Y iWiF iN iVNW i' NJY WiN}W WNi< WOV N N W N2WiYWfO > OM U >° yWOY W WOyWy Vi0 i NOJO>M\9>iY =N }hN~yM J~ yN 7W iwW W SNNJ>i W`>WN <MOiWY M NFiW W_i«YWWY !WF y y:fOY<N yY iJ1y hW YHWnN y~ Y> i NKN 2 JVWVyi9M iW VOWWiFNFiw ___if NOt V ii~ON IW i»iiNl Ni OYiiiW• YiwMiViy jONf N i Nit>WIWMfF>Vw>NMO<W>MJ 00 IWOW P\iN YJ O~e CVO<PYY iNN• w>f Ji •h~NtANieWf>1\>NitJp~ ~iYYiY •< 001,>+t~<OWYifWY 6fWMi0>Y~NtV\~OY.•i~ Y~iOW lWW2h>MpOLW~~V OI~~f ~ o fM Z n !\ ~ fy y fy pY ~? i i i w~ V YN O M V JO >J h • YV n°I1W~~ i OV J Wi O V'JW MiWJ JWON iM1JiN> f<~YiJ JJWi~WiH INO •N FfM1J '9 NONifW MJ JONiVW li J1.. •N < W UNi O_ai ys iN OM YJMJWJONZ WYMVO~iiW OWCYiflWFHOw~>fUVO~ O JYi<WWWSFyJJOOYON eeoPpYlsaWYwaaaaWie =ONNNOON<NOVOONOOOOOf ON ON~i000hNiNOONfO0O1wOM1 ~wNNh~ffON~000MhMOf ONO< wN0 N~Nwf N~NwNNNVNrNNN ry NN M N Y W O W J y W i i Y > F M M i J J 2 u Y N>F VINL ~ WO !if iNeHRN Ot ~ > NJO NiaWtWOWnt H NO •00~ •M;UJOnJyWNOV WJJ t~wi0~~~~~~\~ Si00V~Ori~ OMOWSVfW\OYW i VVVY 9fN ~OVNiYO>>JY~Y J•iii •y IVW JOO tyWOxVNNa WW_WFW ipV Yif 0=VY00YpNWYNW YW~°t Ylii« •WWWNMMOO~<tWWWNi YOWYtYYYfYtYiWYNMNNNMNN OOOVN• YgONYI~! OANNM N W MwM < wN0 y ai<OOF v °eu~i~ w wl:p pwfWYVV WajNn Oi~uW JJ N a W i'J» NJO NILWW •<LN000 ItW~Nln r> ~N><WWW MYJW~Y~ INi>1ff o WoaaW NIFJwti SOW}WWY NNNWGOp V f i i N J O W_V J W N u" L NfU N_ SiN Y M f~0 Y f J V O f_ I •yONV NyVY~MY O~~~H~J WViiOSW NNgVNUM JJJN( 6 f<fNJOW VyVWJZO WS<O NNNNNF> • ~ 1 iii •i• Y~ ~O~ :Z• •>~ nNT<YNMOMNhhNwNNN YWiOONONNhNOgNNNwPONMF rygNONNf NNOOMw100NMNOM NNNOihNNNNNw>OfhwO1MNNN NNN>~wN NNONwNN„NNnwMNN..n N N=fO NhNNMq NIOfY1IlOONNw wNN NU°~Nn fN NN N NNw NM LI ee wheeeeeoNOneeeohoeefi yewwh°e .f.1y eeoeeNOweNnaaeo~.~e h ~a.N+i nw°a'^<oiNaNeM~Ne«~nwMa~n w y ~ N Nr f + w n iii ai ryi urn ra ~;e ADO ht nee r O Y W Jar/NOyNNiNirVNOMNNiNihVWOyNN urinw~n~XX~xXxX~xnnnwn ~iin•"i n~'ii ~'~~~ ONNNNMMNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNMNN Y _ W \ •V i it V i yyJ N IJ. - i O W N i~ i 'J h r f r 9W •1 N ~W N VW N O~ N aM r ~ N 1N h i Yi • •e h/ sr iNU Wvf u ie ur Yi ii ii LLWN eWi N er Nr M i1N i J VN J i OJt JN IW fW wi i..J air • w irN =F W Aas iN:~i san'NJi 9p •NJ M NVO wVi ryY 1•Nwr VL'i r/- FO r OOVW1~ i Oi MV• NyyM WN tJ0~0 Ni1rONS~N~\YO~WOMOW O N•fYr hrOirN •• r rr YrNNN ~ ~~ rrl~SiW WNirNii/rwfJ Nr W • rN Y4lViJWOiWW/NY y• J1J: YYNiCO Wi•NiM•MOM- WjjO fY VY)Y•Mif rN rN YOO-~Mf/iJiJ\• MOfiOfiJ NNS NfN M-WMI • wMr•ON• fJ _ //JwrriiWrriM•ii~F~~YrWNW ~ifYY Myy ii'ni~i~: )/Zi.~wHe)~ie«e)~N~~N~AeR w • i O O J J r Y f YYf Y- r VY f Y)f i • i r r 9 .EsP Jens J S~ W \ of a /f/W fN\ wy i •OWY f NiOMiiS S a M Y F Y~•MN//M YM .I W iY OiJ)rO;r YrYV O • YM •VWI\N-Y ifNO iON YOY/YWJMYi}W •iDiOrO>ff Oif 9M OYM Vi ..II \\JMMpWrN 1YY• OY••Y }MiY•rNLJJ~Nw iiiW•SS~ •YNN++M i0JJ0NY iiY ifWYOJ/ Wf ~f~ilV~/`YM SWrNrMFOrMMNMOii wWOOff NOiNNNfNOYMMr>JMNNNrYW- WLiiVYVY ii>f Yff\iiYWWW;MYWY hfrrrMhr~J7i>)}}i}i)})iiirMN WNy iNy\NNNIiMNWMNNwwNOyihwpW N+I•)>1~•Nh1V\OihNNNNiOwMI•N N111 N NN NNN NNN NyryN s V h p Otl NOONOONOONONryNOOYONANNNVOMNOMONN000000 N V O Op NOOOOVNNNONNNVONVONNNN>NNNNNNONwON0000 N V NO •NNNNOMMVNNw}OONNNVOOA000VNVONPN}}NON ' w NN NNVNN NVNONMOhO VY1~OVyV=NVNhNNw>••MNN4NV T N N N ONM O••N O ON N • O N y u O M <h1N1 J • •P~ it gs0 VVO i0y YNW v~f Y tl V L W1 1. <• O• i• 7• i• ID •i A N A N A L N N A N A n J~NaNNN~NVM~wwNNIN aI.ONOwNA1NrNYYYNNAVNaMONONNNVNV}ON wNn"N'x°I:SSCIR.YIRRRFIfIRA1LAAtIRSSSSSSSSSS797S:~.7:~~'Y9'~7'S'I77~ }INNaaaaaaa•aaaraaaarraaaa•aaaraararaaaaavaaaaaaaaaa pNNNNNNNNNNMNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNMMNNMMNNNNNNNNN V• 1 1 I 1 I I L L L L >NF N =YY NO YS MNN i „ NV NN N u wW' ~ N~n~~nn s ~rr•M n ~u Ywlesii S lewi IINi • ViN V „<aVIVN NNa ali•aM •O }OOVVWVYNN iN N\V i • NYN N_ LMMMN• YN\~a•> ~• ~~ <~~~•MalLti p0 •NO Y ~~ Y W\ WWa O O YI HO \ F < ty~V W L> WYYi Y WY fWWWW MWVV LWWW YW YWWYWFNV YN WLWYN Y L •V Y YVVO YY ~ iVVYV<OVgN HLM JV D V j }YYNNMJ NN S ONMNNJ\NNN iJ ~V L Ni MWWJJJY JJ JO FJJJJWaJ\\W ON JYJLw i l t O NW •iLJY • •LW • J i_O aai ~P\IW •L •NV N W M W yY N<JLWMyy11y1 4JNM NY CNNNNN N`` WJwV N WN: i i DiJWrOJ'J~i00Ner i9J'IJNI'J2+~> \i 'J'JWO 2 W O J YW<YVaYO•<YYiYW OOOOOWYY Mia<NOYYOP: 6 Y Y JO Y Y •i O VYV ii YWNLO iJL W O `L LjiNOLLL WILML\N LLN LLLiWFWWJ LLLW N L L pNN NOOOLLFOOVDi<rOOOONNOLfNWV•YDOO~OM` 1 Y V VW N Vi V LM ~I afWLiYM Y N VW >i;V MMM\MFFFYYW<hY}}YVYYYi N N F >sN M V < > Y Vi ~ J YiiL iiYiOY iYtY YSY JJ•YJS i0U i Y J < YOOWWW ~YWVYO YYY WY f~Y~YCfWOW~WWN N i J MD iW~~r~YYVW}} YOrMY~Y~OYYWWJJLWYiYN~N1Y1. i N • „ V< ai\L < t\Jt •~<}Y •<1• •V VI{i <YVJNW< <LO < Y i LLY YLLLFVLLNLOfOLLLLY<\WWL>7NYYNSF`V V U W J NS YNOIJWYYNMYiYii.'•Lf YYYi YiYNOLYN Y N M W } • N DYO WY~Y~I1SWWYY WNWYWWMYWOOpi SJ<W~WO• i t V G i ~V OWJM~OOOiY00~O~1Y*pOOOYLONNWYV~>OiOfOUO »rl V ~ }_ V M •a• F N N >O V N • O •i iY 4~ i J W y~ V < Jr• VY WY W N W_ L • N Ji t VJyitYf NMU t V F i N i W •e a reW• ys oo w s e F VY < pM}} •~WN L 2 i V_ h rWn WU J iV~ii «J 6• ~ Y ~ • YrWY iiOLWiWNOJW » YN J Y • > > L i NWNiYOf NWL LW 1 V V N• O N WMON Ne<LLWeOYN F N• • M M YSL J r Lir 'r VYNNiMiJWWN•Y Y L YO NFOMN s < » aWLY uY •JeNYr•surrY Ns ~Siee•Y uYL~N N ~J = rf JYMN y •ONLW••NDVNViW • • OWN i W i eLWL<Y SiW aYWOWLw}}VOJiW> M N W MrLV<Jii OYYJJOW p<iW}WiWViOW :SJ J i < WOLNOHN•Li riiiY N MO F Vli<NY V M O V VO LW NL YYN••• OI• L •<~ fLYiY ~Y Z •i Y is •M_iJ iiYIVVVIiRrVN •O ••r VWr• W1ir y V L W t< ••wMV J•OV~<rYrW~f JOiYWjrYWiOiVYfONYiV V Y J Y Yf V YY~i VMJ}WYWYY<O}•WirirVWiYVlOOV00} F < OVUVVOJJJJJJIiiiiY N.7}•••V•WWWWNJJOOYYY L N V i Ji N<•<••<•« « <f••lV<V<OOOOONOYOOOOOOOO> N N N •V NNNNINMNaOYVAY}OwNOMNwVNNNYr>OYONV•• V NV OONNNONNNNNOLNNNNNVVNNMYVawNIMNNwIV N N N N •Ii .IN aNNNNOVOawO a•IiOMry~•OVMN•OIYVNNONNN•wN•NIwN W f iNw ~Y:d VYN =~0 i\O ~O ONY J w LL U 6 W: . u~ N~I~ \~< ~Z• ~• • •ii °i ~ ii i o• i ai Y• . ayhN0000wO00NMOtl.h.00MNMNOOeYYM0000N.00NMNNOdNOOMOM •NOw000NNOVMONOMNPYhOVNNNOMidOtlNOtlOO.NtlawONPNYwOa TONNnIPMONNVP<OOYhNfYNYNwONtlNNh~tlONOOtl YO~~Nn~wNP MNnjPNNwA Nrr MNVNNMPwNN>INON YNtlNMNNMNNNNN •=NMwMOf nIM a ryTllNnTNNNNfMNNIN 01•f VYrM MN.NtlhYoOMNN.I>V YffwhAYMMrMMhY .....<...vSSSiSSSiS if 59$i+ii+3YYS3SSSYY......tl... ONNNNNNwMNNNN11+1NNN1f11N NNNwMNNNNwwMN1<11NNNNMNNYfi llalM NwNMNNNNN y Y _Y Y YY Y YY Y Y Y • Y ~Z VNIr1e MwN f Y NS40 NN L NM TN.NNf ON N PY1\ N NN Mi •fOhO1Pi MN~ h N •N. i0 rr WN NON N PrrNfNNNf N N N s YN:w N NNi YYYYYYJ 'JY ~Ji Y 'yJ Nff \ SY n YY YMJ i N WWWWWW• SW\ OF W i NZWWV MW \ WW YyJt p \ NNNNNN9 NN Z• M M NINNW a W O WWUWWWiW AWf NO Y N •YOYYWYO NY \ VWYWNN . \ NwwMMryiaN ~O r0 w M OWN UY Y \Y tl MMNVi O f NY ` YVN YNif VN N zNNN 1 JJJJJJJj :JO NY J y fYiiJJWN \J NOS JJOJN\ P Nny~NNNfY NN P Ny ` Y~NYNNWN tlN Npi' rrY N<~WaN 1> y 90J»7W1 \'JP \~ 7i V N i'JJiV NW7VYWZ WWYhYYiJ WILY fWNM1W YNf NpiYZ NF. J YNW Ny t1L RU_W>OJWiW Op0000ZwOYOPNVJ:O= U`N` MNi 00\i YiOVNFi>fOONO {N NW'J N_ FPYYNOr[Z FNiiiYYMJ>~INW~^FhfO JNYN OZf YM~YZ IWWN SiiiWZYNM iYVOMOffWYO~Z iiWY MYiJiN>WWSSOZWJZ.{~YI< QWNM iNWZ9Y iiNVY> N NW UN tlNWWOWNOO.SO i iiiti:YV OiZMPN i {MZy00UiiWJa rLiaWVi9 iiMi ONOfVO NjfZYN i O V WYh WfMY{Y IWWN{YYYYNZI`NiNPW YYYY>{VUN1ViliWWVZiiVVVY Ni>YW00~0=:ViJOOiYiY9NYF N_Y V firYWWWfNS~~Y{f>IWWZYOiI~>YWWON afYWVfW{4r{iW W{WZf iO 9'JS O OOOOONZLSO{NYR\O>JVOYI~~fYO~Ni!rO ~OM~FV\~OO~O.iefiF~{y> O V N Z e 3 J < W W Ir N J J Y V Y { <Y U Y ~ N Y YW O N Or YO U N f N N> N pO O y pZO ~ ZM O 7S OJ O l N M O Y i p Y i \NOi i0 YfN yi ~ UJh i Y U f VSUF ii NYf NZf fgOJ W Nfh O Y V U~ OW Y JW NWN V> J J• iW N V WYWVi VNf FOY O< WYYZ 9 YNYNW N i O O OYYWN <V V\ iiN MNNON V YifOVUY J < MJhiiiN WN< <OY ~YMMNW Y wV Jn OO'JLi W r•1`. M <yj>YiNp iNJif OMOyy Y WOW i NyWN JIM::O M~<CYOJYp<~rO1WYrL~VitWiY W ~NYiOWYV~NYZf O WJ1Wff YOJ Nfi„WY<W NY'MY1W_ fiV_NJ iYMYfNOY MNLLYiO ON{pUOZiJ •J yp JiiV J< <UiON• f i O WONO _Y_N _•OWWiNO{ IOIY •'JOifJO J•iN< W OiNNWM<•iiY ~OS fWWj MYJV~ f fi PYOOWiN <W Mr NY •Y<OihJ>iNO r• N •Off<_M • r[•i NrZ[JO N•\iYNr L1iV•3 lii~J 00 9FiYN • yF~ NujiWWO• jfYYWW:Ji if ~i<Yryi riiY YriiYJJfiif if Uf)f ~WhVUY>iNNVZM01002 eiiYVUVUVVYyYVVVUVYYYVVVVVVUVV00000pO000~WWWWW>IIIWY tlhYONNNffaPNYY.AaN.whhOweYMNnNNYNNNhYNPryNMaP.PN..N. NON.aaONYON.Oa.N.hMPY.PeNlannYNNNO±OYNMNNNPNNNNNNP• eerie ow.ee tieYe .neNaNOePe a ~aYaoeNOPeN--rytie aaeaatl aNNtla a tl aN aaNa ryrYaaP N atl .NN i i r NP •~~o LSO 2L0 Oy YFY OjL M L V poeneoNSeeaNNNnrNO•wlenwYYlNwn•eaahoNe•areenwne • NOOnONnTO0i0eOhwNMhnleO ;VONVONVNrNhNN•V•O••OYeewYn• f/ hOOPPON•hNmOY•IhNWL•T•11ahN000hVN•wMP1YONOY00ML•OATTN !O •NrYOMwMOTMNaVNhrNn•N raT10N hV••w ITNaVYYVwMnN•V •r •. NN r• w rN •Na Yw YaaYr r In .rv n N . fir: ii i i ~rNnanahYwerNnanahYwYrNnanr)YlYNNnaN•hYwYNNTfnahrlYr ii •Y•S==Siiiia{i++iiiii+v9•xIR IR RA ~I ~Ix fi•{i•nwrnrw nwel~w•'Y •IN•".~•N••St ni'n'X •N•w lni• Y• ONM•r11N MYaiN NNNNNNNwNNNMN•IV•NNNMNMMNNNNNYVIw w11V•M NNN1111NNNwMNMwN 2• Y • y f N • • y •O • YV j V • M • e N MV N w w i•M ~ YY N rV Nh n < a • •aMw \ • OY Y\ y Nw NN y e•NN a ~ wM1V N JV \ !n WYO ~ Z \ • w•1a! TNF : YN<• ••N N N O r • A_ _\Y \r f •ue _ • Ni • Y yN V\ r NYF J y•YN a Vre Y iY L Y_• •\Y Wr • N•N IN Y Yi T •• W =~J N• „YUaS w YV •~ wLfi Y~I • yYY L Y 1 ~ NN L\ SMV •W i OLVY N N • Vn • VJJJWN =V J JH Wi 4\9L JJW JJY 1 WO rN O Z9 NNY •Y VYW 1 :z N » WI•••~IW • • 1 WW MO{ L • • ••N JMW y W y yYLWN f Nr Y•Y 00pY NN<YrNNN M: WL ZYp9"J RYiYLN9 I~•p1 LMNJJ YyS a'Jpi JOpN MZJ J•Np 2• WYW•WWI NL ••• hYLLpJ yLM•YVNLYYN y YY N u~ WOVe L1{i01 NZLL LW011~1 Y• NYIL V LVYWW JL OLi OV 9iLLYWINOLLi SLILY LNM L J L 6• YOOOOVOrYJYO JOr hITNMpJMf YMZOOY•MOO WL Z NW> ~) {iYYM L i UVa ONLY OV NVOI Oh iV NI YMhW iY iMf Oy WWY 1 thFiYW M_M_Ni W f^ WN • `WWSSYW<LYJi WYW O YiJVy stLM1yiWY Y f1 JVJJ Vn Ni iY WWeViWrNV L i M6pZiLOLWNi Y iYYJJaOi~J i ~ zSiV< OL inriN•~ 9M)OffOMOOM<Jiiii e_i_ZVL_O_IiJI <V WY>YPNiW LiYrYY iOLOiOZii FL >=f)YYf • iWJ WWY O• J <tf JOO<fM<fhLYiZrINWWYf rO y<f iYW110_F VW___ h • VVLLLMYVL YLNF:YYy<y FMYiLY LLLNh• JY>• NhOF i• M•YYYJLr YI < Y>JiYii<N~J FbNYYMYiYYJO CN ZLJ • L<WWWpIZL•>YYiWiY<Y<~1itNNLY L LwVWiWYWWLY IMIOYOMiJ H• =Y)Y)OYVt <>!O)Nt JJ J<IVYriY >)OL )rYI JINW{LIpO • VOOOIy>W•YONVO.OYO`LVLitYMwWiN NOOW<~OVYV{LiNYiJLV1 • • L M F • y Y L 1 YN J i7N ti i ~ • j iY jL •N~ y1 i L. •VY Ln1N y J Zs0 S V JW ••i ` Z fY1V iYFMY JN ~ JS :NV I y W» N9Ni NMYJFY ZY Y OM i•Z i > OZ NINI pWiJ • V YY • OVO •IiMN M_•p• 1) iJJi •LOYYf WW FFWV ViN • <JO PVOY J 00 iS JY •UY eYNi h N p »LY ^O_ Y<i9Y •~• ra OOYNY• fiY •W YNr OJ MVhh V JVYNF •Y YLOYJ YYLYYN Nei i VVW JWiNU V (OJJr yif pi VYWWVJYM VY~YMy 9V)Y 9 I :aJai)YpW NYY~ WpOp<IW fMWFY MY M1 i<1 NWNZO • SNYNir)YW•YOJiFOYWWiii YiLrYJL01• Y)NZ• 1Y Y Y 9VZ=JIY:NOONL OJ00000 O<Vf 1<Zei NIYMNY Y iWYi Z Wlpi •VOYYYyO •N NY rLJMOW 1LWY• YWpLLV• • L••W9•• i OOJN Siiii M~Z~ NOfi YiY 1 YrWji \JYU Y OYWy rFW •ZVIYY WWWW •iNfJVI _yY1i 0J<NiWfNLNVWfss ZJ Z-„ pJV •NV~>YYWyV 4•V[Y WVVVOViYh J~i• JY Y'J •NMMJN~V•ZjNMLNrONyY it NiNLtYJ<WWWWWYZiYfYYYyJNYJOUYOYJNIWiNJiWiY~OV •+i iY> it IOI LLI~L yOyyYJYYY yYS2LiZZiYZZZL2irMNNrN17Y •[Y YYYYNI[YJJJJJJ FVN•aw1YPMhOTTONnNPLMarrNNn2NMNnNPTVNYN n1lY•emN!••T O• •TaaV•lw•NYTTNaNtlnnNtlNTmrYIrOJVraTrO•nTV O•~PrNVwNIN p• YW::±Myah»MOMNOOTYYaOwawrN•rr TpOVtlN00•YNmNOnrmLNy i• N V V•Jrr N,^1 NaV aa• NnrN ~• • Q u_ :Nw Y fir f ~ Si0 iW0 s00 ILMW M• Y a P a b O M1 0 a OOOOOOOM1Nn N~1.10 NO/hOONmONOY00NOhN000NOOrNNNOmONNOlMO~ OwNr~NVTpPNNrNtlVJmNOFOrnNON1O SNTYONPNOS V~N..SwIO •niM SPiVP• N r V N mw Y wJn ~V N PV N r N r N N M1 sJ MNVNVNOIOw.N{I+11N+VY•+OIOyN.NNINVYIM O~iwaNyN •I~aN ~ViM l~l•IN NN1VwN VIwOIOMN WNMMIINI N•Ni11Nl•NSSVI YISN NN YIS Y1NNh NYniw NYN1 YNiSNNNYI MIIISSNI/11N Y1G NGIIN•h Y/iG SSM >VVVVaVVVVVVIVVVVVVaVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVaVVVVVVVa1V ONNNnNNNNNNNNNNNNNnNNnNNNnNNNNNNNNINNNNNNNNNNNNNnNNN V y i• 0 O O O 0• _W /_ w VJ ' M1 \ nNNw ! if N h •- N! O M V V •OV \• NV V <N NNiYZT 7 \ \/j\ VIm O NS > V W N9f• V MVIn \n MZ w /V •OViOM1 w w 1\ V f • N I W>1 ! JIJINO O • VijN • V VV O - eOS iJJJN - WNOI N W `J = O V >P N <W11•yyM V • r -•NN \ - • •VO O >Or PZ YOZiM M wH 1! iN! w -M p S FHr< t\ /ON~ OZ ~ W •rW Y N O•V• J J J NSWV \ J IJ N Jir •:\NJN /ONOF •j0\ V P N V\r J M •J ON\ i•V •yy 1Y• SZW\ Ny WI. iW N\NJ •_V • VVha Oif~~~VJi w'Ji`a NNWV Yf 9f r°+'>~\Z\149 N 9SW 7 jOSJ<i NJ <VWWSW llfOipO wNr•W~NNi Z/f- VNyINN NVWSWO J~.aiNMJO JNSVNffp/~OhN6 wV-aeMNWiNYFINVNiON< ONIJO WOrIOIO Y JI VZOOM/YY/Ma/ eI IN11 YjiV1V~~r:l0 Il N//O m/r/ZF/VV/ NON N~•j.~HN~MW~gWWS20W10YV~V07{Y1O0~ V9 IVW-IWMfiW•11i V IOLW OZ •f Yii pj Ni-aa •i0-LW „ON N-i01i<O -iiWOtYWWJiV i ZiNiJ i/WWY Op0-!N/NWNY W iOjOIO NiY W!>yN6 > Y VrWJNi<JW`JVf prO OWYV VrJWfgV V jw VJK•f W•f M• /NWVfVY-V YN•1VYF0 -iNNjNfVVUrN/•Y V-tW VMV-W a_• /N<9MNiMYNN>rM>YJJO YYWNM J>Jy•WM W7rOi/Z NiN• W j0•ROit~JW~J yvWWjOW ><V9W9J i0J<>I-/JfeWfiO>WiyO 'JWOJ/<aW< J~ipSNOp>'NjOSNOH~\t-U•fONa~r700S~1OV 1r•00•NUOY'JYNOY00 $r ~ a i Y r~ i N Y i N » / VF V Y N / .~11.J i y i > ,I ii V SIII U N 00 MYW Y.V i J OOa W ifV V J N Vf O i .•. Y i N M N N W 3 SLM / ~Or W V V WrM f NW • 000 N>W ZW W O /Yi y WO N 11W r urYN i O[WW • Y pM/ IlV W OOi>W wO lZOitF Whiiu 9NY F/ i VJrN WN•irOiJ \\WrYVrN>OOrtVVNNVM1iFf Ni<W ir0/ aVNJ S/ VYiSOZJ NOMJ OiJWiNiV+ i WYi< N<OYLYNfnV _ J oNW .WeiW .fmWYW+eai ~se.NirtlW+ uzrYhNhhtlW. WJ• •NO Nr O JLFV OVO fOJOr>i fV 9WrOi00VV )IVVYVVfV wVNtl• y Yi Ow OVi i•JONa VOOWiW+WWY .wi VNNNNNNiNGfiieWWiNfVOtlVJ-S+'>..ii NNSJSMV w/r ii00V y •JNOWYVfiiZZN wNNw V fWirw •OJVFWi Z'J. `VONNr ffJJ ~yJ~J •f tlf •SWNN iYNMO OOWN•vrV) OOOWVi/ftf sy \OSr Dvrf UVtiZiiVVMYrfvYtlV~i>ioNF}JOLpJ>VWJNiIWW<O~VOVY tl~If Ff p•• • rV Vf•f<uWWWVOOOOJ tl\WWNVNJf ii i.IN• •<f<WWWS JJifff(LiitiiiiitifiZiiiifiZiiiii000000000aa6aaaa•• m~NMPNNPINIhhmNhhONrPVNhwINiiYVlNlhmVhNNOVNIwryNlmh•~ OOOODONPO ONl PIwmINNmMlrNNPP~N PONVFOwNO0oOn0 V I~Ii11NN• i NNNrNN .•w•.N NNNNNNjN NIwINNNNNNNNVNN 9 < V O N iNw :`d Val 0?O II<LL a N Vww oNs J V ~ E ;; E E<E \1y \• OIf~ O~ i• V• ~ f •O ~Z• •a~ •)~ i • ~ 7 •~~ ~h• i°Ni II Yi i0• •i •ii W' wNwoNematlNaNNyNeneawwwlsaoNNeoaweNereowenoehyeaNNeN hNnNOONM1VrYNwVNVMPOOVNyNNOMP:OVwwONO010N rywmNwNyNOhVN <NNh~VwNNOPNnOON000PNOh MNieOwy•wN~ OiYVOVMVNNiyNmyy Nll~imlNwVVVN11<IiHN• N ~VN INN~m NOViYVONO~ON N OnV NN mPNwyJtiN NNV+• ~ wN ~+ N n in1YlrN ePawyN1n~INV>f NyYpNNNINyia>Y0p0lNN W ~YM ~Yf1~~y~Y111NISwNSSYOiwSSS~SSSS~S~Irr~ OwMNNMMNNNwMNNNNNNNNNwNNNNNNNNNq V• O y W rtlf• •atl N ' u eN • `~ F W I ^ J W f V F`i NSNi \ ~ W>V WOWVYw YVJ> r i ~ of u auN ~atlJr i.i N y <VJJfI.n •V~V<\ Y lV0 WN•WS> NWMMNtlh Y > >J•f V•a Of J•Y Y W YM VONON~W_M %jN~YF fOtl NJi Vi V VJONM N M>Jh 1VO aYOaJJOf~ONryN •00 Nfii<C OM O ~afO<>WYYJh<JhVWOVM OJ VWV Oi>rWV iewwfw•00 Wf •WMh=M WWV~YWW•iOW<tl> OYW»«if ~WaYY<faNJY.ifO WJ`J~f>f VNNNWVMIW eNe<OONO WO<a00>M!<•fWWi04Oat~N~ OM1O>SYOi•VOVfNOVt« •JY> 3s"3asaayyy3~~y3~3$~8 Nririrairrrrirrirrrr NNNMNMNMNN NYI YIN YIN NMM W • M Y O ~ • ~ Vw PVY r, °y, i M1W O WMN yNh MMJ J7i ~Vi JOY aH a0 F~•o Ya°Wi iNMihOf Qi f J O. 00 •M si Ww °~ M> ~J WN j• M NV V<WO wine Wf W> WYNY 'pus°o iWJ) i U9M•w <OY» Oy00y ^ N P NN~N eywN MMwC 7J~J aaeaa~a =hhh>1j• WWWWj~p iiiiJiN •f1<Wf< •\••YWO iWfYYiO YWWW<J< Y~))J<W • 00••V M Ni N i N M V r Nii O V h M H i _ ~ i A a« V• VN eJ M VyVwi •J Nyy VV VV ~ <J r €Y~Q Yi N Wiest M ~si0i OW V Nt O _< w M PW O Yh0 O :OWMN hi ) Ow hwti N V N hi•<O O WYN) Ve<n i• ~= OJO <yW M sWW V~~h Vji1LiOMW^fMVY~j YNi W•MOM MOWNf ~<J Vy<OfNi\fYW `O•fVYfVVV Nf Oi\JMJiO :W h)OOVU 0=hhhOi< <N~JM i•i<WWO hO OOOYafWhr4JV iOf YMOYWOf ~ryN OW SiVVhV1 ~ Wf~J<W ~~iiiV •YVeV•~MM>MfVi00>pW 2 •N _MNN = NO•Y OS••OWM W •_00_NN •JNCYN)O<O)WWWW4NW ~N>WiiWVOMW MAN: hVD~MOy ~iNW) iWYWiM1JJNOOOSW• WOO • YW<J! OV••SiW ~jN`iVZJOYtJNh)ON VJ 21Wl•• OSJWf iN=i<iiiNVWM ••~•••••Ofiff Yf MfftlfffYttMMNNMNNN M'NNNNNNNNNNOOONMN~ OwNmNNhrVNNNNNNiNN M1ONNMww<NNOPNN IN NNhNw O.I Nm..rn Y N NNrh.N10PNImONON)V<NmIOWM1NIy mIwlWNmmmwNhynmNmMNO N10'IN`YN000wNNNry NMN NN N NNNY NN NHNOy000frymnNNnNN~N I~ NNNNN. N •E ui OporeNe•eeeeeNOn.oOpeN.«e NOOOONONNNONOwNO000nONnwO ~~~~~~~~~~~~1~1~~~~~~~~1~• rNNnNwOnwVMOhn•pnrOOMNNeO. ON M NnNMN n nn n n J•NrhONOWNnOMVPVVOMMNONON000wNnINOP0001N :aaa~~asassaassasss9smssss~ssxYSSSSSS.sc sr•+rrrrrarrrrarrrarrrrrrrr+++r+r++r•rrr oNNNNNNNNNNNNnNNNNNNNNNNNNnNNNNNNNNNNNNN ' !! ! ! 1!!! ! ! V J O P i i V O i Mh 1 • N V O ) 00 \ i N $ N NO NN N v :NP J•~ VWI =;0 iWe OM lNV OjC ~ W V •O wi !" wH eW isw. !~ ewlho Y \o ai wiworpv 0000 W 0e eh NVOriYV h Y MM h ~F 0 YwMi JJ )N V wW MONONO w JJJO YJ Jt J~ MNNNNNI NN N O NM J) OY' JNN0001 ~.hO~WI ~W YOO •JW ~~~O~W• OW~YWYi \M VLO OWN000 O)i O)M`OU009J Y_SSh_f_h_9JhhL~1WY MrOFihWNi a0 MN OiNMW il•LZWi)WW CWWWlLVVO~V YY VMVYf N_O• WiitiJ^^hf:hVL iYiii VSY SVWN<~ lllWl~\Y iJiiJi L0 NNLaLiNLa9JiYNONLOMLOLi Y fNNf if~OfiOYifhV•YOJf Of ih WWLOWWOiWii IV WWiWwNi iJJf}>NN}>f M>OfOw}~=>i>NYO OYYOOOhJOOVNOYLOiO OOOwYV V •i VN i•O N i OVO V ~N VJF N 9 Y .O ~ M O VY f\W E 'J .» CdPi GY 3 O V l h fl .O L MVN _Vp. WN O LNY Vi W2 Vh hV N J OYf O.>Z VOJ •i MiW WiIYVF\iOhV ~~tyWy W.OVI``V .OVN NOO >OJO WW OJi.lf LYYV> YVN i i OWf. ~Vft hhLIMJFOU •W W • N~ LW Y\MINJ iY 7<Z~VJ w~•003 OL NN fJ 100 VVJhOLWMNLO .L000YZO000 ii~JWVZiiYVU iFYfsTi~Z' 2•tN fYJWWOOIMMNNN__N _NM _M JJZi J>if •llWiiiif Vf ~• i •LO! NNNNh>h.Fhh..hh'J»J~7»J» 1°nowu°le °Oniw °p we w ~NPN.rO•P) V wON • ONJ I h n N wNM w e iioihi w . =:zw! ) !F VOV NJ MNIMO M J6 JJ:J\ WJ ONNONN N~ JN 00 OOWOMpiO fWOO.WO N\O L!V WILOW VNNII wO=000J000 O OhWiMhiFViMh ~WilO1.WWWW flu MiOfi>YiZf wi °e ii lulu wl OYYNViMVYMVf NW~IWYZV>rNW IOZVOOVOVVZO NV V iY Z W NN W N V Yhi~ ~ W iW Mh <i VO Mi NO i0»N Wi. ffh YJ MOiWh I_WV LiiNWllf NJ J)YO •J~ VJW M•pffUi lfiizii°u ies Y ••YfIJ MW NVYJNNJiYJWO )fZZZ)ZZYMMN NOONO=PnYnOn•••NhONwO nNnOMONPOONO nNNQ•=N•Q 01•MNP•NN•MfONN ONw••10•ONh! NNnNNN w0•h NwOnOYOi•jOrO•NN ONNNnNNNNNNN 1 1 CITY OF I`ANCHO CL'CAivfONGA STAFF REPORT •. DATE: July 3, 1991 T0: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Anthea Naitl g, Associate Planner SUBJECT: MILLS ACT AGRBE!ffi1T 91-B/ - LORD HOU88 - A proposal t0 implement the use of the Mille Act to reduce the property tax on the historic property located at 6791 tlellaan Avenue. 1Ra01~IDi1<iA Staff recomo:enda that the City Council approve the contract for Mills Act Agreement 91-01 between the City of Rancho Cucamonga and Hix Development for the Lozd Rouse. BACID;ROOm In August 1988, the Council discussed incentives that would encourage historic preservation activities and promotion. The Mills Act al love for ~*.e owner of a desi grated landmark to realize praperty tax reductions upon entering into a preservation contract with the City. The first such contract was approved by Council on April 4, 1990, and prior to that time the potential minor lone of revenue from the General Fund was addressed in a memorandum to the Council Sn August, 1989 (see Exhibit "A"). Accent convexsatione with the San Bernardino County Assessor's Office have aEEirm¢d our initial estimates for the co eta involved with a Mille Act Contract. The property owners who entered into the first contract (the Btegmaier residence) will save $1,777 this year; the City will lose approximately $84 in revenue. The subject of this present contract, the Ianac Lord tlouae, vas designated a landmark in June 1988, and is clearly an important element of our cultural heritage. Mr. Lord was a pioneer in this area and after leaving, he founded the co®unity of Lordaburg which became La Verne. Hix Development has proposed a tract which will surround the Lord House but has also made every effort to preserve and maintain the historic home. To this end, the development company has requestefl to enter into a Mille Act contract which will transfer upon sale of the lot and thus continue the care and upkeep needed for the home. CITY C01R1C IL HTAPP REPORT MA 97-07 - LOPD RW86 MILLH ACf July 3, 1991 Paga 2 CUNCID8I011 Staff believes that offering the ovnere oL historic ptopertles the opportunity to gain hanefita from the preservation of recognized resources helps the City provide incentlve9 for the continuation of our heritage. Reap ~ly ~ te; d,~ ~~,~~ Hrad lez City Planner HH: Aflaap Attachments: 8,shlbit •A` -August 22, 1989 mesorandum to the City Council 13 CITY OF RAitiCH? CU~,ADiC1N~A MEMORANDUM DATE: August 22, 1989 70: Mayor and Members of the Li ty Council FROM: grad Buller, City Planner BY: Arlene Banks, Associate Planner SUBJECT: REPORT ON THE MILLS ACT f~ ~ ~ ~S 19r, BACKGROUND: In August 1988, the City Council discussed irc entives for historic preservation and encouraged staff and the Historic Preserv atian Commission to move forward to provide as many rea savable incentives as passihle t4 encourage designation and preserve tf on of historic properties in the City. Since that time, the Commission and staff have explored the details of many available incenttves. One of the most promising is the Mills Act. The Mills Act is a State Taw tha4 enables an owner of a qualified historic building to enter into a contract with the City to preserve, maintain, and if netessa ry, rehabilitate or restore their historic building. The corttract runs for 10 years and is annually automatically renewed for an additional year unless cancelled. It requires that the assessor re-evaluate the property using a capitalization of income method rather than market value. The result is a substantial reduction in property taxes for post- Proposition 13 qualified historic properties. Landmark designation is sufficient to qualify a property, The M111s Act has been used only a few times in the State. A major reason is that the original version of the law required annual public aaess througA the property, but this requirement was deleted in 1986. Xew interest has been generated in the Mills Act recently and Rancho Cucamonga has been recognized as being on the leading edge of efforts to put it to use. II. ANALYSIS: The fiscal impact of the lowered property taxes will be felt mostly by the County. The attached ezampie, (see Exhibit "B") which is not a dellnittve calculation but gives an idea of the kind of savings that owners can experience, shows that on a (225,060 home, the City loses 584.00 per year in general fund taxes, while the landmark owner saves 51998.00. (TO get a definitive calculation from the assessor's office, we will have to submit an actual contract.) Staff's expectation is that one to two dozen contracts would be drawn up over the next few years. Given an average lass to the Lity of S84 per year per contract, two dozen contracts would mean an annual loss to the general fund of f2 ,016. MEMO 10 CITY COUNCIL RE: MILLS ACT August 22, 1989 saga 2 Balanced against that loss would be a gain to the Li ty in terms of maintenance, rehabilitation, and revitalization of historic property. Mills Act contracts provide a positive and tangible inc en tive~ to owners of potential landmarks who may be hesitant about desf gnatian. This to fo rma lion has been reviewed by Jerry Fu lwaod, Deputy City Manager, and Jim Na rt, Administrative Services Of rec to r, who acknowledge the loss to the general fund, but see the benefits to the City of incentives for Dreservation. As pointed out in the attached material. nne ~~ t!.. ~t;t ;;pcc t; ;, cne mills act is that it does not require the historical build ing to be on the Nattonai Register nor must it be a commercial enterprise. Modest local landmarks can qualify. Also attached is a Sample "Historic Preservation Agreement" drawn up by our City Attorney's office. IL contains all the necessary provisions required by law. A copy of the MiTTs Act and the a ppifcahle secttort at the California Tax Cods is atiadbd. III. COMCWSION: Staff wiil work with interested owners to set uD Mills ctT contract agreements. !n seeking out properties for contract agreements, staff will give first Driority to potential landmarks identified in the historic resources survey as the Lity's most significant structures. A second criterion will be potential landmarks with deferred maintenance, where the tax savings could be put to good use in repairing the structures. Staff believes that offering to enter into Mi11s Act contracts with pro De rty owners will be a good incentive for designation and preservation efforts because tt brings a tangible benefit to owners. The money saved can be put to use to mainta to and restore the landmark, which is a benefit to the entire comalunity, present and future. Should you have any questions regarding our efforts in this area, please feel free to call either Arlene Banks or myself. We wilt keep you posted on the success of this program. Resp ally t Brad e Lity P anner BB:AB:ko ~~ MEMO 70 CITY COUNCIL RE: MILlS ALT August 22, 1989 Page 3 Attachments: Exhibit "A" - Excerpt From April, 1989 California Preservation Foundation Newsletter Exhibit "8" - Economic Impact of the Mills Act ' ~ Exhibit "C" - The M111s Act (Calf fo rnia Government Code Sect ton 50280-50289; Exhibit "~" - Califu rn to Revenue and lax Code Sec H on 439-439.4 Exhibit "E" Historic Property Preservation Agreement cc: Jack Lam Jerry Fulwood Rick Gomez Jiw riart Ar'. ene Banks Historic Preservation Commission r~ MILLS ACT Arlene Banlcs City of Rancho Cucamonga From April, 1989, California Preservation Foundation newsletter: TA% WCENTIVES FOR PROPERTY OVMEIIS Ranene Cuumonae hn Man worldM r Ird r many LbanNvn as peribr whkh would ereourpe ownna d hbbrb propanies to Inl enlhuaaslk about landmark de+igrtion. A moN promisirq, dean mentbned bn aurynsinply urMamaed tool b Iha Mllls Aol. Thb Slae law (Own«naM Coda Sectbn 502a0.1) mab- W a rury rrourltlt ro con0actwish an ownr d e quNilf W hiuaical propeM (NatVta on r Blida bcal ragbtu mp M su0bieM) b'rearkl tM ur d the propartY' Idr hiuoric prrarvabn purpasaa Tha ra>nued tarrrl b /or • mbbrm d tan Yawn. h em mrdakr mrMNione about rapes antl rhariktalion, bd IMn b no public aotre reWkemaM n moo ones vns. Orin • Gonbad b approved. me count)' rn+aoYe dllp b mlllyd, arW ms r+uaw moat man duarmina IM valve of IM proparry uskq a'apilakxation of klmrna matlbd: In wma ern, aspadasy tar progrry bought eMr Pmpositbn 13, prol»ny :cvn may M reduced b1' a largo parcrlaga. Tha Mwly of IM Mi4f Act i+ IMt a modest Mme can OuakiY -Ihua'a no neasady for • NNbnal Regioer li+tirp or r'rcoma produerp' goal, u b IM can wdh ladual tea credaa. To liqure out how IM Myb Ad works. qM • Dopy d Mkla 1.4, Saclbn 139 0l Chaplar 3, Pan 2, Dwbion t of IM Sroe Rnerwa and Tratbn Coda (Your cdy'e Ibarva de• panment may be w4wlp to pMlocopy IM Mo papas d sedan A39.2 -IM Marl, abrq wish • wpY d me Miye Aa, .nd oak your In prep«u b weulaa yad savinpf. M werskndNbd nampla d how N wwk! lu an owno- oavpbd home b as lobww: 1. Ca1cu W e tM rnur klooma Nut woW M aunid h your Ouadied hisbrlc bulArrp N N woe b M ranted. mrue rpanrt 2. CakuWe IM •upAalyelbn roe' by eddkq: ~ The Fadua hams tun 9yMt SoaN'e SepemD« knerw rata rounded ro Nr Muaa 1/a%, (WI SepleniMr: 10.231 PLUS 0. M hbrorka pragrry Nsk rbmponenl of 1%lor rnidaMW propaNy. PLUS a Taa raa parwmage (a s01a war 1%), PLUS o. voceMepe ayuu b raapraca of IM nmainrg INa d IM buildkq. 'Ramalnlnq INa' Ilqurs of 20.50 yang u. commonly wad; the raelprxal a 20 yws b 120, whkh b 5%. 3. DHNa tM annual Ncoma in It) bi me wm d a., b., e. andd. TM earogiueayoudr noes vaArdUr hWork papr• . ry. TMranwe tav roe b appNed ro mla nw vNW. wMn waealmneled an aaempla d • 5100.000 boon whkh wdi- nady would pay shod f1200 pu Yau h proPany lanes, IM now lean under IM Alilb Act ware under f300 po yer. CdY +bll eaNad aM wo the Nab Io IiM sample egna- mmb and Iwnd Day • Mrblul. Ranch Cwamorga'a Cdy Mornay hn drawn up a sampb.model agreemam whkh wit soon M presented to IM City Councit II the eorbepl b approved W Iha Counei, owrnn of potential landmarks witl M eoMadM b ra N IMy ue rlarnled in purauinq vt aprnmaM. Lrvlmark dasgnabn and prnarvnbn would M • raquWmanl. TM contract ado- malkaly ranewa ibaM nary yes unlns a mtke b given. N an ownu carbeb . AAib Ad mMrad wiMd IM requked 10.yeu ndka, IM W/ meMaes psymaM d a n.hy In: 12 12%d IM lu0 uwrent valve d lM progeny. -Arbne Banks EbsYa G«rewa: CPF. ka«Kq Hadrrae Terk F«r renam- mwle+aaa4 +lrtteed+d b Awry rvnendrierb rnWa b h hfll+ Ad N Irf r r elbrnpl b+erpwy h lepuk«M1M+eld 'vlarw usage. We ebo alma erl tlr Loh Aa earal+ srry 11op, 13 rerrnmwe Y rr a sW d e earoaeled prop«ry, Mabel ra IW1r4 Sly, bra «a tan allWlpa a rAp+ aCl VM. CPF ,nenib« artea Nank+, aerwdar Plenty br h eiry a Kerala Curmage, oonaisurd Ns eraW r ale Yu Den o1 a rwrwed CPF abn b mW Ha bq«ru YwnM nsr Iwawn b Cafi«nWU: M lnrnd b pWrn • ImNW+r YrdY on h rurs, pracre, erd Oruale • wial+amd+cerweas erd ON+bdn r Sspwribu. ~1 ECONOMIC U~ACT OF THE MWS ACT The Milo Act enables property owners ro pay aubssmtially lower property tun. Because counties receive the major portion of pttrperty uxn, they bear the bnmt of the loos. Citin, which pnaglly receive about 4% of property uaea, beu a leaa<r burden. The economic impact, o[ the Mills Act on Rmcha Cucamonp is illustrated in the follorint example: (Nora The devils of eaeA sup bdor will be confimted when the Sm Bernardino Aaaeswrs O(fu.e calculates new rases for an sctuil eonsrcc0. but the County Appraiser informally fowd our interpretation of the Mills Act and the Cilifomia Tu Code to be generilly acceptable. ) Assumc the vane o[ a rmmdy purchased landnsuk house in Raaho Cuctmonp is 5223,000. Property rues re 52327. 63 (1.1230%), and the pardon that the city is ensitled m soma 5106.61 (4.778% of the 1% uubliah<d by Proposition I3. The rcmainin6 .1230% it for special naeummts) Assume that she property coWd net 5600 per month (5930 roar minty 5130 asxwl expmaea). It me owner enten into a Mills Act contrecF thm the capiWiradon of inwme medtod would yield a value calculated n (allows: (su attached union from Tu Code) Amod Net Incovte: 5500 a II .59606 Capitalization Rate- (l.) Fcdenl Home Lam Rase (9/BB) IO.25f (2J Hinorical Properly Riak Compoatat {.00 UJ Property Tax Componem 1.12 (4.) Reciprxil of itsrytovmtrnd remainin6 life (assume 20 yrs.) 3.00 20.77% Vilw: 5960D divided by 20.37 % ..(47,126.00 New taxes (1.1274% of value) ; .32q,µ Ciry portion (1.738!a ofl%of value): . 22,72 Loses m City: . p,29 Saving to Imdmuk ornv (52S27.tS3 • 352q.M): . 1996.21 The tax has m be reuleulued each year to allot for increases in rmu in the area and chmpa is the Federal Home Lom tale. It should be remembered slut thin example uawees a reemtly purchoaM Dome; many Imdmuka and potential Imdmarb Dow hem in the same oamership for yeah and w ue paying lover property uses: therefore the uvinp to the Ormert could bt Ieu sad the loot to tDt city wrould be lau. (f the example rcprewu the print of m awnp htedmarlt, thm the city low m averap of 551.00 per yeu for each Mille Act emtnact. Wei6hed apiwt thin lau is tJr pin m the city in rcluDiliuud historic propenin and rcviulizatioo. 'Ihe Mille Act ilm Drinp totnethinB pmidva and tm~iDle to offer to orners of historic propeniea and intxeaata inlercat in deai~wtioo. l~ ~vL~- ~~~ ``. ARTZCI.E 12 Ipriginal Poor Q~~~~~' HISTOR. ERTY COffTRA0T9 /.(il/~~ P Ll ~ PKSi'n .tea Z Sufi :r r...~ ~ 50280. Restriction of use of property; application of owner 50280.1. Qualified hlatarical property 50281. Required psovisiana of contract 50281.1. Contract fee 50282. Renewal; nonrenewal; notice; protest; recordat+nn• ...~_. - 80284. Cancellation; grounds 50285• Cancellation; notice; hearing 50286. Cancellation; fee; payment 50287. Action to enforce contract; parties 50288. Acqulaition of property byy eminent doslein; cancel- lation Ot contract; ioappllcabiiity to dete;ml.oatioa of valuer $0284• Annexation by clty.ot property under contract to county; rights and duties of city 50290. Consultation with atat• commission C~!'-~ Cc4n~ I ~ar $onrA ~ ~cpu nTrxs r~ ianrnvrp.x. areas> may Contra c'F W~ourna. #o .esT'^~'c r' use of h~sierre props ~o carry e..f. the pu.posa 'fh,s n. title. ant. Sa<+;c~ 939 eF Revenue enf "R: Cade Cie ~s~•d~ ~..{~r^~A ~M'"'ci1 P^W~~ 1 ra/a aaYlasl...f r of .nl.seq+ ..NINY.. of ww~ - .. .... m1Y/1d ll.N Ta. 1aTT rN/eNt w4ersel 'creel. f.na.. 1 aces.. MM M auslaTl a e4 1J Ieear.aAla eW teNN •fl N laif... 7aTa 1 1. eN m.eil.rN 1 f.1.ar. r h. •aNW t Iw..ew aaTlai eaa .«eW p aus..JaH. . .W e.Aea 11e1) ./ Ci.nw r. ors r. 7AT. l 1eT. Isar aN e.r. C.W.sal. CW M1naa O.wsar.ae. LYaq l.feea... HWsa W L.11.aaNl e~9ala1. CI1 RMO W Ceew...N 11 ei a .la. ua M NF UnwYn. YMenN GIINae. R eYe.n. A N`NMaee1 _ . 19 G 'Original Poor_ ~+!a!ity d dw5f. Q..tlfl.+nla.nrl p..reb Y rtrwvt ea~i rww n..a~'ae°u~d r`.elm orm~.°i n~ °1O°"" •bieh w u.w r. w Hetlaw Rgra.er mtafk ehe.. ar ierae ~.. f.rrtar bumf's dltaiee r local dp.d'a 9.efb. 1.181-Abl of 17d. ?0 of fh. Cad. of Fad.eY R.NUnoet. c i 4y 1b1 Wetd m rl tuft eq, mant7. ar eR1' and mmq oltlrni equar of binafio! a wbiaeafr ~ r eat rSiC~ .ltY uy.'fr.t rota Yin.. or 4odau.n i5 SuF~~c,e ni is (Addtd b~ smr.tsr. L lt14 a --. f 4J bf gu..ti F,e4 Y 7Ylti. rq.b.d Yro.ltler m aea.et • • • Aa) emv.et rwr ur oedr mY iffleto tb.tl meabt w loUe.l.r pewufeer nl~n;m,.m ~ W 'f6. f~ o! w ~~ atoll br !ae • meimum geiod of ~Q J.teL to y Y4/5, Ibl WMn .pphabM w erCrt ahtL YtarNe w d7a~.[• C nnteaef can m r,..w~j..p.~.ay..~.fq.,. ..... .._. _ .`~:::.:~ :.w-~w ..,w .~... s.~.rS. m eamn ana S`l°~i HY ~ yI ~ ~ lJ.p.rmyrt of hr~ 4 mNw .o~eLw ~4~ of w uian sr niaa+rie'rfwrvr ~ ... M54onL-1''~f ' ~ pa ~ q~ mmm.ebef of w tmkr ud oacukr of w OfwW. M N. wrwr. w rC I1LJ. ~ Drpntmtot OL Pala rd R.ee..doL .ed w $ar BoYd d !go.linYa. a etir b• ..rtt.q m Q.'lo,.t ~ d.Yn.l.o w o.etr'. eMgk.on ~ w.ew.tt. scam, nL{+ons ~r Voa.orc~ab.LL~ ~w .~smr~ Who tlp ~o om~ii.r wr.-ow~e.w'. 1 +v de~ermee etttr .bo rand i.u JI. mraree epYtdianc s '+~` (estsdtd b Jem.trrL L sr, ~ ~ f 11 C~rf' f~ftlains c ~ r~.ft• ~ tfFed` .t{~O1 change O(• pN~Lr"fhip . _ .. ..., __..... lOrortd lVar .. ~ . /an!/! / l~11. rddrd N~.7h0.1N7. L .1U7frA Yd YYdd 41 rr411f1•. F 143r. 0. s'f4 i 1, w f..YMeN ~ 7f7, P 1J1R 1 IbL t'e[ ~ SNrLL Cwfnef M (TLLy ..rd ~~ '!a. It~lfl.tin 6od1 rariot ur • ee.aoet drralbr i. dfw wet. eat naa++. far fu. YfeY.ref K`}* ntt oweu. r . madiato m rreur ism w ~a.atet pq . fr mt m rrd w e..taa.b4 err of lbu .a~u:utar ri. Yfetr.eti ne/tSnnlV IAddd bf Sa4lYrr. L rrr. F ~. 1 U tn~eytf() Rlu~n c~5 ~ 1 rrlri Rrwp .r.p..rW rtks Ygetrtt n..t'dY4fY .fta 10 n. ~+Afl ~ W 6tY .wre.r.e pwW. qtr r w dw et m. m.a.s r rd after ra..l y a.r r : drrdOd Y w ara.ey . f..r .b,® wtewatlell> r.w i.if{.1 eua of w Pr(~~ ra}i o~ . mart ritr e.ur et.sene.w.l "r rirto r pnMOl i. ebit d.tOa.. ¢ w asn.r r rinn~lal~ f w It{IdtYt't b.y drYr u rr r..r sot b fw. w era+ee slat prry eMW ..m mew y raratrr.~o.N.twm.a.uoewow.wa'rr.rr.rw...rln....fd.morw a 4dW i 5 entlreL Udr rdo. i turN bf eh. owr u I..tt % b1A rt+tt r w ne.wl d.u r 6! a ddfd f0 tiv. wMrYWt~~~La do Pnt. r w fw..l d.y ar lttrtWl .aaa.fir.C~ M ddod ~Crrrf un IffS ti M Vp. ntdlt b w ewer of . esrk. Ga. w bNf K ranaw4 eM oarr nrf ux;{}en nofii. ~. neao Yfotrf of w .etln ar.ernet~.L tfY tepd.dw bey sae. u r~ dr pore r o{' h)')Knar.al w far..l d.b, trit8dr.s w eoue. of rr.w.tL is aerved~^ Ou~na.r Ca/1 P't)~S+ C[u1\cal fOnKVa.p.l _-.a.etrlr. • • • owuo d.L11Mf. b rwfrunt ao 'Original-Poor Quality ton ce llf~ -7 Id I7 eM MebI.U.. l.df « tM ...s r.m..etle. e! let.ee i..e1 Y..r ~ m nn«r. rd Lon{tJ GT eonttaet. rb eskdot matnut...n nm.ie k e_Kerc far 2e b.l.eee a! W C.r'.ad nm.ie~cs.dst sEt rCn+a~.ro .n oeiJiwt .ntutl.a « tM kt r.e.W oT tb. oxe.e4 u eh. ow out b• C46ci' ~,ar (~'R. avev .lull (omkb N. ktkken boh .rftM Iefonn.Wa • • • N. kekmdn badf ~ t.Ttiance eF eMll nsdte h ordv m.a.bM it m d.onw. tM Wtib ry of N. Vtav.rq i..alr.d. ~rt~ ad ~ (.) Ye I.ur flue PO dsl../t« . ep « eao.q mnn iem . m.e.ea .nth a. aww fen...t m Jii..rtieN. W. ek~k o! tA. I.tuluh. hadl rbW nmrd .iN W e«.y ncard.r . aoff o! N. / Ci } j C!¢rK m.v.et vairL ebW d.w5b U. pnp.rtl .ebj.et tMnfs ' ' frvm ..d aR.r W eim. e! e.w~d.aoe. N' aMtr.R rWl imp.et i mdm ua.o! m W p.r.re. v a .fI«dd b1 tlm nmrdua l'QCOrc~S W i T(1 kn at tbYimra ~OUMy iCreord.~ {~ ~ 9mu19aA a 9aa 0. -_7 J./ ^__.__._. _._ .._. ___.___ p{ leMrs,t ~ S6tal G.rdmtl.lk Oe•y. Pane i l ~ T1r Mthl.eF. Eos1 uq e.rol . metkT I! k d.mrmis N.t tlr aae.e hY blasb.d .e1 M elr ~m'Y.4 t« m du .rekk « W W«nd th. veawrq m d.urionu b ~b. a.et M f may Cwue I ; F i m. t ar.ditloe. o ptlet rb.t R « keav m«u N..med.N. t« • ~aWha bYmriwl ~r M . ~nln eei~ i _ INQQCh. ~ d ...m . u m . mq eul ur.o.m.m..,..: ~:: ::::c.~~-.__..__. .._. tM paprq ie tlr mtaev .p.rid.d i. t-. erae.el. QroPrlt,{ .5) lrcled Pr ne (~~yy Of SmY.1MR c M0. 0. ~ e T•1 .. .. ~. y no+ren.FLud at a5reirr~ $0285. faaaeliaYr; adla; LaselK No ma4act ahaLL tr oootltl m0ar 8eetlm 5078e Wltli alnf tlr - Publ tc ~ Vddattw body has s~ notlee d, aed hr bald; a 0~ ~~s m htann9 1n at d h 8 h ll l h hb 7 c tone an s a s a pew Ll tot addr_ of each t Cancel b WhlLhad penwant to Sectlm 6D61. cO^~~ ~ (Add.d b7 9ta41f'J>Z a lsl2. R 5743. ! L) $ 50286. G1eae~aNea) lea; pa~mrt C4ncellaf~'~ -~ Tl a contract b oenabd under Sactlon 50784, the career aha8 bee.a<sa of W9 a omllatlm tae a< >Z~ Detect a7 the 3u0 aaba d tM ProWr` tY at the thpf pt pnplbtlae, ae deteemleed h)' the camty neaoor p,~.ch o h can {+• ct adthout teiatd to say eaatr"letiae m auth Dt'eDeb bipaad Wrnlant meant P.ym..1"to fhb artlcla. The ouloWatbo fee eWll W paW to the Conrro0ee, at p1 Own.r R aUCh fJ~a and In a1Mh alaatlR a/ tb• CCEh'OVaf lhaV ~l'pQlbe. eOd S'/~ % t6 U a~ he dapodhed !n the 8tat! Geoet7l P170d lu ` (Addei hs Statalf72, a 144; R 2U3. ! L AmadM bf S441Y1t, a ' u~, ,la } 7207, R 2~ fs, ! 4 epintlfe lee. L 1e83.) ~} ytmc , ccUafi«+ f can o ~w Nate L!. Lla .ar.aa.ae .a.a..e te. ur tlfa .~.araa « etl. wa.s We..• ..rum w lr.. a r.r.~t w n... .ew .1... e...m C.rt. a..r. w b ....w ..r. s, e2K e.t.... a n. rv aTr-n r .w~...r a u..wm. r... •.1... q.r.a.. J.a L IML v e.Cl .tw p ~Mmb'. rM .efa~d.e m IaR-a{ w .eet..r M eN .Nd.l .mbaW / A 4 e.N 1v W erll..s We..lm.. W M im .Wr aiaWa C W j > halehlm. Yt.u d e.ww..rt .! .a.r .a.. as .e am.um, a 110f. F atrs w ID.rrW !Nta .err L.a0. 1 7L ai "mriginal_Poor Qual;ty so2a7. eauoa b aotwos oootaet: Prue. Qeun~l ;ra ~ as dtematlw b uacelLtloo of the cattrad for hteadt of aay madit)oa, the memq, dtr. or ear hitadowmr mar brim aro' co- ',ando.~~v' may tlm b court nacaaaey to antoece a contract IneWdlnb but not IIm1P p,.,y aefi on ~~n W ~ as aCtiott b aatorce ttM contact by apac{!ic pertotmanu or IR- Cou~+ T' )unctloy en FrKe conrracY (Added M $tt4lTlt, a 1N=, y. 71st, { 1.) 50288. segawuoa of property br amlaaat aomtiat eaaoall-- tla• of eoaisect IoappllrahNty b dataatlnWOa of doe To td want that DroVertr su6ieet b mated under t61a article .,~ -.~..,y r~ ...I,wl. ,,,. In n•H 11o rnlaawt dmu{n or Other tCOUlai- c4 Cm+x"c(' ~ by W entlty authoelzed to auncLe the potwr oe aminant do- male' and the aartuWtloa b determined hr tee tgfabtlw hoar to ~ P`•~ ~ ' pro ttWtab the purpose at the matsact, fuc6 contact alull M alacded 0.[r reA ~`~ and m tae ehaU b lmpaeed under Section 3O4A6. Stc6 contract ahaLL fen rnf n'1' Ua~ b deemd md1 cad void tot aY purpose of detaraola)o~ the vahta d doh the ptopaty n acquteed. ib Pnpu}"f $O ~ ;s nd CddAti b u.w. tatsw b 14at.4 77eL 11- ~ a7 Shtala're. a.714 b p 17~ 1f iL) ~ rnrd }i.r [ann.ch WYW NeY 1fa ]na araa~ina unlM W aaa. er ~UWt raaaea. lOerr atrneeae 3are a..r •ef. CZa lblrat aarW 1 K 50289. Amesatlae !~ dtt at ptepert~ coder matraet to co0- tyi tfpb eaO iotlea at e1lr in annvrs¢ Ya the want that property reatticted by a coated vrith a cotmtY a,e.s, c;i,•s uttder th4 articb b tatrxad b a dtY. the dty. ahaC etttxeed to aL r n Hart t rl~bta, dudes, tad Dotrea at tht COtmtY uodar such ma47et rcisind t wC ~ (AddJ 47 S4b1f4; a INL P 311. 1 L) - c can') y . lessee CeeeaWd.a .aa ear ee.atYeee - _ ~a.Je. taaal a f~dr W wet e! ~!W Wewiv MTr~+ r7 ~a Oita W gar 11Yeerfrl FFYlonca~ u~iaoa CarWaM • • • M'Y M.Ir W rarY ~ eaut~e n)e.ua r Ww1rt Oar ~iywrtis cemmna;w UrWaehSWalNl.afee,F~.{N~. --~_.,.~ adr~r5 .-_ tie! haheeela 8aaa W 7Stireerrt er}Dd r r e7, K sea ssa 11e r 17e, ClA iWd W Lttr«rrt 11 el r 17R »w 177. tae, 17e. 77t r 1e0. ea es, n a t; to r e0. ! r ea tat SN r tat as ^~~~ _ ~..,, `'~"` ~Vr°r1lAY cr.nq ;c,d. C'odC ! 437 raolER1Y rAXATTO aatotalb by a fatter of 100 aad ~' ! for the prior year. ~„~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ aeellred ~ rek (Added yY SuLL1976, c. 176, p. 3M. ! ll, eN. MaY ZI, 1976. Amended y7 Statelq~ r~ t. 6T0• f I1JS, f l0.l, a@. Seq. 17. 19771 Sutal9l0, a I3M. 0. IWI, ! 77; $len.l9ft, O ~W Nan WnQWh nude charyrammdmm4~.;~Ne M 7b 19M a0endmeal, a tM ead a1 rya ~ aaedoo a rye aanarr and T da4ad 'aori dlrihraad L aaeka Code m Sawka ]WOf at rN aevearr ead 7aeeam O APalinrlr of OteMalaaa of ltaLL1971, a CaM' W •o tye road gea0rapy O 0!0. P I777, m W aetl.inn uadattaken t+aeot "Geenreat Cady delwad 'W ~t a aer m t9eK19M c 176, P A7. r aaM oade War m 9aedaa 1x10! d de ~~ t Gor.C 0 !1100. TaxelMa CodY'. aaRTr r ~ CYr alfatrr O Arta' aemW reared nyn aaAhryle n tlmk, r liewwamaat Cods ! 371y, ~ Tratfae rN7. ter nalrarn O CJS 7relr 9 110. ~~ ~0~~ t10e11or 139. Enfo[otaWr n1~1d go~µr. 139.1, Nenr{eud hi 1192 VJunby ugnlirtlea of fptvma mn6o4 detmmiydoe, 139.3. Naip d aoarnwal d t valrledoa, 179.1. Ratordatloo of eakrcaeble rerrktba gior ro Ilro den. Artfe4 1.9 rw added by Statt:1977, c 1t71Q p. 3f53, f 1. / 439. Batast+sahlr taMtyettl poPsey Mt1a4 7((piII ~ Of this attleb and within the mnoio0 of Section 1 I subject r m ~~ ~ a ratrfekd' if k Y ccammaodo4 witb Saabn ~rnotratt axenuad ~0t to Ardd1 V S of the Gtrwrnmmt CotM. ~ 1 Of Part 1 aE dvisir t d 1id1 (AdYd bf Stata1977, e. 1000, R 7153. !{ A) tiaq tielnaera ~ltadlh 4dtaart f 01 n e14 011n W IarY Tarllaa. Iaae. f 111. 437.1. Raa4letad hlataeleal ~r Far PrPnrs at this taYiela •rarrktsd hhtol4tal ptopwty tort tpalrtl hlrtaeieal praparty, o ddiod ie SaNon SgS10.1 of the Gorrnmant pls 391 a3 sh. 1 7Y the setursd tax yak Amended by Suu.1977, p. WaJ. 3 77; Suu.198{, mm4 at dlt eM of We F4n °ud d4mbuled parwe0t f dY aermw and 7+aanm Kood parapaph foamwlga a.kl.d .,m dimlt,ned 1 SWm of Ub Revmue and a• Code 1 77157. . J153, 4 1. nine of Section s of dy restricted' if it is usuant m Article I2 of Division I of Title arty" means gWhlld to Government Cods, 'dri~inaf Poor ~ua!'ty htII =T6itif.Ai. ?R6tEN'PY /139.2 which is wbj«t to a hisoorical property contract executed pursuant to Mock 12 (sommeneiq with Seabn S02t19) of Chspur 1 of Pert l of Divtsioa 1 of Title S of the Government Code. (Added by Sut>19T7, e. IOW, p. JI37, S ~• Amandtd by $uLLl%S, a %S. S 9.) ~ RrrW !Wu Sla 19x7 modern wWllutad'u deeaed fmaommdry Wdl 9eeWo 70.71) d CNpur 1 in Ssnm SmaD.l a( dae Govenvam Code' of DlMSlae S of dr W6Oe aeewume Cade': Far "e1M11oa dY ngWremmu M Ankle 7 end nude • pwmedml Chalice. ~ 4392~1,V,yY~'ua~~tbr~~+:~a~pyWlleatlm at isooms satholt7 dssaeminWm When v.....ay cu.Vaa.rwr7 rGtrll:fed hiaoriui propmty, [he county assessor 7hail OOt COOAdR rake dtlta On aimikr propeery, Whether or 1101 etdotxeably ..wd'1.v1 aryl ehall .,r.hr w,..h ..«.I.y.,l hl.w..i..l .........w. M..A~ ..^~:...1:« (ion of iaeoms method in the followios manner: (a) 'f9le •"^ ••r ~ ~1^'~'^~ IO bf GP(inUxd ehe)(b detQminld Y fOVOwi: (t) When sut$daot ratttal informadm k avaf W7k, tM income ffW) be the faw~cem whkh an be imputed to the rae~faad historled property beio~ valued band upon lent acnully recdved Eor tlta property by the owner alld upon typical rentals teciaad hx tht asaa for slmWc Ptepse4 is similar use Wheys ehs owsar prys the peeparq tn: Whys tM resAlud hiatosiwl p7opsq hsiq vahatl 4 asataly attaumbsnd~ by a laa~ say cash loot ar Yt uplivakot oossidsead m dstslt~q tM fair ram of the propety shstl M the amotmt for which the propaety would Ife wNeeted m tam waro the ramal psylsem to t» retts4otiatd ro the liahe of taorant conditlooa isdudls{ tlpplkabie pmvlaiom undo whkh the ptelpsrty k atttarenby remitted. (2) Where atHidrnt ~~ +~r -!+^- ±e mt av +ai•~ thaJp~e shall be that which the remieted historical property halos valued rg~y ~ e:perted b yield under pndant maoydoast and suhjpx m apptlrabk prow. lions utdsr whkh the ploputy is tafaroaaWy remixed. (3) If theme to ao inmammt which tsforuably remicts the property IdpJw-tbmlo ao amamt which coostlsnea the minimum amual laconic to be agWiaat4 thm tlw income ro be upitail'aed shall Ile be~the amouet so stipulsad, For pu:pors d this sseges jeppma shaLL be dlltartntsd is aocordssce with tulaa and asulrkst iawd by the board at7d with thfs senbo alJd shall be ~ Revesw shall belie atttoml d toooey ore moseys worth, cuh rem ar ib equivalent, vdieh the property corn ba aapaaad to yield to b owseroperater annually on Ib aslega Gem say uaa of the praparty paemittd usdar the terms by which the Pmparty le aolesorWy tem~icrad. ~Nse shall 6e any outlq ar awrga atrsual alh7catlos of tiasry a measys 1raRh that us 6a (airy ehsrssd apimt the revmlr a:pacled m be ^alwd dtaiq td pafod urd is wmpmis~ such ravasw. Thoas mar m be ehatsad eodnat tewew ahsU ba sLlLthasa which an or i~atr s~awsary b the predltctios and m,isMasr~a '~th.t 399 A ,..r, . a~ li342 llt0lF.>RiY 2A7CAT[6~~ tar. I parlotL Expenditures shall n« Include depkdon charan, debt rer intareu on toads invented in the property, Property nxea corporadon i tam, or corpondon franchise taxes baud on imwtne. ~ (b)'me Cf~ailoa C1Le tQ bf..llifd is valuine 2wner-occuoied nn~, famllY dweltinp pursuant ro this article dull n« he derivtd from sales dsu ' ` and shall be the wm.of the following compoaenu: (L) Aa intern[ component m bn datermiaed by the board and mnouored / no lams than September I of the ywr preceding the astnammt year sM < which waf the yield rate equal to the etfative rate on conventional mongspy as determined by the Federal Home Loan Book Board, rounded to the Went. en t/. percent. (2) M historfal property risk eomptmetn of tenant. ~ ~~ ponenrr for property taxes which shall be a pereenng..R„~; m ~' y.y.....oie w the propeRy for tilt aaussmmt pk 1 tilfl6a 160 aatnfinent redo. \ (q A component far atoordradoo of the imvravameao w61ah sha8 he s ~ percentage egWvaknt to the redprowl of the remaidng 6fe. (c) The capitaBradoa rare to be used io vahdttg sly other r ht 1 calms putzitrr m th4 astYJa sba8 ms 6s samara uvaa sates des ar sfii8 be r6e sum of the followiaB oewpaeseae (t) Ate ialtsraar compaeenr ro be dtllmmiload bf the board and etgsaeoti ao Lwr than Sspeember L of the year ps'aadlog the aunstnmt yar W whkh wu the yiew taco equal m the aHeuive ran on coavendaod eaortgsga u determined by the Federal Home loan Book Hoard, rounded to the omr• est'h paKenL (2) Aa historical ptopeny risk component o(`2.}erceat. ()) A component for property tares wfiieh ~~ 6e a pereemage egad p the esdmated toW to rate appl)cabk m the property f« the assratxm par times the awpment rsdo. (Q A omponent for attloniratlon of the improvemeets which shag 6a s perceatap equivabnt to the redproal of the remaitdng life. (d) The vglye of the reatritttd hiaar)cat property sha8 be the Iptaiwlf t6sjppppla datermfnad a provided is subd~ivision~a) divided by the apiull ratlon rate determined as provided is whdivisionn (b) or (c). (e) 'lbs ratb praceibed in Section ~Of shall bs applkd w rke value d tY penperly dsrarmlaed b subdivison (d) m obtain iu aasnasd vahlr. (Added bf gtralfn, e. 1010. a ns~, ! f. Ameodad by SmtalfN, e. a~f.1 w tflttmlml Nam YM IfM amgatarm daMad. from dr is d a+aofa rptJtod 17 lenlta 1117 i aY aoenttaq MmYM4 'tM lerd for PmP°rm rnds and pteodlaa'tas soitatY oaad• t~satY Wmda Stet ash !oral Taaatfoe. Ire, / Ilf. if(f2'ORICAf. fRW`E1TY ~ 434.4 ft 3 1 439J. Nona at oooreoawd of eoateact: valuadoa Notavithslandin f anY Mo„~ of Section 43A2 b the coosrary. if either the comfy or city or the owner of restricted historical property subjen to contract has served noti« of nonrcnewal as provided in Section 50282 of ehe Government Code, the comfy asscstor shall value such restr(cted hiaorical property as provided in this action. (a) FoOasvinQ the hearitq conducted pursuant to Section 30285 of the Government Codc, subdivision (by shall apply mtil the termination of the period for which the cmtricted historical property is enforceably reatriaed. (b) The board or aswbr la each year atoll the tertaiaatioa of the period for which the property u etr[orreably restricted shaW (U Detertnirm the full cash valor of the property as if it were not subjen to ao c.u.....cw.:~ . ..:.::.. (2) Detlrtllille the Vain! of the property by the capiWiratiOn Of IIICOme method o provided in Stetioa 1391 and without reprd m the fact that a notice of ttonrettewal or cancellation has accurrsd; (3) Subtract the value determined b para,Qaph (2) of this subdivisioa by apiWirarioa of tnonme ftt~ thr&slloah rshtedtaamlasd in paeQaph fl) of this sslbdivisioo; (1) Usixq the rape aneeoaced by ttr htlN ptttsaaer m p~a~aph (1) of subdivision (b) of Sarsioa 4391, dbtssuau the amwat abtatoed is paraQaph p) of this subdivision for the ttumber of yrars rettsaido4 until the tertai• nation of the period for which the propeely u eofottxably restricted; (5) Determivs the value of tht ptopmty by atidio~ the value determined by the capitaliarion of iMOme method as providcd in parapaph (2) of this subdivision and the value obtained in para{rraph (1) of this subdivisioe; and (d) Apply the ratftq prescribed in Section 101 to the value of the propmry determined in paraaap6 (S) of fhb auhdlvbloa m obtain its asaased value. (Addd by Stats.1977, c 1010. p. 313s, 4 4. Ameaded by Stau1984, c. 678, y 23J 1lMS1eY NeY ibs 1911 aaseedmar dsMad, tram dr ice- par at svrvars saynind is Ssnioa sets, sad' vo0uctory puaRapk '~ dr board, tar par• pnpdiea 1ha caaaq' aw~sr'. 1439.4. beerdat{s~ of sdaresahM bsu5nfsm prior b Ilsm dab No property shall be valued pursuant to this anfele tmlesa m enforceable «stricrloa tttaatln~ the regtWemeets of Sectioa 439 b sipted accepted std rarerded oa a be[ore the Ilea dare for the fiscal year is which the valuation would apply. (Added 6Y 3taa.19T/, c 1010. p. 3131, S 4.) aur~u 401 ~ ~ !"'~ .1 cis of ~.axcno cucaasan~ca STAFF REPORT DATE: July 3, 1991 T0: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack I.am, AICP, City Manager PROM: Brad Huller, City Planner BY: Anthea Hartig, Aeeociate Planner HUBJHCT: NILIS ACT AGR66NHNT 91-02 - HIPPARD PANCH - A proposal Tn implement the use of the Ni lla Act to reduce the property tax on the historic property located at 13181 Victoria Avenue. 9tafE recomendn chat the City Council approve tie wntract for Mille Act Agreement 91-0Z bstrean the City of %nch0 Cueamonga and Jaaes Hanks, Jr. for the Mippard Hooch. ' In August 1908, the Covneil discussed Sncentivea tha_ would encourage hiaioric preservation activities and promotion. The Mille Act allows Eor the owner of a deli grated landmark to realize property tax reductions upon entering into a preservation contract with the City. The eucceeeful initiation of this contract would mark the City's third u6e of the Mills Act, thus providing the owners of historic homes with incentive to preserve these cultural resources (please refer to the staff report for Mille Act Agreement 91-81 for further Lack ground data). The Hippard Aanch represents a unique architectural feetute of the City. Its owners have carefully rehabilitated the home, once a summer retreat for a Bay- area family, and recently received a Dee ign Award for excellence in Historic Preservation from the Planning Commie9lon. OOSCIA8I0M We are aseiated in our afforta to provide incentives Eot the continuation of our cultural heritage by offering the ornate of historic properties the opportunity tc gain benefits from thn preservation of recognized resources. ` Brad City Pla BB:AH:9p a DATE: T0: FROM: BY: SUBJECT: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT July 3, 1991 Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Las, AICP, City Manager Nm. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer Judy Acosta, Engineering Technician Release of a Real Property Isgrovement Contract and Lien sar...ar far 5751 Cabrosa Place, located south of Nilson Avenue, and west of Haven Avenue, soon tree oy nandu~yi~ o~~J Sandy Davis. IELOgIJDRTIDIf It is recowwendad that the City Council adopt the attarJrd Resolution releasing the Real Property Improveeent Contract and Lien Agreement and authorizing the Mayor W sign said release and the City Clerk to forward it to the Recorder. A Real property Improveeent Contract and lien Agreement was approved by the Ctty Council on August 1, 1984, and recorded on August 14, 1984, as Document No. 84-192641 1n the office of the County Retarder, San Bernardino County, California. The agreement was for the postponement of street improvements along Cabrosa P1 ace. The developer has completed the required street improvements for the subJect property and the Release of Bonds and the Notice of Compietlon was accepted at the April 17, 1991, Council Meeting. Therefore, the lien agreement sudeitted by Randolph and Sandy Davis 15 no longer required and staff recommends that it be released. Respectfully subettt~ed, 1„ NJO:JAA:~h ~~~ /' Attachment N. LINE SEC. 26 23'L4 7°S2 30 ~`W _ W I LSOhI 990.18 fa ENUE 26 z; t4 ~ ~ ~O j f Al ~ N ~'\ ( N ot`° ~ ~ o ~ ~ = i u: + c f u 1 Yt 1 d ~~ d (z o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Q a ~ / Y_ ~ ~\ J ~. ~ -~ ru. ~ N %•w s . 1. ~~. i 20 ~~ r~ °~ 5/TE 8 w~ d J •Z J ~ 3 z V CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGINEERIIdG DIVISION N r,~: A" ~srr:. as RESOLUTION N0. 9~" ~ 7 7 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RELEASING A REAL PROPERTY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT AND LIEN AGREEMENT FROM RANDOLPH AND SANDY DAMS NHEREAS, the City Council of the C1ty of Rancho Cucamonga adopted Resolution No. 84-214 accepting a Real Property Improveaent Contract and L1en Agreement Pram Randolph and SanQy Davfs; and iiii~ivi~a, said neai 'rroperry improvearent contract and Lten Agreement was recorded 1n Off1c1a1 Records of Sen Bernardino County, California, on August 14, 1984, 1984, as Donaent No. 84-192641; and NHEREAS, said Reel Property Contract and Lien Agreement 15 mo longer required. NOM, THEREFORE, BE IT RE~LVEB that the' CtQr CouneN of the CtQ' of Rancho Cucamar9a does hereby release said Baal ProperRy Iaproveaunt Contract and Lten Agreement arrd that the Ctq Clerk shall Cause Release Of Ltert to be recorded to the offfce of the County Recorder of San Bernardino Caurtty, California. 30 - CITY OF RA ~CHO CUC/u1i01V'Gei STAFF REPORT DATE: July 3, 1991 T0: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Las, AICP, City Manager FROM: Nn. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Henry Murakoshi, Associate Engineer SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT FDR iN.rrai r aTTnN nc a~NU Tr IMPROVEMENT AND DEDICATION BETWEEN FELIPA REESE ANO THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAIID11G11 FOR SIDENALK A-® WNEELCHIIIR RAMP IMPROVEMENTS, LOCATED ALONG THE NESTERN MID NORTHWESTERN PORTION OF THE REESE PARCEL FOR THE SIERRA MAORE AYENUE- NINTH STREET TO 310 FEET SOUTH OF CHAFFEY STREET ALLEY PROJECT It is recosended that City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving the Agreesent for Installation of Public Isprovesent and Dedication 6etreen Felipa Reese and tha Ctty of Rancho Cucamonga. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS The attached subject AgreeeenL between the City and Felipa Reese provides for sidewalk and wheelchair rasp isprovesents which Include sidewalk and wheelchair rasp installation and other relate4 work, along the +restern and northwestern portion of the Reese parcel. Mrs. Reese has agreed to grant to the City a Sidewalk and Wheelchair Rasp Easement to allow for the installation of sidewalk and wheelchair rasp along Sierra Madre Avenue in return for the construction of said teprovesents. Said sidewalk and wheelchair ramp isprovewents will be constructed in conjunction with the City's Sierra Xadre Avenue Ninth Street to 316 feet south of Chaffey Street Alley Project. Respectfully 5u ted, WJO:HM:sd Attachment RESOLUTION N0. 91' ~ ~ V A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ACCEPTiN6 AN AGREENENT FOR INSTALLATION OF PUDLIC [MPROVElENT AND DEDICATION FROM FELIPA REESE AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO SIGN THE SAME MIEREAS, the City Council of the Ctty of Rancho Cucamonga has established requirements for construction of siAwvalir .~A ..n.t1~._~r-:W-r i ropruvemencs in conJUnCti on with the Sierra Madre Avenue-Ninth Street to 310 feet south of Chaffey Street Alley Protect; and NHEREAS, installation of a sldewaik and wheelchair rasp and other related Mark, located along the western and northwestern portion of the Reeu parcel shall be Dade a Dart of the Sierra Nadu Avenue-Ninth Street to 310 feet seuth of Chaffey Street Ailey Prolact; aad IAIEREAS, Mrs. Raw has agreed to dedicate sldawlk and wheelchair rasp easement to the City for ufd fmprovuents. NON, THEREFORE, 8E IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, does accept said Improvement Agreement, and authorizes the Mayor and the Ciry Clark W sago same, and directs the City Clerk to record same in the Offfte of the County Recorder of San Bernardino County, California. 3a - CITY OF RAIr'CHO CUCAmGNGA -- STAFF REPORT DATE: July 3, 1991 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Councll FROM: Linda D. Daniels, Deputy City Manager SUBJECT: APPRAVAL OF OWNER PARTICPATION AGREEMENT WITH FOOTHILL ASSOCIATES AND THE CiIY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA I RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor to execute an Owner Partlcipation Agreement with Foothill Associates and the City of Rancho Cucamonga. BACKGROUND: On October 3, 1990 the Agency. City and Foothlll Associates entered Into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which set forth the basic terms for a realignment of Pioneer Way and the required redisign to the Sports Complex facility to accommodate the change to the circulation pattern. It was further required by the City and the Agency that the terms be memorialized in. a document which could be recorded against the property to Ensure that any future owner would abide by the agreement. ANALYSIS: The attorneys for both the City/Agency and Foothill Associates have concluded the development of an Owner Particpatlon Agreement which memorializes the terms of the October 1990 MOU into a recordable document. As a point of information, at the timc the MOU was developed the formation of a Community Facilities District to fund these Improvements was not anticipated. Therefore, staff would suggest that once the CFD is formed and the election successful, that the OPA be amended to include the provision of a CFD as a funding mechanism and how that would affect the contributions by Foothlll Associates for the street improvzments to adjacent property owners. Respectfully submitted, ~~ ~. Linda D. Darnels Deputy City Manager This item also appeazs on the Redevelopment Agency agenda for July 3, 1991. The complete OPA Is included as an attachment to that staff report ~. -- CITI' OF RANCHO CUCAidONGA STAFF REPORT ^~~'' DATE: July 3, 1991 T0: Mayor and Meiebers of the City Council Jack Laei, AICP, City Manager FROM: Wm. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Linda Beek, Jr. Ertglceer ~:).°...~..r: •wen wn ui.uro tvmrrnu inD cYirITTOw nF mnfIFFCSTONAL SERViCES AGREEMENT FOR BRIDGE INSPECTION FOR AKRON ROUTE BRIDGE IMPROVEMENTS, LOCATED AT CUCAMONOA CREEK, FOR THE AMOUNT OF 515,000.00, TO BE FUNDED FROM SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT ACCOUNT N0. 22-4637-8738 RECDI~A~TIOIk It fs recomeended that the City Council award and authorize for execution the Professional Services Agreewlent for Bridge Inspection for Arrow Route Bridge Imgrovemients to L.D. King, Incorporated, for the amwunt of f15,000.00 and authorize the Adsintstrative Services Director to expend f16,500.00 (515,000.00 plus lOZ contingency) to be funded fraw Systees Developaent Account No. 22-4637-8738. BIICK920UMD/ANALYSIS Caitrans requires a qualified, licensed bridge inspector to inspect the bridge portion of Lhe protect. L.D. King, Incorporated, 1s qualified and approved by Cal trans for work as inspector on bridges and has performed satisfactorily on previous bridge ,lobs in the City. ~~ Respectfully su tted, Na. Jce O'Neil City Engineer NJO:LBad Attacharent cc: Purchasing _ ~ 3y !;I'I'Y Lk' 1tANCHO CI;CAAfO1GA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 3. 1991 ~~ T0: Mayor, and Nembers of the City Council Jack Lau, AICP, Ctty Manager FROM: Mn. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Steve M. 61Ttiland, Public Norks Inspector TI~ SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF tMPROYEMENT AFRFiKiR CYTCMCTMt mo Tosn +?g+o LANDSCAPE, LOCATED ON THE SOUIH EAST CORNER OF HERM0511 AVENUE AND MINZANITA DR1VE, SUBMITTED BY BAAYOUN DEVELOPMENT It fs recaaamnded that the City Councfl adopt the attached resolution, accepting the subfect agreeam~ extension and security and authorizing the Mayor and Ctty Clerk to sign said agreement. BAf:IIdid111D/ANN.YSIS Improvement Agreement and Inproveamnt Security to guarantee the construction of the public improvements for Tract 13318 Landscape were approved by the City Council on July 7, 1988, in Lhe following amounts: Faithful Performance Bond: (95,000. Labor and Material Bond: 547,500. The developer, Baayoun Development is requesting approval of a 6-month extension on said improveuent agreement in order to couplets the Landscape installation and the establishment period. Copies of the Improvement Agreement Extension are available in the City Clerk's Office. Respectfuity submltf~dgJ/, C~ Mn. Joe O'Neil ~\~/ City Engineer NJO:SMG:Iy Attachments Bgayoun Development CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~ 1ObO0 CIVIC CENTER DR. P.O. BOX 507 RANCHO CUCAMONOA, CA 91729 JUNE 3, 1991 ATTN: STEVB GILLILAND PUBLIC WORKS INSPECTOR II RE: TRACT 13315 BXTBNTION OF THE IMPROVEMENT AORREMENT. DEAR SIR, DUE TO TI[E FAILORH OF THE LANDSCAPING CONTRATOR TO COMPLHTE THE NORX RBQtlIRED BY T$E CITY OP RANCHO COCAMONOA, WE HERE BY REQUEST TBAT THE CITY GRAIIT IIS AN EETENTION 08 SIX MOIITES IN ORDER POR tlS M BE ABLE TO PIND ,! 9lIBSTITFiDR COIflRATOR TO COIIPLETB TRB WORE REMAIAINd. THE PREVIOO3 COMTRA7'O!t HAD LEPT THE LAlIDSCAPINO IN A COIfDITIOIf NOT ACCEP3ADLE BY TR6 CZT! POR PINAL AlPROVAL. WB ARE CURRENTLY WOREINO ON PINDINO A COHTRATOR LINO WILL REPLACE ALL THS MATERIAL, AED WHO WILL MAINTAIN THE AREA UNS'ILL T$E CITY OP RANCHO CUCAMAONGA IS WILLING TO REALSE OUR BOND. TEE ESTIMATED TIME TO ACCOMPLISH OUR GOAL IS ABOOT PIVB TO 3IX MONTHS. WE AT BAYOVN CORP. ARE WORKING HARD IN ORDER TO OST ALL IMPROVEMENTS COMPLETED AND RELEASED. INCERELY YOURS, YEHIA BAAYOUN PRESIDENT pure t a isyi CITY i6 d;n :~`J ;', '.»~pgF. 3 to 15342 I'i5mthorne 1>oubv5rd Suite 405 • LSwnd5le, CA 90260 • (213) 679-8372 RESOLUTION N0. C~ /-' 7~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNC1l OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMDROYEMENT AGREEMENT EXTENSION AND IMPROVEPENT SECURITY FOR TRACT 13318 LANDSCAPE NHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has for its consideration an Improvement Agreement Extension executed on July 3, 1991, by Baayoun as developer, for the improvement of public right-of-way adjacent to the real property specifically described therein, and generally iocaceo al Lim ~VYwT.aut wv...-. ^f uw.r,oa avenue and Manzanita Drive; and NHEREAS, the installation of such improvements, described 1n said Improvement Agreement and sub,~ect to the tenas thereof, 1s W be done in con,{unction with the development of said Tract 13318 Landscape; and NHEREAS, said Improvement Agreement Extension is secured and accompanied by good and sufftctent Lprovememt Security, which is ideMtited in said Improvement Agreement Extension. NOY, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California hereby resolves, that said Improvement Agreement Extension and said Improvement Security be and the same are hereby approved and the Mayor is hereby authorized to sign said Improvement Agreement Extension on behalf of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, and the Lity Clerk to attest thereto. 3l - ------ C1TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT ° ~;`~ DATE; Juiy 3, 1991 '~, T0: Mayor and Meabers of the City Council Jack Lam, AiCP, City Manager FROM: µn. Jce O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Steve M. Gilliland, Public Norks Inspector I~y~_ SUBJECT: RELEASE OF BONDS FDR TRACT 9400, LOCATED ON THE NDRTN SIDE ~~ ~~IiY~u ererR artYFFN BERYL STREET AND CARNELIAN STREET It is recommended that the City Council release the Faithful Perforeance Bond of f28,000 and the Labor and Materiai Bond of 514,000 for Tract 9400, located on Lha north side of Banyan Street between Beryi Street and . Carnelian Street. BlICK6l0U~/ANI~rSIS At the regularly scheduled meeting of June 15, 1988, Ctty Council accepted the Improvements for Tract 9400, released the Improvement Bond, and a Notice of Completion was filed. At the June 5, 1991, meeting, the Maintenance Bond was approved by Council for release. At this time, all improvements continue to•rematn free from defects in materials and workmanship. It is therefore recommended that Clty Council release the remaining securities. Tract 9400 - located on Lhe north side of Banyan Street between Beryl Street and Carnelian Street Developer: Prado Corporation 1156 N. Tustin Avenue Orange, CA 92667 Release: Faithful Performance Bond 528,000 Labor and Material Bond 514,000 0.espectfully su d, uJO:sMG:sd ~~~ Attachment CSTY OF RANCH9 CUCASiO1GA STAFF REPORT DATE: T0: FROM: BY: SU&IECT: July 3, 1991 Mayor, and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, C1ty Manager Wm. Joe O'Ne11, City Engineer Steve M. Gi1111artQ, Publte Works Inspecto~ RELEASE OF MAINTENANCE GUARANTEE BOND FOR nnarr ??..? LBC.".TC9 ~;: T~~ SuiiinNtSl CORNER VICTORIA PARK LANE Ally FAIRMON7' WAY RECONIEMDATION It is recommended that the City Couerctl aadorfDe the Cfty Clerk to release the 1Ntntenance Gwrantae 8ond_ BACI(~D/IIMALYSIS The required one year maintenance period has ended and the street improvements remain free from defects 1n materials and workmanship. DEVELOPER: Republic Development 180 N. Rlvervtew Dr. if130 Anaheim, CA 92608 Release: Maintenance Guarantee Bond iStreet) f46,751 Respectfully subm d, ~• ~~ ' `„"' Wm. Joe O'Neil C9ty Engineer WJO:SMG: c,1c ORDDANCE NO. 448 AN ~IIUfNCE OP' 'DIE CITY OOfNCII. OF '1HE CITY OF RANCID CUCAMCHGA, CALIFYYQiIA, APPIY7VING IIiD[JSIRLAL AREA SPECIYTC PLAN AME2d1FF1F27P 91-03, EBIIfBT.IS2~IG RD;<IIAFICNS F172 ~ I1m00R WHOI.FSAIE/REI'AII. ~ItCIAi, [JSE, NDDIIYIIJG 'D~ DEFIIiITICN OF E>rDNSIVE D4PALT Oai~7Ai, USE, AND MAI@IG FII~IDINGS IN SUPlYA31' 1FIFRFDF The City Council of the City of Ratx3a Cucamavrfa does hereby ordain as follows: SECTION 1: Part III, Table III-1 is here2y amender] to read, in wottiN; aid figia~es, as shown in the attadvd E#~ibit "A". SFX.TiON 2: Part III, Table III-2, Iand Use type Definitions, Section D is hereby added to resod, in wvxrla and figures, as follows: D. O~CIAL USE TYPES Indoor tdwlesale/Retail ~nme'rTM+ial: Activities typically include, but are not limited tn: retail, wholesale, or discount sales. 7he.^~e types of busiihsses exclusively irnolve mlltiple vetYlofs selling new goods in separate, ~*+vner+t display structw.~es. Uses typically include, but are not limited to: discautit outlets and indmr swap meets. SECTION 3: Part III, Table III-2, Suteec:tion D, and use type of definition for ExtPtfsive Tmpact Cmmer~cial is hereby amended to read, in wmcls and figures, as follows: Extensive Fact ~m~ercial: Activities typically include, but are rot limited to: these whidi produce or may produce a substantial i:ig~a~t upon the srnr_undiig area. CCSes typically include, tut are not limited to: outdoar swap meets, went parks, arc] drive-in movie theaters. SfYTIOl1 4: Part III, Section N - Subsection F.3, parking arc] loading requirements, is h_reby amended to add: g. Indoor Wholesale/Retail Camwxcial use: 1 space per ioo square feet. Alternatively, as part of the eonditional use permit revlxw, the Panlting Own' ~~ion may allow 1 space per 150 ~'e feet subject to presentation of traffic aid parking studies. serrlobb 5: Part Nis hereby amended to add "~. Wholesale/Retail Commercial" as a conditionally permitted use within °•'^°~-^-- 8-11 aryl 13-15. L` Ordl7tanC8 NO. 448 Page 2 FiIlCPZW 6: Pact ZII, Section N. DevNcment 8tattderds, ~ o+trar~+•-• R is hereby added to seed, in words atd figures, as shown in fate attadted F~dtibit "B". SNLTiQ7 7: lttis Clxtncil finds that this will nvt advm~ely affect the ettvirottmertt and hereby issues a Negative Declaratirn. SFL720lt 8: 7tte City Clxucil declares that, sttotAd any Provisirn, sectiortr Par~Ph, se~rttence, rn tauTl of this ordittartce ba rendered or declared invalid by arty find OotSt acorn In a oast of t jlsisdi.c- tirn, or by xeasrn of arty pre®ptive legislatim; the r®ainLg paroviaiats, secF-ials, Paragraphs, emtmtoes, att1 w¢ds of this C~dirtarce shell yl~in in roll fn ++n a,vi ciia..F ,4-CPICN 9: the l~yrn shall sign this Oaldittanoe std the City Cleric shall cause the same to he Published witaun fifteen {15) Bays after its ~~ at least ottce in the Tnl „r.i yell Daly ,t taMSn, a ~ of general cirailatirn published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in the City of Panto , California. ~l 1 TABLc III- t SUMMARY OF LAND USF SVp o -I o.- -. F s RERMITiEJ vie + Cp.4plnpNALLV R RM Y r "'~'-'••nc.r E ITi EC uSE 40 iE von-nor. ea ,ses v_~ _ - USE TYPES fans u••' iP GI GI GI GI GI Sutt•r••3 ~O t ip Ip GI '., GI ul iP GI GI nl R iP 3 ] a 5 MANUFACTURIN • i a 9 f0 Ir 13 f] ra i3~15 ~r Cu•tom Lignl • • • • • • • ~ • • • • • • M•tllum • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ~ t/1nITMm Imp••t H••v ~ OFFICE PROFESSIONAL DE IGN 8 RESEARCN I • I '~ •' Atlmlm HrHn• a GMIC• Prol••swnal Dnpn 5•rvl<H '+ '•'~ } I • • } i } • }'. +I • I • I } 4 Rngren swne•e • • } } • } + NMOLESALE STORAGE 8 DISTRIBUTION I • I • ~ • •1 • ~ I • ~ • • • • • • • I puHlc SIwH• ' M•tllum • • • •' •' • • • • • • • fATERIAL,S RECOVERY FACDdIIES IautFll I • ' I a a l 1 P F ~ 1 • • • • • I I • ~ • / ~ ~ tocE.•Ing acU ntl I ~ I ScnP Opetatba I ~ I. I +~ +~fl~ • tl+~}~ Amoral pn• --. ___ I ~'+ i- AutomollH FN•t Slw•H I } I Automotive RenlelibHlrp , • I AWmOUw iLINH TWY II•p•yy[ppr ', I • I Automabva Truek ••pair-Mgor • i Autanwew ar.. I ~ 4ulomotlW SHVIe• St•IIH Su11HM CHbettoi • INtke • YHb I ~ I Bmlpmq Conlraclw'• Stwe•• taro ••~tl•q etuM•n•ne• [ergleN egnam•aupntlrly Eeuipmant s•ppweasel..l ~ I •ualrrH spar peP•tl a a•rvleH I • 9u•m•s Support 3+rrleH ~ • • } Coll•nleaeatlen [Mr1eH p i • ConvmHe• Sale. a SHV1eH } + i EalNq a OIYIkYI• [e1e•Hp•IeM• • • ~ EntlrtLnmH12 • EANnMVe M••et Cpptw•relH Fa•t Footl SaN• • FMarsW, tttel•ena a a•• 4tt• Mr•teH Fooe i [evw•pe Sel•e • ; • Funarel a Cr•IHI•rr [•rvte•• •i " ' ~~~•~ i• }~+i•I lil }i}I I +IPfI•i• ~•~ ~ I•I+ .I.I.I+I•I I I•I• •~•I 1•lal•I}I i l}I } 4 '} }'}I 4.} }I}' + •I•I•I•I I I• I ~• •, •i•1 • •~•I } + • ~1•I I• • •, I ••I•i•I ;.I•I • • } } I ~ I I•I• •I•Itl + } } • } } •I • l+~}. E..•r • Irtttpor NIIIDY[[ylRNay D•nrll[IeW • I • t t + f t; I te••e•vttetoYl 4n [•rvle• • • • • • I h N•Iw ~ Npn•p • i • • • * • • • } • • y+ t ~W • • 4 • ~ I •I ~ tM • • • • • • •1 • • •I • •• • lcrr_opH•tIH ~ •~ •~ • • • f •! • I I•I • lal utwrH wMpt UE•t[ Flt••W[ • • • • •'+ • I +! A I slew cwwartAws cellt[• ~ ~ • • • • pWe • • • • • • • • • • • • Mtge b/A •~ir1R[Ny [aytpH • ~ • • ~ • • • • i ~ I } I • ••• ••••••••}•I••+} • V-aM•e1DN tar. • • ~ } • • ~~ NO-N•rH AH. OrHI•r p•41ct ~~•rN Y1•••~N WIXLWpylppp Ipt.Hl INMr Mewlr. al 6%HIBIT B K. Indoor Wholesale/Retail Comsreial Criteria: To ensure that surrounding land wee are not negatively impacted, additional filing requizemenis shall Snclude a Site Namgemant Plan and a Tcalfic Impact Study ae described below: K. 1. Site Management Plnn: Issues each as security and •ite maintenance shall be addressed by the applicant to ensure that edsquate services era provided !or clientele and surrounding land wss. Itess to be addressed sithin the Site a. Trish eolleetlan and s1G maintenance b. Security and safety control masura c. Perking attendants and circulation Qiractors d. Graffiti removal and building maintenance a. Personnel managamsnt K. 2. Traffic Impact Study: Baceuse of the possible trnffic intensity related to Lhe wee, a Traffic Ispnct Study shall be submitted to the City Engineer addressing the follov_ng items: a. Trip generation b. Traffic voiwe distribution c. ACCeea analysis d. Interml ciroulation e. Mitigation meseures, if required by the anelyais, shall be sham. `i3 dRO, Exh',b~~~-'~~', OPDIHI~tt4CE )40. 449 AN ~7DII~ANCE OF '!f~ C11Y OOiAJCII. OF 4f~ CITY OF RANt7i0 (S1CATflH(3A, CALIFLYdlIA, E4PABLISfiD4G A PDBILE SOUPCE AII2 POIdl7fl0[d~I RELVCFiON PRO(3tAP1 A. ~~rrts. 'lhe City of Panho acamcxga hereby finds aid declares that: {dfl3uTS, the City is ommitted to ia4n~oving the public health, safety and welfare, inclurlirg air quality; and 4hR~RFAS, mobile sources are a major contributor to air pollutim in the Saith Nast Air Hasin; arcl ~A.S, air quality goals for the region established bi' state law cannot be met reducing air pollution fx'® mobile soiuces; and ph)ERFA.S, the Sr>trth Nast Air Quality ~ Flan (A~) calls upon cities arc] mimties to redure emissions fr'ce molar vehicles rnwiskerrt with the +~*+i ranwmc of the California Clean Air Act of 1988 by developing and iaplemnting mobile san-ce air pollution rvductim programs; and 4hQ•IEFPS, such programs place '---" upon the City's fords, those pmgrants should be financed by shiftirYg the responsibility for financirxl fr+an the general ford to the motor vehicles areating the demand, to the greatest extent possible; and WEQ32FAS, section 44223, added to the Health and Safety Code by action of the California legislature on September 30, 1990 (Chapter 90-1705), autharizes the South Nast Air Quality Manageoent District (SCAQID) to inpose an additional mctnr vehicle registratiai fee of two dollare ($2.00), eampncing on April 1, 1991, ;,,rr,.aeircJ to four dollars ($4.00) , cc~oencing on April 1, 1992, to finame the inplementation of transportation measures embodied in the AST4F aryl provisions of the California Air Act; and Fh032FAS, forty Dents of every dollaz collected under Section 44223 of the Health and Safety Code shall be distributed to cities and camties located in the south Coast Air Quality Ma»ag®aent District (SCAQpID) that oily with Section adoption of this Orrli.narx~; and {d¢StEAS, the pmratsl share of the fee revenues far cities that fail to adopt an ordindnoe pursuant to Section 44243 (b)(3) of the Health and Safety Nde shall be distributed instead to the jurisdictions within the District that have adopted an orrlinanoe. NOW, 14D~ZtEFORE, the City Camcil of the City of Fanho CucaloWya does hereby ordain, find and declare that after careful o>nsideration the imposi- tion of the additional motor vehicle registration Fee by the SCACpD to finance mobile sauce air pollution reduction pzngraac Ss in the best interest oP the city and pmrotrs the general welfare of its residents. 44 _~yp~9 r' ~ ~~y,e "e'1i~'r'is~ f e ~ aa9 ~ ~ ~d ~ aa2•a~ ~ of ~ 6itid' ,aitr ~. ~y11 1~ t~'_','~~ytc(~~„ st~ s^LO~ erY ~ Yee at as fO~i~.ci~Y °f ,,~~i~ °~ tT+e1~~~ ~"a~ C. 11 ~ ~q~y'~ ~1 ~yt+ 11~ ~s ~ ~C1e 5 l~itY~ ~ ~ ~ ail ocity ~~~~~a~ ~i ~ c~,~,t~ ~li~O~"~ ~,,~pY of ~,e "l~l i~l~.ttjy'6`.xd~,rt'PII3 .w piY"'_ ~M~~~4 oY'`4~ ~ylt ~ p1~5 9 oY •- ~ F~~ ~ J~`Ol~ O~ ~ 80~ N ~1 ~ tii~„pi'~ ~ _,,~ A~ y~ apa6 ~{~ tDr ,,~,d~ ~c1g ~ ~ ~G"- ~~,,,1 ~,eCY f~ X31 ,~~ P~ ~ `.' ~ i~+,- ~ ~51~ ~jg ~ Citl ~ ~q cif c>tY ~ n ~ cn~, ~~its Y$_,C~Yyt+~~ ~ ~ 1~ ~ 2~ ~yOle ,~ ~ t2~ ate` ~ yOr' i4r' ~£ '~Ye~,,~t~~ ~yll ~ l2~ ~11 isvn1~" ~ ~ iX+1~~YPi`, p11 it 41 t ~ a £~ F~_r,rt ~' ~~_s~~r..i~~tk'ata~s~ y~ °~' ~3Fm`~"t t° ~ ct~'~ 11 ite~.' yu+~ ~~ r1+e tjle ~ pff`~ ~ 51'1 0Y ~ ~,rC~ ~425'd£ ~ 31 £~`t ~ ~_ (q~ ~~~~~l Ore 111 ~ o ~t °f af.~ t~1 ~%~' i`~ ~"" 21 ~wi~ ~ ~ffiy+~a~ i~~~ a`~ta'." e~1~1~ i'~ a Z¢"°~ ~e~a+,. ~ ~"_ 151 v~Zy o~ a~~ ~1~' .', ~~ti~''al 04 ~;'w;:~ ea.ll Wit;. ' ~"' CP a.:.:. ', =~` -;~~:_ r o~_, nt, ~ an gA2p4 ~1~5 ~5 Ordiiw~os No. 449 l'a9a 1 E. '!fie provisions of this otdinema shall be arnsttved as necessary to effectively catty out its purposes, wd~idi are heYety found and declared to be in flat2wtance of the public health, safety, welfare anti omvenierre. F. ,~v~pj~7(. Should any sentence, section, clause, part of provision of this Ofdit~acm be ~tA+~ by a cant of ocapetent jurisdiction to be invalid, the same shall rot affect the validity of the Ozdinanoe as a whole, or any part thereof, other than the part declared to ffi imralid. G. EFfective ffite. 7fiis Ox'dinaire shall take effect thirty (30) days after adopticn. sBrrtoN l: era Mayor mall sign this otainanoe and the sty cl~c shall cause the arose to he publiek~ed within fifteen (15) days after its passage at leant once in the mlard V'allev ffiily Bulletin, a newer of general circvlatim published in the City oP Ontario. California, std cixwlated in the City of Rand~o ~R, California. "L ---- CITY OF RANCFI(? CUCAMO?<'G.4 ~- STAFF REPORT DATE: July 3. 1991 To: Mayar, Members of the Ctty Councll and CSty Manager FROM: Rick Gomez. Community Development Director BY: Jce O'Neil, City Engineer SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION 7D APPROVE Tk~ ANNUAL ENGINEER'S REPORTS AND RESOLU770N FOR THE ANNUAL LEVY OF ASSESSMEN75 WITHIN LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS NOS. 1,2,9A,3B,4,5.6.7, AND 8 FDR FISCAL YFAR 1991/92. nFf`lrMMFNDATIr1N~ I It >e recommended that the City Council hdd the pubbc hearing and approve the annual Engineer's Reports and Resolution estabhshtng the assessment rates for Landscape Maintenance Dlstrfet5 Nos. 1.2,3A,9B.4,5.6,7, and 8 for Ffacal Yeaz 1991!92. Rate inereascs involving utility costs and contract services helped contribute to an lnerease m maintenance costs for most of the distrlets. Due to a seven winter, (cost damage msis are Comddable N some of the districts. Contrtbuting to Ne frr<:reases In utility costs 16 an uurnase fn water rates Cor the districts along with slgnlficant increases m maintained areas. In an attempt to contmi 91 /92 water costs, m addlUOn [u subsequent year's water costa. moisture sensors are being Installed !n some of the districts. These costs w91 help hold down the skyrocketing water burden. Service levels can play a part m keeping costs down m a district. Utlllzing a lower, and yet more optimum, service level, costs for a district can be held down below a normal increase and m some cases reduce maintenance coats. Th1s has been already done m the past and we do not recommend lowering these levels Curtner. With these and other factors becoming more tvldent to the managemenf of UIe dlstrtets, test saving landscaping methods are 1xL~g rnKewcd and implemented. In addition, development pobeles are under review In an attempt to best balance the support of the cost of mamtatning the landscaping by the pmpertlea within each district against the expansion oC the maintained area within UIe district. Helow B a district-by-district summary of the recommended rates, curnn[ rates, and some reasons for any Increase 1n [he rates. You should inter to each distrkt's Annual Engineer's Report for additional detail. landscape Maintenance Dfstrtct 1 -General C1ty The recommended rate of 569.95 reflect increased utdtty costs (water and electrleity) along w1[h the replacement of weather damaged trees 1n addition to Heaz Gulch Park being added (or mainlenance. Utllity costs must support the increased park area IS acres) m addition to over 7.5 acres of more ground cover, shrubs and turf, an increase of 6596 over 90/91. The district Is funding the design oC 26 capital maintenance protects throughout the dLShict from pnor yeaz funds. The current assessment !s ffi35.00. yl Landscape Maintenance Dlslrict 2 - Victoria The neormnended rate of 1976.00 re9ecta Increased water coats which caa be paRlaily attnbutable to the addttlon of maintained arias (an increax of over 40 acres, or 6896) along with Increased water rates. Weather damaged landscaping and mols[urc xneors ~ arc being Installed at a total cost of !80,000, A prior year nxrn of 693,240 will be used for this district to help hold down the 91/92 assessment. Because of the capital expenditures in 91/92 for moisture sensors and tree replacement, rnaiMenantt costa in future years should not require this rexrve to hold down the assessment cote. The curnnt assessment 1s $204.75. Landscape Maintenance D1striM 3A -Hyssop Whlle the maintained aza remained constant them le an antlcfoa[ed rate Inercase 1n warer mars wtucn resuh in a recommended rate o[ 8979.38. Due in the small number of parcels Involved (el in the district arty change in budgeted amounts can have a significant effect on the rate. Total costa to the district wN only Increax approxlaratety 8800.00. 6485.00 of that inereax Is attnbutable Lo water Increases. The curnm assessment 1s 8258,75. r n~.ro..s... w,rsr.,~.ns..,~e D)aMM 36 - Commactal/lnduststai Maintemm Dilatrfet The recommended rate b 6248.99. A douDBrtg of the mahrtamcd area frmr 4.5 [o nearly 9.0 acres and the restating 400% increase m water costs attrounted for the Primary Irrerrax in costa. The crrrrent asses®ent !s 6175.00, Landscape Maintenance District 4 -Terra Vista The recommended rate is $240.18. Equipment Maintenance and Operatlona (up $75,000) and water coats (up 860,000) accounted for most of the incrcax in costs. Moisture xnsors ($20,000) and the replacement otweather damaged trere ($23,7001 also contributed to the increax. Total maintenance costs rox nearly E22S,000, or 4896. This le reflected from the lrxreax in maintained area of neazly 17 acres, up 8096 from 90/91. The current assessment m $110.00. Landscape Maintenance District 5 -Tot Lot The recommended rate 13 $105.00. The current asxssment rate oCB10S.00le sullkfent to rnver costs for 91 /92. This district consists of a small playground fatlllty (.33 acres) supported by a stngle tract of 44 homrs, This dlsblM is not expected to grow In sfu, either Lry number of asxssable units, nor try muntained area, Hence. ftrls dlstriM also has no funds for arty futon equipment replacement casts. Landscape Maintenance District 6 - Caryn The recommended rate le $235.48. An Increase in water costs (up 2196) accounted for the primary Increase in maintenance costs. This corresponds to an tnercax in the maintained area try 3 acres, up 19%. The current ^~.: ant 1s 6195.00. ~~ Landscape Maintenance District 7 • Etlwanda North The recommended mte ffi 6700.54. 1]tta dffitrtet represreds a relattvely age landscaped area supported by lower than average number of arcels. Thla factor along with ineeeased contract services costs lan fncmase of over 0160.0001 has the gttattat Impact on the recommended rate. 91/92 Is the 6mt year In which the dlstrtct mamtalns the landscaping. 111e current rate Ia g5.00. When this dlslrkt was rseated m 1990 a rate o[ up to 0850.00 was tnt6ally estabWhed. Landscape Malntenantt Distrito 8 - Etlwanda South The recommended rate b 0f45,22. As wah district 7, 91 /92 fs the f[nt year for dlMrict maintained landscap(ng. This 1s a small maintenance district serving a limited ...,.w.. nr..a..~.1< i~v~ r•n~iraM GrWrea ircrcascs (uo 61.790 or 45961 had a siantOcant impact on the recommended rate. Maintenance and Operations were up 01,U16 over that of 90/91. The currant rate Is X6.00. Re1s/p/e~ctfu/lly submitted. ommunlty Devebpment Director RC:WJO::wa Attachments: Resolution Engineer's Reports X19 RLr80LUTION NO. 91.180 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, T'O ' LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1, 2, 9A, 3B, 4, 5. 6. 7 AND 8 FOR T'lIE FISCAL YEAR 1991/92 PURSUANT TO TTiE LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 IN CONNECTION WITH LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1, 2, 3A. 3B, 4. 5, 6, 7 AND 8 WHEREAS, the Cfty Council of the Clty of Rancho Cucamongga did on the 5th day of June. 1991, adopt lta Rtaolutlon of Intentlon No. 91-149 to order the therein described work in connection with Landscape Maintenance District Nos. 1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4, 5, 8. 7 and 8 which Resolutlon of Intention No. 91-149 mss duly and legally published 1n the tJme, form and manner as required by law, shown ~ the a~davlt of Pubtlcatlon of said Resolutlon of Intention on fUe in Theo ce of the C-ty Clerk; and WHEREAS, said City Couneil having duly received and considered evidence, oral and documentary, concerning the Jurisdictlon facts to this proceeding and concerning the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and said City Council having now acquired Jurisdictlon to order the proposed work. ,S}wCTION 1: It Is hereby resolved by the Clty Council of the Ctty of Rancho Cucamonga that the public interest and convedence requires the levy and collectlon of assessments within Landscape Maintenance District Nos. 1, 2. 3A, 3B, 4. 5, 6. 7 and 8 for the Fiscal Year 1991/92, and said City Council hereby orders that the work. as set forth and described to said Resolution of Intenton No. 91-149. be done and made; and SECTION 2: Be It further resolved that the report filed by the Engineer Is hereby finally approved; and SEC?'lOy Be it finally resolved that the assessments for Fiscal Yeaz 1990/91 and method of assessment to the Engineer's Report are hereby approved. 5~ (saiay u{l Bid PeaTt7uSEYQ N ~ ....... .i..........i . ~ ....... ..... ... ..... ..~... .... o ..... ' rn ~ r v ~~ O ~~ m G ~~ rq y ; . . .. ,.. ..~.. ...:... Y ~~ i(/~ Y y m V V ~ ~ q~ 3 C ~ i i i v i .......... ,....,,,.. . ......... ........ ..... .. .. .. ~ a.~ F. C O ~a ~~ ... .; . . s m ~gg ~~~ ~ g ~~~ ~ saso~ aoueuaau~ey~ G'~~j ~ ~3a~~o C~a~o~~ Anaual Ea~iaees'a Bapost Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General City Parkwaya and Egaestrlan Tells) Approved. . y Wllltam J. .City Engineer qty of Rancho t:camov2a Annual Eo~t Report Landacapa Mainteaanee 11LtrlM No. 1 (General dh Parkways tr RgaNtrlan'14aiL) FYcal Yeat 91/92 The F7( 91 /92 annual report Cor landscape Maintenance District No. 1 (General Clty Parkways & Equestrian 7taLLa) is prcpazed >n compliance with the requirements of ArtSCle 4, Chap[er 1. DNL91on 5 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of Cal1(ornla (landscape and I,ighting AM of 1972). Landscape Mamtenantt DlsMct # 1 (I.IuID # 1) represents 52 landscaped sites at varous locations throughout the Clty. These sites arc not considered to tx associated with any one particular area within the City, but rather benefit the Cily on a broader scale. As such, the parcels wlthm this district do not represent a dltlnct area of the City as do the City's remaining t,MD's. Typically parcels within this district have been annexed upon development oC tl,..e. parcel. The S2 sites mor^~wi...d by tht district rnnllst of parkways. peseos, median islands, entry mormmrnts and equestrian lratls. The hreakdawn of maintained auras l as follows: Projected §/~/gl 6/ten/m Ground Cover and Shrubs 11.00 17.73 Acres Turf 0.58 1.35 " Parkland 0.00 5.00 " Equcstnan 7Yalls Z,gt ygQ " Total 18,56 31.08 " The ground cover and shrubs and turf areas are maintained under contract by a private maintenance company while the equestnan tralls are maultauud by the City's 7Yalis and Application Crew. Capital Improvements wlthm LMD #1 wtrc paid by. and constructed !n conJunetlon with. development protects. In FY 90/91 IMD # 1 funded the design of the retrollt of ]andscapuig and Irrigatlon 1n parkways at 26 various lacatlons within the d+strlct. Funding for these protects wW continue Into FY 91/92. The maJortty of the budgeted costs for (,MD # i are far direct maintenance of turf, ground cover and shrubs. These tunctlons, along with tree rnamtenance and certain lrrlgatlon system repair and testlng are perionned through a ContraM Services Agreement the Clty has with a private landsrape malnttnance comperry. The City's Trails and Apphcation Crew rnamtalns the equestrian traits. The projected costa to operate and maintam I.MD # 1 are as follows; Prono~d Mair,t n oo B ~da.t~ 91/92 Regular Payroll $48,880 Fringe Benefits $18,290 Maintenance and Operations 852,899 Equlpmmt Maintenance and 817,93E Operatmrta Contingency -Tree Replacement 83.500 Contract Servlcea • landscape Maintenance 8192,000 • Tree Mamtenance 815.522 • BacWlow Teattng 85.525 • Misc. (elec., pWmbing, etc.) 82.000 Capital Expenditures -Protects 90/91 fnxze/wind damage • 1tee, shnrb ~ ground cover 853.200 replacement • Moiahrre sensor and 827.000 controller/enclosure lnstallatlons Capttal Expenditures - Equtpment 80 Capltaf 67cpenditures - Vehldes 80 Water 8122,211 Electric 16.042 Suhtatal• Add: Assessment AdmWStratton/Overhead 890.433 Total Revenue Required: x..994 Less: Interest and Penalties Assessment Revenue Requned 8634.901 For 91 /92 the district budgeted $53,200 for the removal and installation o(landscaping which was damaged or destroyed during the 90/91 winter and the high winds during [hat yeaz. $27,000 was budgeted (or the Itrstallatlon of water saving moisture sensors and the Installation of controller endosruea. Even with the moisture sensors water costa tar t}re year are projeeLed to be 8122,211. No vehicle or equipment purchases are budgeted for >n 91/92. $104,500 Is available from a prior ytaz reserve Cor the pallrrrinary design, design and constnrchon of the parkway retro0ta stated shwa m FY 90/91. in additlon, $50,000 will be loaned to the distnct to be used toward the prelkninary design of the 26 rctro0t projects. Budgeted maintenana costs for LMD sl krereased (ran 8485,781 In 90/91 to $573,007 1n 91 /92. This fncrcase can. N part, be attributed to an ~•v~n•>w of 7.52 acres m the mamtamed area of the disU1M. Significant mcreases over90/91 such as the replacement of weather damaged trees, shnrbs and ground ewer ($53.2001. the installation of moisture sensors ($27,000) and antlctpated water costs (8122,211) accounted for the maJor share of the inrieased maintenance costa. Added to IIv1D N i is the maintenance of Beaz Gulch Pazk for an addltlonal coat of 885,100, The following ttemla-e the ameasme[tt rate (~ the Mahrtt: Untt M of Base Unlt AdJusted Family Paz~Casl 6,797ts 869.95 F i O r 869.5 Se 847 Multi-Family Pazcei 4,559 0.5 34.98 159.451 Total Rtvenut 901 falld~cepe Malntenetlce D~etrkt No. 1 Aluk7Wtlona for FlaCal Year 1991/92 ANN~>~D $pllemlly T. 1988 ~' TRACT 12969 t her 7 1968 S 26AV. T2 TRACT eo an . 13825 1 1989 N 6 BAU. TRACT . av® er 13930 i a 1980 23 A.U. ANNR:XF_D TRACT ce . . 13821 M fi T 19911 TAU. TRACT me 13e96-i h 7 1990 M sl su ~~i2 TPACT . am 13890-2 21 jQlYf h 40 AU. ~~I? TRACT ~ ~ M rr 13738 il 6 1990 18 A.U. ~~p TRACT ene . 13896 1990 29 7 A.U. ANNEXED TRACT . Mar 13316 123 AU. ~` =Xrii3I ~ ASScSSMEtdT 91AGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. ~ AND 2 'Original Poor Quality - ~~ it li ~ f ~ ' y ~ !~~ r w~ ~~ ~„ Y - ___ - e ` y ~ - i ~ N 7 ~` ti ~ ~ £ • ~~ I~ 35 _ ,~ - ; i ~ __ 1 .. ~ ~ -, ~ ~ x -- ~ '~-- ,~ ~ ~ ' , ~ ~ ~ ~ __ 1ui~ ~"YIAf271~f1 --- ~ ; k ~ . ~ • r i ~ ~ ~, ~s.~" f i , Y ! T y I b p ~ wi sY.i ! .~ v~ dd/ ~ » ~ •E. ~ J L1J \~~ w ~.Y~ ~ Y~ACr'S.~ '~~ } ~ SL{}LS'Y~~ ~3 ~Q~ ~ ~ ~i1 ~ 1 ~IIIi~ , r ~TYR_ ~ ~~~ CITY OF RANCHO CnCA1[ONGA ~ R 1 Q' COUNTY OF 8AN H~NA8DIIQ0 :: `6~"6 ~ sTATS OF CALIII'ORNiA w T ~~ - lv AbSESSMEN7 DIAGApM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 'Orig~nai Foor Qual;ty ~,. _ -._ V "SL~_-J... r ... ~. J ~ 'R= [ ~ r. -~l~ / x. I -_~-~- i '''aaaaaa ' L~ Y D 'll,•i<T I IIJ.~ ; M - iS.- ' .~M1LS I ~tf JG ^~ II ~~~., _ CITT Op RANCHO CUCAYONOA ~,~~ COUNT! OP HAN ESBNA8DIIQ0 BATS ap cAtnroaNtA N ~~=3 ,m CatliBi7 'A` _ ASSESSMENT DOAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 'Orig;nal Poor ~uality . .~f cy/w,~u~ GT. _ ~ g s ~ ppy > y _~IS - Vj I r0 ~ IMf ~' ^"" ' 1 • 'f \ to i =• ~.--~ v , I `~- 1 ~. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA • ,. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~ TR 13Qi~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA - - G4Ig8IT ~~` ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSGPE IYMINTENaNCE DISTRICT NO. t STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 W a ~ ALMOFD STREET ~ ~ ~ W s = W J N t .¢ ~ O D Q N ~~ W S „_ HILLSIDE vnwn CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~ /3G~ _ STATE OF CALIFORNIA exmelr •q~ AbSESSME110T ®IAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 <FM~ rl 2 30 3 ~ N L P y w w 7L a ~ ~ c 4 ss w 3s r b ~ L ~ 44 33 iT ~ Z 43 34 ~ Zf. to u ~ 42 3r W ZS ~~ a a 3s z :4 W R ~ 40 3! ~ s3 13 MaReELU Da. ,+ ~ ,3 ,o n le i~ zo 21 HIGHLAND AVE. . CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~' COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO f ._~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA I K 13S~D-I Cziii6lT '{• AbSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAWTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 7 i dl[(~µ~ le as ~' ~ e ,u as is ~ u ,e a Z at y ~ 20 2 ~ i ~ 21 W M ~ Z 22 i 1' '0 ze ~ 2a ~, !~ CITY Ole RANCHO CUCAMONOA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~ ' .~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA / ^ r ~ ^ •A. A55SESSMENT DIA~3RAM LANDSCAPE l~AIN7ENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 Orlg~nal Poor (~ual;ty ~~~ Sirsi~ ~! -. _~ (- i~ L 1 ^, L:~a . _~ ~~ ~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA ~' _ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 9 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~3~38 _~ [xwelT •~• ASSESSMENT DIARiRAM LANDSCAPE MAM'ITENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 Oribinai Poor ~ual~t~---~ j ~ 1 i E i~LII LRT• }T i~ N ~I Y 1'\ II`` l N1111C V! Cf N ~ n p LEGEND o F [ f DENOTES LINOS CAPE p IRE[ J ~ OCNOT[5 SIO[WILN a crRR [!s Ci DE NOTlS 3711![7 L16NT © 0[NOTU TA[[/ 1 ~~ l[MON }1~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA ~' COUNTY OF 8AN BERNARDINO ~ 1389H .~ STATE OF CALIRORNIA C.[IIIOIT '4' ASSESSMENT DIAiaRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 CNESrnavr sr i l "1 I PJ11[~CL 2 ~IllAL DEOGR7710N I ~I ~~\~+4, /~87'SO'94'w Do.oo~ I I ry I to /~ 4S ~~. ~ ~~ I lD~~~~ ~z w ~'~ oru'o4 t teees ~~•~ ~N M 1111 ~ g90.o0 I^f~I{'iL I ~ 46AL = I.-_--- 1t'1.lLI CI.rGFIP~aN~~ b '~ aoe' n s.-~e'st t„.sc - PQ3' - H et•~~'aa•e ~r..rs• r-r-r- I~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~e ~ » I nr. I ~~ I sr I '3 1I x, I ~I ~ ~ j i PR(~PO 'l S~BDhIS/.^.,1q ~ ~ ~j j . - v~ - - ~~~~ T NG! /33/AI I I ItI--___-~ 1_L_ _~-L-L-L-J QI ~ ~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONQA _ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~i 3 3!(03 3!(0 E%MIBIT •q• ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 'Origins! Poor ~uaf;ty n,:~-.- ....~; r- CITY OR RANCHO CUCAMONGA CONNTY Otc gpN gERNARDINO ~ STATE OF CALIFORNI4 1 R /33/(0 LANOSCA7E MAINTENANCE DISTRieT MAINTENANCE SPECIFICATi0N5 THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR TURF MAINTENANCE IS: ~ 1. The Contractor shall mow all turf areas once per week during the Deriod of March 1 to November 1; and not less than biweekly during the perfod of November 2 to February 28. 2. the Contractor shall edge all turf grass borders concurrently with each mowing. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize all turf areas Tn accordance with Schedule ~t-~. 4. The Contractor shall mechenically aerate ell turf areas both 1n the spring and the fail of each year acrd more often as required to reduce compaction and stress. 5. The Contractor shall meelranfeally dethettlr all Lnr'f areas once per year. This operation should be scheduled. i~dtataiy prior to over seedtng for~• those areas that are to be over seeded. 6. The CoMraetor Shalt on an amtwl basis over seed alt areas that do not have a high gwTity stand of turn. 7. Concurrently with each mowing, the Contractor shall mechanically "bowl" around all irrigation heads that are blocked by grass between aawlogs. 8. The Contractor shall on a weekly basis remove arUr trash or debris Shat accumulates on the turf. THE sERVICE LEVEL FOR PEST CONTROL IS: Complete and continuous control and/or eradication of all plant pests and weeds. THE S~~YICE LEVEL FOR GROiiNO COVER MAINTENANCE I5: 1. TAe Contractor shall trim ground cover ad,acent to any hardscape, structure, fixture, plant, or other area 1n which it would not encroach such that a neatly triammd appearance is consistently maintained. 2. The Contractor shall on a weekly basis clean any accumulated debris or trash from all ground cover areas. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize all ground cover areas every ninety days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. 6. The Contractor shall annually,,at the direction of the City Engineer, now, or otherwise tower, all overgrown ground cover to a height of three inches. 5. The Contractor shall aBthantcally "bowl" around all Irrigation heads that are blocked by ground cover. THE SERVICE LEVEL F9R SHRUB N117NTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall selectively prune all shrubs whenever required such that each shrub grows vigorously and healthily fn 1t5 natural form without encroaching upon any ayacent area, 1n~proved street or sidewa}k, or otherwise becoees a public hazard. t. Phe i.oniractor snail rertntze all shruDS every ninety days using 6-6-6 with trace elements or approved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR VINE MRINTENMICE IS: I. The Cantr'acbor shall trfR vfnes ence~ per yeer~ fa Septeibw 2. The Corrtreetor shaTi re-atYaeh tp a wHl or fartee onea• por year ~in Septeaber vines that fall off tha wail by using the attachments required ort the construction plans for the Site. 3. The Contractor shall annually, to September, remove all vines that grow into undesirable places such as trees or shrubs. 4. The Contractor shall fertilize all vines every 1B0 days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. THE SERVILE LEVEL FOR TREE MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall trim to a height of fifteen feet above grade, trees on the work sites to awlntain thn 1n a safe condition including vehicle, pedestrian and equuestrlan clearance and free of dead, dlseesed and Qy1ng wood and "hangers or other public hazards. Any hazard above thet height will be reported to the City Engineer. 2. The Contractor shall "tip-back" young trees whenever they encroach upon adjacent vehicular, pedestrian or equestrian traffic. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize each tree on each work site once per year with the appropriate number of Agrtform 21 gram Plant Tablets, or approved equal, per size of tree. 4. The Contractor shall restake any tree needing rcstaking. C~t~!j ° ~ 1~~c~~o C~~o~~ eaauai Ea~iaear's Ztepozt Laadscape Maintenaace District No. 2 Mctorla Planned Coavmnaity) Approved Wllliam J. O' City Engineer CJty o[Rancho (~mnnpa Amaal t:ngineets Report landscape Maintenance D4trlet No. 2 motor(. PLnned Commanlty) Fiscal Year 91/9 The FY 91/92 annual report for Landscape Maintenance District No. 2 IV(ctoria Planned Commumty) Is pzepazed m compliance with the requirements of Artide 4, Chapter 1, Division 5 oC the Slmets end Lilghways Code, State of Callfornla llandscape 2nd I.tghting Act of 19721• landscape Malntenantt Dletrlet p2 (I.MD M2) n~resents landscaped ettes throughout the Victoria Planned Commumty. These sUe are associated with areas wlthm that community and ae such airy benefit derived from the landscape UutallaUon can be directly attributes to those parcels wlthm that co®nmty. Became of this. asseeementa requked for this dlalrict are charged to those peccela within thnr planned community. The sites maintained by the Qistrfet certebt d parkways, paseos, median Islands. equestriaa trolls and paths. Tlit tueskdowa of maintamed areas D as follows: Ground Cover and Shrubs Turf Parkland EquesMan Trails Total 5/30/91 Protected 6/30/92 21.00 45.28 Acres 22.00 38.53 " 27.50 27.50 " ~ $..~ ,~ 73.50 114.31 " The ground cover and shrubs and turf areas are maintained under contract with the equestrian IraUs and parks being maintamed by the City's Trolls and Applicallon Crew. Capital Improvements within LMD e2 were paid by, and construMed !n mnJuncUon with, development by the Victoria Planned Community. The majority of the budgeted costs for LMD p2 are for direct mamtenantt of tud ground cover and shrubs. These funcUOns, aL7ng with tree maintenance and certain urlgallon system repair and testing are performed through a Contract Services Agreement the Clty has with a private landscape maintenance comparry. The City's 17alls and Application Crew will be maintahung the equestrian trails. The protected costs to operate and maintain LMD N2 are es follows: Prooosed Matntenance Budnet: 91/92 Regular Payroll $252,700 t7inge Benellts $84,230 Mamtenance and Operations $19,700 Equipment Maintenance and $99,260 Operations Contingency -Tree Replacement ~ Contract Services • Landscape Maintenance 5575.000 • Tree Maintenance 50 • BackOow Testing 50 • Mlle. (elec.. Plumbing, etc.) 80 Capital FSCpendlturea -Protects 90/91 freeze/wind damage • Tree, shrub & ground ewer 559.585 replacement • Moisture sensor and 520.000 controller/enclosure Inetallat[ons Capital Expenditurca - Iquipment w Capital 6tpenddures - Veldcles W Water 5413.386 Electric ~.~ Subtotal: ~ Ada: Asaessrnerrt Aamadsteatlon/t).erheee 5109,948 Toter Revenue Requred: 1, 4, F1vmlYearReave 690.240 Net Reverme Rtyprl[ed f 1.590.802 less: Interest and Penalties x..431 Assessment Revenue Required (1.522 371 No vehicle or equipment purchases ate Wdgeted for In 91/92. Thfs will hold total costs for the distzlct down m 91(92. signNcant envt aema mctude ConttaM Setvicea of $575.000 and Protected water usage of 5413.386. both otwhtch can be attributed to an increase In the maintained area of the district of over 40 acres, from 73.501n 90/91 to a protected 114.31 acres m 91 /92. In FY 90/91, the Assessaent Rate for LAID M2 was 6204.75/AU. The i[tctrase to $376.00/AU. 1s attributable to increased water casts d 5243.386 due to an increase sn [he maintained area of 40.81 acres along with protected increases m water rates. 1R 91/92 /Iartiarmmt Rate: Helow t9 the schedule the aesesanerrt rate for the types of land use. lhaee AU. will be assessed at a base rate of 8978.00/AU. for the district to realize revenue for FY 91/92 of 81,522,371. A reaern of 893,290 wID be passed on to 91/92 Jn order to achieve the 8376.00 rate. Unit Not Base Unit AdJusted 5.1314 SSSG 11'S!G SSIIIL3 $LSioit Factor BStC BGS233u4 Single Family Pareel 3.897 8376.00 1.0 8376.00 ffi1.465.272 Commercial Acrt 15.74 2.0 752.00 11,&16 Vacant Acre 491.52 0.25 94.00 45.283 7bta1 Revenue 1 522 371 Iildacape MalMenarse Dbtrk:t No. 2 AOIIG[atlona for Flaeal Year 1991/92 PM 12263 28.82 AU. - ewnwn •q• ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET UGNTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 3 ~Originaf_Poor duality 7I7 ~ ~ ~~M .O/~I "J w/ - ` Lei a...,-. uie~xw,w ,..,o,.,•~.,..a e - _..,,r~ _ ~ R ;.,a, ~~ ~_;,i~.'.'°mf~-.~ .;tea, `'-ice= . ~ ~ _ . f0 I c '~ n !_2 LJ '= [_ :±~ Y M MiG'2 I MaK / e ,~ Ir s ..~.z ~ a ~rnss j .~~ ~ c ~~ 9 /n.~t2 2 i nvaFC ,~ey¢ ~/ /O /I dm M\ l //.~' - I MR2L ~ ~ RiMr.... ~ / 4 ~~~~~ ~~~ `~ I CITY OF RANC~10 CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO - ' ~ ~1 S STATE OF CALIFORNIA L~ i LANDSCAPE 1lAINTENANCE DISTRICT M1lNTENANCE SPECIFICATIONS THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR TURF MAINTENANCE IS: ~ 1. The Contractor sha1T mow all turf areas once per week during the period of Merck 1 to November 1; and not less than biweekly during the period of November 2 to February 28. 2• The Contractor shall edge alt turf grass borders concurrently with each mowing. 3. The Contractor shad fertilize ail turf ar... +~ _c_cr:a,-,ca .f;;, ;cnrduie 4. The Contractor shall machenically aerate all turf areas both 1n the sprtng and the fall of each year and more often es required to reduce compaction and stress. 5. The Contractor shaTT machanicetty dethatch att turf araas once per year. This operation should be sclydulad fmmmdtataly prior to orar saawltng for those areas that are to De over saadmd. 6. The Contractor shaiT on an annual basis over seed ail areas that do not haw a high quaNty atend of turn. 7. Concurrently with each mowing, the Contractor shall mechanlcalty "bowl" around all irrigation heads that are blocked by grass between mowings. 8. The Contractor shall on a weekiy basis remove any trash or debris that accumulates on the turf. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR PEST CONTROL IS: Compiete and continuous control and/or eradication of all plant pests and weeds. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR GROUND COVER M1IINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall trim ground cover whenever it encroaches upon private property, or the property of other public agencies, or becomes a public hazard. 2. The Contractor shalt on a biweekly basis clean any aceumulaUd debris or trash from all ground cover areas. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize all ground cover areas every 360 days in March with 6-6-6 or approved equal. 4- The Contractor shall, at the direction of the City Engineer, mow, or otherwise lower, to a height of three inches all overgrown ground cover that 1s a fire hazard. 5. The Contractor shall mechanically or chemically "bowl" as often as is required around each irrigation head that 1s blocked by ground cover. THE SERVICE LEVEL Fpt SHROB MIIINTEIUINLE IS: 1. the Contractor shall prune with shears alt shrubs that encroach upon any any aglacent improved area, street or sidewalk, ar atherwise Decoaa!s a public hazard. 2. The Contrarfnr shall GrH 11v all eA.uA. .o._..~ un ~_._~»_ _~..~ < < e ..a ~~ trace elements or approved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR VINE MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shaiT trim vilros once par year to Septeaiar. 2. The Contrutor ShaTT n-attach m a rntt or fines alxa per year to Septtaber v11rcs that fall off the wr}1 br ustlq the attachaeMS required on the Construction plans for the sfte. 3. The Contractor shall annually, 1n Septaeber, reaave all vines that grow into undesirable places such as Lrces or shrubs. 4. The Contractor shall fertilize alt vines every 180 days with 6-6-6 or aDDroved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR TREE M1IINTENANCE IS: 1. The ContracWr shall trim to a height of fifteen feet above grade, trees on the work sites to maintain them 1n a safe condition including vehicle, pedestrian and equestrian ctearente and free of dead, diseased and dying wood and "hangers' or other public hazards. Any hazard above that height will be reported to the City Engineer. 2. The Contractor shell 'tip-back" young trees whelrover they encroach upon adJacenL vehicular, pedestrian or equestrian traffic. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize each tree on each work site once per year with the appropriate nuMier of Agrifor~ 21 gram Plant Tablets, or approved equal, per s1u of tree. 4. The Contractor shall rcstake any tree needing rcstaking. C~i `~ ~ i ' ° ~t`3~~`3rJ ~1~,n3 00 ~a C! Aaauai En~o,ees's 8aport Landscape Matatenaace District No. 3a (Swop Msintensnce District) Approved~J[SK~ WUl1sm J. O' . C1ty Engineer a4 otaascho Anaosl mpmar. Report 4adwpe>1Ldacen.nte Dbtrloi No. 9a (Byaaop Natateneate DMtrlct) sae^t 2efs 91/ev The FY 91192 annual report for [.arWscapc Maintenance Dfatrtct No. 3a (Hyssop Maintenance DbtnM) b prepared in compliance with the nqulzements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 5 oC the Streets and Highways Code. State of Callfornla (r ^n.td~an- and L.ighting Act of 1972). I.andecape Maintenance District #3a (LMD #3a1 represents a Luuiecaped parkway on Hyssop Drive south of Sddlt Street. fhb site b associated with an area within that dbtnc[ end as such arty benefit derived from the landscape inetalletlon can be dlrectty attributed to throe panels within that dbiric[. Because of this, assea®ents nequlred for thtsdWrfct are vLagged to those parcelawlthia that dtstHet. Yhelmeakdwrn of maintaated areas b as toliows: Protected Ground Corer and Shrubs 4L~L8.1 Total 40.1144 40.144 Acres 7'he Ground cover end shrubs are maintained under contract Capital )mprovementa within I.SrID #3a were paid, by and constructed in mnJunetmn with, development try the Hyssop MaWenance DlsWct. L; The maJonty of the budgeted costs for LMD M3a an for direct msintenartce o<ground cover and shrubs. These funcUOne are prantled through a ContraM Services Ag.eunent the City has with a private laralscape maintenance company. The proJeMed coats M operate and maintain LMD #3a are as follows: prnno~d M fnt nnr B Ada t' 91192 Regulaz Payrofi $qp Ftinge Benefits 1610 Maintenance and Operations 5199 Equipment Maintenance and >613 Operations Contingency -1]ee Replacement !BO ContmM Services • Landscape Maintenance $1,510 • 7Y'ee Maintenance >sp • Bacldlow Testing A165 • Mlsc, leltc., Plumbing, etc.) 8f51 CaPltal FScpendltuns • Protects 90/91 freeze/wind damage • 71Ye, shrub Q ground corer 90 replacement • Mokture sensor and 80 controller/enclosure mstallattona Capital Expenditures - Equlpmmt $0 Capital Eticpettdltutes - Vehicles 8a Water ggOp ` Electric ylpg Subtotal: -~~4' Add: Assessnnent Admuustratfon/Overhead Y268 Total Revenue Required' ', lase: interest and Penaltks ~13Z Assessment Revenue Requhed t3 095 No vehlek w equipment psstrlseses arc budgeted form 91/92, Mobture Sensor wW not be Wtaeed in thfa distnM betavae, due to the nature of the landscaping, the senvota would not prove to be caM eHtetlae. These 6aclore,wl9 hold tetel caeFS• for the dblrkt weer d X800 oast Items include Cottteact Strvices of =1.810 azW ptojaYed AY~I~t: In FY 90/91. the aoar~......t Kato for I.MD M3a was 8t25B.75/AU. The ltscreage to 9'+379.38/AU. is altnbutabk to Increased water casts oC $488 over 90/91 tosty. This due antklpated rate mereasea in the cost of water. The maintained acreage k expected to rcnaln at .14 acres therefor protected 91/92 costs for Con[raM Setvlces will only increase slightly over those of the ptevtous year. 91/92 AsasmeM R~M~ The following itemizes the assesvnem rate (or the district: Unit Mot Hale Lnlt Adjusted f~Ild Slse T)!pG 113Lt8 A/Umt F.RGL9L BS{G BGYCIIYtl Single Famlly Parcel 8 ,379.38 1.0 8379.38 $3.035 Total Revenuc 813.035 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT MAINTENANCE SPECIFICATIONS THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR TURF MAINTENANCE IS: ' 1. The Contractor shalt mow all turf areas once per week during the period of March 1 to November 1; and not less than biweekly during the period of November 2 to February 29. 2. The Contractor shall edge all turf grass borders concurrently with each mowing. 3. The i.untrac wr shaii ierciiize aii curl areas in accoraance witn xneauie I!-A. 4. The Contractor shall mechanically aerate all turf areas both in the spring and the fall of each year and more often as required to reduce compaction and stress. 5. The Contractor shall mechanically dethatch alf turf areas once per year: Phis operation should be scheduled immediately prior to over seeding far those areas that are to be over seeded. 6. The Contractor shall on an annual basis over seed all areas that do not have a high quality stand of turn. 7. Concurrently with each mowing, the Contractor shall methanically "bowl" around all irrigation heads that are blocked by grass between mowi ngs. 8. The Contractor shall on a weekly basis remove any trash or debris that accumulates on the turf. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR PEST CONTROL IS: Complete and continuous control and/or eradication of all plant pests and weeds. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR GROUND COVER MRINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall trim ground cover adjacent to any hardscape, structure, fixture, plant, or other area in which 1t would not encroach such that a neatly trimmed appearance 1s consistently maintained. 2. The Contractor shall on a weekly basis clean any accunwlated debris or trash from all ground cover areas. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize all ground cover areas every ninety days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. 4. The Contractor shall annually,. at the direction of the City Engineer, mow, or otherwise lower, all overgrown ground cover to a height of three inches. 5. The Contractor ;hall mechanically "bowl" around all irrigation heads that are blocked by ground cover. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR SHRUB MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall selectively prune all shrubs whenever required such that each shrub grows vigorously and heal thlly 1n its natural form without encroaching upon any adiacent area, improved street or sfdewalk, or otherwise becomes a public hazard. 2. The Contractor shall farttlize all shrubs every ninety days using 6-6-6 with trace elements or approved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR VINE MAINTENANCE [S: I. The Contractor shall triar vines once per year fn Septeaber. 2. The Contractor shall re-attach W a wail or fence orRe per year in Septenber vines that fall off the wall by using the attachments required on the construction plans for the site. 3. The Contractor shall annually, to September, remove all vines that grow into undesirable places such as trees or shrubs. 4. The Contractor shall fertilize all vines every 180 days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR TREE MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall trim to a height of fifteen feet above grade, trees on the work sites to maintain them in a safe condition including vehicle, pedestrian and equestrian clearance and free of dead, diseased and dying wood and "hangers" or other public hazards. Any hazard above that height will be reported to the Ctty Engineer. 2. The Contractor shall "tip-bark" young trees whenever they encroach upon ad,{acent vehicular, pedestrian or equestrian traffic. 3. The Contractor shall Perttlize each tree on each work site once per year with the appropriate number of A9rtfonn 21 gram Plant Tablets, ar approved equal, per size of tree. 4. The Contractor shall restake any tree needing restaking. C~f~j c~.f' ~3c~c~~o C~~c~o~ca Annual En~iaeer's Report Laudacapc Maintenance District No. 3b (Commesdal/Iadnstrlal Maintenance DLtrlct) Approv CL/ William J. Q' a .City Engineer dt~ urR.nehn AMVI parpneelx Repot Lndanpe Maintenance Dixtrlet Mo. 9b (CommercLl/IndostrW lrafnteoance DLtrltt) FYcalYSr91/94 The FY 91 /92 annual report for [andacape Maintenance District No. 3b (Commercial/Industrial Maintenance District fe prepared m compliance with the rcquircments oC Article 4, Chapter 1, Dlvlston 5 oC the Streets and Highways Code. State of Cahfomfa (Landscape and l.lghticig Att a< 19721. IQ: landscape Malntenarice District x36 ft.n[D x3b) represents landscaped sites throughout the Commercial/Industrial Maintenance DlatnM. These site arc aseaclated wuh areas within that dLStricl and as such arty beneftt derived from the landscape inslalletion can be directly attributed to those parcels wlthm the dlshfct. Because of this, assessments rcquued for this dfavlct arc charged to those pamL wlthm that planned cormnunay. ThU dbtAct consists o(the Haven Median faland and the 4W 94red and Haven Avenue entry morL=_ t 7Le MIDtkm Medians and enhp mrmrmeat are to be tnclvded within the district !n 91 /92. The quartLlHes of malntalned areas consist Of: Protected StLd9' ($1 SL~L97i Cround Cover and Shrubs 0.27 4.42 Acres Turf 4.34 43Z Total 4.57 8.89 The ground cover and shrubs an mamtalned under contract m conJuncllon with a Contmct services Agreement. Capital Improvements wlthm LMD x3b were pafd by development HeautNcatlon Fees The maJorlty of the budgeted costs for I.MD x3b arc fnr direct maintenance of ground cover and shrubs. These functlonv are provided through a Contract Services Agreement the City has with a prirate landscape maintenance company. The protected costs to operate and maintain LMD x3b arc as follows: Proposed Maintenance Budget 91/92 Regular Payroll $2,530 Fnnge Btnetits $840 Maintenance and Operations $30,798 Equipment Maintenance and $1,031 OperaUora Contingency - Trce Replacement $0 Contract Services • landscape Maintenance $133,700 • Tree Maintenance $16,000 • Backilow Testing $1,100 • Misc. (elec., Plumbing, etc.) 12,000 Capital Ekperutltures -Protects 90/91 fteene/wind damage • Tnx, shnab 14 ground cover 112,525 replattment • Moisture sensor oral $16,000 controller/rnclosure Installations Capital Expenditures -Equipment 10 Capital Expenditures - Vehicles 1p Water 187,427 Electric 14.050 Subtotal; Add: Assessmrnt A(L*•+atmtlon/Overhead 123,586 Total Revenue Required Less: mte[est and Pemhles 512.974 Assrssment Revenue RequiRd 614 Weatherdamaged trees, shrubs and gromtd rnvewlll he replaced at a cast d112,526. Mofaturc sensors w01 be lastalled at a coat d 116.000. This Ia expected to decrease water usage. The budgeted amoum for water 1s 157,427.. No vehicle or egWpment purchases are budgeted for N 91/92. AAalvals• In FY 90/91, the Assessment Rate for IMD pSb was 1175.00/AU. The +++~++_•~ to 1248.99/AU. Is attzlbutable to h+creased water eo_sts d 147,427 which 1s due to, not only the urcrease m the malntafned area (a doubling d the mamtafned arsa m 90/91). but also an antklpated mte tnerease for water. 1R 91/92 Aaaeam±• 1L•!•! The tollowing itemizes the assessment ratc for the dLStcicL• Un1t x of Base Unlt Adtustcd ia18G lI9G TYQG Unlls $LlII1S[ Factor Lf81t B4YCIILG Single Fam0y Acres 1,159.14 1248.99 1.0 1248,99 $jQ$~Q Total Revenue 1288.614 Landscape Malnte0ance Dlatnct No. 38 AMexatlona [w Flscal Year 91/92 ~q~jZ DR F_ebn.a~..~r.7 111 88-19 M mh 1 12.08AU. e PM AxNF'rcD 1 - 12848 r0 4 1990 13.32 AU. TRACT en . 11428 1990 A U 4 78AU. e CUP xF~rc:n nr . 88.38 HI 18 1990 17 AU. ay PM ~ . 11410 1990 rnf/ 19 223AU. emu CUP . e 88.37 l 18 1990 .7 AU. ~.j~j2 CUP Ju y . 89-17 1Qt °O 4.84 AU. ANLIEXEII CUP SG9 ~ Y 88-48 7AU. ANL[EBEp PM [5.14 12781 C M M S 140(1 19.14 AU. ep PM ~ nn r _ 12598 1990 3 O f 1 19.04 AU. fj CUP . c 0 fer BB-18 7 1990 h N 2.48 AU. au P M . avem er 13125 (Cwaicel 7 1 N 19.2 AU. e PM ern ou®~ - ~ 11990 19.1990 S.92 AU. PM 1 9:it 27,SBAU. E%NWj •~• ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET UGHTWG YAWTENpNCE DlSTA1CT NOS. 1 AND 3 c C~Ti Y OF RANCHO C1lCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALiFORN1A 'Original Poor r~~„r+„ „~~ ASSESSMENT DIARiRAM I.AtS1SCAPE MAWTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGNTNiG MIAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND B SlTB y-.~~- I .~- ......... ... .. .. r- _.._a "-- ._~.- ---- -- - I I .~ ~~~~~~ 1Yt W - • ~. .~ ~ _ ~~; ~' ~ `EOISON COURT ~ "~ '~ ~ i - ~ ~ - "+a aJa y i•i .. 11 C ~ j ~ ~ .__ :~ . ~~ . _ ~ ELL C RT ° ...._ ,~- ... ~ .~~. ~ ;- ~ - 1 _ ~M I I ! I '9 i ~ ~ '- COTY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA CO~JNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA pM ~28aR .- ~CIP'inat D.._.. n exwsrc •~• AaSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAWTENANf:E (STRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGNTINt3 MAMTEDtANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 ~~~~ CITY OR RANCHO CtICAMON~iA COUNTY O~ SAN BERNARDINO Q STATE OR CALIRORNI4 ~ //a2g 'O~i~ir~af Pocr Cu,):t„ - lXIII/IT ,~~ AssESSweNrr ni~opwM ~.ANOSCAVS ~ oISTRICr No. ~ STREET LIOiiTNiO MAgiTENANGE DISTRICT NOS. t AND 6 L;sil10 ~i aW parr •naar wry 0.11 •W IW~aN wYf~ WYT T~/~ 1Rf Y ~Yr! ~~l/ ~TR!!T. T/// tTI/~ r~Or~ ANa ~aaT. NJTIrY~ Yla~tiw WV\n ~Va1Y1a W~'gLY Ad40~~W4• auaa~~t a~~y{f r~ I J ~ ~ 1 w W t 2 C44Y OR RANCNO CIJCAMONY.. . . COUNTY Of SAl1 BERNAROINO ~~p ~~-~ STA'PI: OR CALIFORNIA exnreii •~• ASSESSMENT 6IAtiRgM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 8 ~_-., ~~~ ~: i~ ~ 1 ~~ j° ~ ~'I,~ 1 ~ ___ __~~., _?_____.l« _,i it 1 ~'' f +.rr,Y.Y ~i r. ~'yY~1i ~~R~ 1rs..~ I 'lTa:. r _ I -~-~• .... ,. ~ rr~ - f~ Q ~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA COUNTY OR SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA PM 11410 e:err •~• ~~~~lY 1~ ~~//~~ss•• Resolution No. 9d-161 L ~~ Q'AYM~ C"?C ? LAlS)SCAPE MANTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIONTNO YAMTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND d W W c` z 3 F W 5~~~ 91 MILLER AVENUE c~nr o~ au-NCNO cuc~-~or~t~n _ couMTY o~ sr-~ ~~~o ~ ~ sT~T~ o~ cut~on~a~ 3 -_ EXHIBIT •A• . ASSESSMENT DidGRAt/ LANDSCAPE MAINTENAN(~ D~TpICT NO. 3 STREET LIGHTING 11AINTENANCE D~TRICT NOS. t AND 8 2'S 00 ~ ~ ' i I i I i W 1 ~ ~~{{ 1 Z ..LL 6 Q O ~~ I F `K y c OO } eO A 4 ' ~ 1 1 W r •. ~ ~ c .. I ~ - ~ IL•~~ I t.z~' i ~ • ~ ~ ~ I ~~ v~~.~ S.3 w te.~.~~,.~..m.r M _ ''"" ""' '"``'u ' 19tH STREET I CITY Ord RANCiiO CUCAMONGA COUN'PY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CAi•iFORN1A CLP 69-/7 •3 EYINOIT •~• AS~'iESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREST LIGHTING frIAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AHD 8 'Orog+nal Poor_~~a~;ty -- ~~ _~-~- fYla} fla[va 11 li~lTIII( 7 \ 1__~~ ~~_~~ 1__' 92n•e c _ BASe'LIN_E AVE. _ 1 d Cl0 ~ (MIiT. 110(VNR ~ - ~~ r li C~~.~ r-iihr ..% _~„ X1 ~\ ~ ma "'- - 1 ..T.. \ . ~ ~ I t .w.,.,, ~ I i ~`t \ i + ~• I \ t \ ~ ~ { i i I ~t ; h`aur. ac 1~ j 1 ~~ ~~ e ~I ~ ~ :~ffaT. ws 1 ~ ~ z ~ Y I ~ ~ i . ~ 4 ,1 Q P4RC ~' PRRC~ c_ , i ~ ~ ,~ ~, 1 s~l~ ~ :1: (SI.T. a.L I 11 g ~ i 1t i 1 . I ~i I ~ ~ i e~ ?~,nrcL I ~ _ I~ .° j i i~ilA? 5395 ^ ~„ ~ I ; . i S ~;- RN.n s72: il I l PG6. 34 3 35 ~' ' i ° • ~ ~ I ~6YIlT LII^U ~ ~ }0000' ~ ~ ~ i ~ /'[31ii M(Il ` 1 4 j r E I w m ~ ar arc attar CITY OR RANCI~10 CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET UGMT1NCi MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 qNp g . 'ari~'snal_Poor_Qual;ty ~ ~ f~'~ o m z ~ ~ ( ~ •~: M ~I .~ mY .._.^ ~ _l .~i 1- ~1 P RGEL I' I I`' i __ -~ i _ ,I i ~ i•Ytl t: Irt i1 r--__ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA .. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDI STATE OF CALIFORNIA ',7781 ASSESSMENT D14GW4M LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE D15TAICT NO. 3 STREET LIGFITING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND g C~4Y OF WANC~10 CYCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BE3;NAEtDINO S7AITiE O~ CALIFORNIA ~ - - - 'driginal Foor ~uafifii •A. A~3SESSMENY DIAGRAlN LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND B C~4Y OF RANCi~lO CUCAMONGA ` COtlNYY OF SAN BERNARDINO f.'[IP / STATE OF CALIFORNIA 'A• ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAWTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGNTIDIG MAINTENANCE D18TAICT NOS. 1 AND 8 I i y W I~ PAtJ1ECT StT@ >i :^ ~i ~~ ~ i ~ ,, _~ I/; ~ ~ ~~ \ ~_ ~YPRltir..._. ~! it ¢i W =1 W CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO PM /3it5 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~SESSMENT DIA~R~M LANDSCAPE MAWT~IANCE DISTTRICT NO. 3 STREET LKiNTNiG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 '4rig~na~ i'ocr ~Uaiity CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONtiA COUNTY OF SAN BEI~NAEtDINO PM 11440 . 3 STATE OF CA411~ORNUA .,,. wSSES~tvi~T Dasro~e-t~ LANO86APE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LNiFITNi~i MANITENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 Ong,r;a r ~~;_~u-~~,:y CITY OF RANC1~10 CUCAMONOA COUNTY OF SAN BEitNARDINO PARCE[. MAP :2?38 STATE OF CALIROEicN1A LANOSCAPF. MAINTENANCE O[SiR ICT MAINTENANCE SPECIFICAFI ONS THE SFR VICE LEVEL FOR TURF Ns.I NTE NPNCE IS' L. The Contractor shad mow ail turf areas once per week during the period of Narch 1 Yo November 1; and not Tess than biweekly during the period of November 2 to February 29. 2. The Contractor shall edge all turf grass borders concurrently with each mowing. s. ine von crac fur >i~ai i .e. L;, iae o. ~ .~~ ~ a~¢a.. !s ,:c.-„rdc..c. ::'t!: c_I..e..Te II-A. 4. The Contractor shall mechanically aerate all turf areas both in the spring and the fall of each year and more often as required to reduce compaction and stress. 5. The Lorttractor shall mechanically dethatck all turf areas once per year. This operation should be scheduled 11iwediately prior to over seeding for those areas that are Lo be ovcr seeded. 6. The Contractor shall on an annual basis over seed all areas that do not have a high qualify stand of turn. 7. Concurrently with each mowing, the Contractor shall mechanically "bowl" around all irrigation heads that are blocked by grass between mowings. 8. The Contractor shall on a weekly basis remove any trash or debris that accumulates on the turf. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR PEST CONTROL I5: Complete and continuous control and/or eradication of all plant pests and weeds. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR GROUND COVER MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall trim ground cover ad,lacent to any hardscape, structure, fixture, plant, or other area in which it would not encroach such that a neatly trimmed appearance is consistently maintained. Z. The Contractor shall on a weekly basis clean any accumulated debris or trash from all ground cover areas. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize all ground cover areas every ninety days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. 4. The Contractor shall annual ly,. at the direction of the City Engineer, mow, or otherwise lower, all overgrown ground cover to a height of three inches. 5. The Contractor shall mechanically "bowl" around all irrigation heads that are blocked by ground rover. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR SNRUB MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall selectively prune all shrubs whenever required such that each shrub grows vigorously and healthily 1n its natural form without encroaching upon any adJacent area, improved street or sidewalk, or otherwise becomes a public hazard. 2. The Contractor shall fertilize all shrubs every ninety days using 6-6-6 with trace elements or approved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR PINE MAINTENANCE IS: I. The Contractor shalt trim vines once per year in September. 2. The Contractor shaiT re-attach to a wall or fence once per year in September vines that fall off the wall Dy using the attachments required on the construction plans for the site. 3. The Contractor shall annually, in September, remove all vines that grow into undesirable places such as trees or shrubs. 4. The Contractor shall fertilize all vines every 180 days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR TREE MAINTENANCE IS: I. The Contractor shall trim to a height of fifteen feet above grade, trees on the work sites to maintain them in a safe condition including vehicle, pedestrian and equestrian clearance and free of dead, diseased and dying wood and "hangers" or other public hazards. Rny hazard above that height will be reported to the City Engineer. 2. The Contractor shalt "tip-back" young trees whenever they encroach upon adJacent vehicular, pedestrian or equestrian traffic. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize each tree on each work site once per year with the appropriate number of .0.griform 21 yram Plant Tablets, or approveA equal, per size of tree. 4. The Contractor shall restake any tree needing restaking. ~~ ~ ~c~~1~o C~c~a~ aaaual F.n~inees's R~post Ltadscape Mainteaaace District No. 4 (Terra Vl~ta PLnued Commaaity) Approved: W1ll1am J. O' Clty Engineer City o[Itaacho CorAmonp Annual Itaajmep'a itaDtirt I~ndacape llalnteuance 1HaMet No. 4 (Terra Vbta Plamld Commmlty) F1aca1 Yaar 91/92 The 91 /92 annual report for Landscape Malcitenance Distrito No. 4 flerm Vista Planned Communityl fs pnpazed ni compllarice with the nqubements of ArOCIe 4. Chapter 1, Division 5 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972). Landscape Mamtenance District #4 (I+MfI N4) mpresente landscaped eitea throughout the Terra Vista Plamed Community. These alto are aseeciated wtth areas within that conunumty and as auch arty benefit derived from the landscape inatallatton can he directly attributed to those parrUS wtthm that community, Because oC this, assessments required Cor this distnM an charged to those parceN within that planned community. The skea malydairied My the distrfet mnaiat d parkways, pexoa, mldlart lalanib atd parlra The quantltfes of nialntatned arras consist of Protected BL34L81 Ground Cover and Shrubs 3,00 5.43 Acres Turf 3.00 5.04 " Equestrian Trads 1500 ?,Z.,`>Q " Total 21.00 37.97 The ground cover and shrubs an rnaintamed under contract Capital improvements wlthm LMD #4 were paid by, and consttvtoed In con]unctbn with, development by the Terra VLSta Planned Community. The majority oC the budgeted costs for LMD #4 Is for dlrcct rnairrtenance of ground cover and shrubs. 'These functions an provided through a Contract Services Agreement the City has with a private landscape maintenance company. The protected costs to operate and mamtam LMD #4 are as follows: ~rQpossd MaL~tenan,e Hud¢et: 91/92 Regulaz Payroli $173,760 Fringe Bene0ts $57,920 Mamtenance and OpereUena $61,319 Equipment Maintenance and $65,200 Operations Contingency -Tree Replacement $3.300 Contract Sentlcea • Caridscape Maintenance $133,800 • Tree Mafntcnance $3,500 • Backtlow Testing $1,800 • Misc. (elm., Plumbing, etc.l $7,000 Capital Expenditures - Protects 90191 freae/wind damage • Tin, shrub & ground ewer $23,700 replacement • Moisture sensor and $20,0110 controller/enclosure Installations Capital Expendlturea -Equipment $0 Caplta2 Expenditures -Vehicles $0 Water $171,055 Electric $12,517 Subtotal: X3877' Add: Assessment AdminlstratWn/Overhead $83,291 Total Revenue Required lZ58.152 ices: interest and PenalUw ~,~¢ Assessment Revenue Requlmd $725.548 Moisture mso~wlll be lnatalled at a ~ of $20.000 'll q la expected d ~, A 00. water usage. The budgeted amount for water is t57,427,. No vehicle or equipment purchases are budgeted for 1n 91 /92. $139,000 to available In 91/92 horn a prior year reserve for the preiknmary design, design and constnretlon of medlar Island rctrotita on Base ilne Rued and Terra Vista Parkway. The 90/91 esna•,nent Rates for IMD t;4 are as Collawa: 90191 3ingle Family $110.25 Mul[1 Farn9y $93.45 Commercial $699.26 Vacant Land $10.25 The Increase m rates is attributable to increased water costs of $61,055 and equipment maintenance and operatWna of $79,200 over those oC 90/91. Contract Services and maintenance and operations increased by $84,987 and $58.819 respectively. These last two items abng with water cost lnatases can be partially attributable to an increase to the maintained area of 8196 wer 90/91. FY 81/99 ..w o.h.. The following ttrndua the assessmrnt rate for the district Untt q o[ _ 1~ 8 ~1 Singln Family Parcel 6 A24 8 A402,542 Multi-Family Parcel 1,478 193.42 285,875 Commercial Acre 124.86 284.42 35,513 Vacant Acre 64.54 25.09 l.fil9 Total Anvenue 725 I~ndecape Malnteruncc DWrkts No. 4 Antrxatlona for Flecal Year 1991/92 ~Q TRACT ` 13894 8 2t AU. lEXLQ AL~ TRACT EXED ~ ELGD19CC21.1 t388~-1 1990 6 9 at L 2 AU. ANN rut . e em er lt%tltl S 1999 D h 22.88 AU. TRACT _ eom er 13,9D9 98 AU. 19.903.1 13.9032 s -. EYFYBIT •A• assessMe!!T DaAwsRA~ LANDSCAPE IfAAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET LIGNTI_ N~MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. t AND 4 ,, r- \~. Y N ~~ ~ rJ .' ~ ~ a a..,' w ~ Z ~ ~ /,~ h i ~ ~~ i ~ w~ ^`y ' ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ `~~ u, ' ~ ,` * ~ Ire , \~\v ~ ' ~ f ~;r-~~/ -; , r CITY OF RANCNO C7JCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BEpNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~`~~- FJ{IIWT •A• i LANDS~C~$$11AgrTENpNDCE~DISTRIC~ NO. 4 STREET LIGHTING WIAWTENANCE DISTFi1CT NOS. 1 AND 4 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~ COUNTY OF' SAN BERNARDINO ~ra8~ ~. ~ STATE OF CALIRORNIA ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE IAAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET LN3NTNQ MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. ~ AND 4 CITY OR RANCNO CUGAMONGA COUNTY Op SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALlRORNIA ~ LANDSCAPE MprNrENANCE OISTR(CT MAINTENANCE SPECIFICATIONS THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR TURF MA [NIENANCE [S: 1. The Contractor shall mow all turf areas once per week during the period of March 1 to November 1: and not less than biweekly during the period of November 2 to February 28. 2. The Contractor shall edge all turf grass borders concurrently with each mowing. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize all turf areas in accordance with Schedule IT-A. 4. The Contractor shall mechanically aerate all turf areas both 1n the spring and the fall of each year and more often as required to reduce compaction and stress. 5. The Contractor shaTT mechartfcaTTy dethatch aTT turf area once per year. Thtt operation slquid he scheduled f~edfa4ly prior to owr seeding for thou cress that are to be over waded, 6. The Contractor shall on an annual basis over seed all areas that do not have a high quality stand of turn. 7. Concurrently with each mowing, the Contractor shall mechanically "bowl" around all irrigation heads that are blocked by grass between mowings. 8. The Contractor shall on a weekly basis remove any trash or debris that accumulates on the turf. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR PEST CONTkOL ii: Compiete and continuous control and/or eradication of all plant pests and weeds. THE~SERYICE LEVEL FOR GROUND COVER MAINTENANCE IS: i. The Contractor shall trim ground cover whenever 1t encroaches upon private property, or the property of other public agencies, or becomes a public hazard. 2. The Contractor shall on a biweekly basis clean any accumulated debris or trash from all ground cover areas. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize all ground cover areas every 360 days Sn March with 6-6-6 or approved equal. 4. The Contractor ;hall, at the direction of the City Engineer, mow, or otherwise Tower, to a height of three Inches alt overgrown ground cover that 1s a ttre hazard. 5. The Contractor shall mechanically or chemically "bowl" as often as is required around each trrigatl on head that is blocked by ground cover. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR SHRUB MAINTENANCE IS: I. The Contractor shall prune with shears all shrubs that encroach upon any any adJacent improved area, street or sidewalk, or otherwise becomes a public hazard. 2. The Contractor shall fertilize alt shrubs every 360 days using 6-6-6 with L,aw eirnmnLr ur appruvad eQUal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR VINE MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall trim vines once par year to September. 2. The Contractor shaTT re-attach to a waTT ar fence ones per year in September vfnes that fall off thb ralT by asirtg the attacfwents required on the construetfon plans tar the site. 3. The Contractor shall annually, to September, remove alt vfnes that grow into undesirable places such as trees or shrubs. 4. The Contractor shall fertilize all vines every 180 days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOIL TREE MAINTENANCE 15: I. The Contractor shall trim to a height of fifteen feet above grade, trees on the work sites to maintain them in a safe condition including vehicle, pedestrian and equestrian clearance and free of dead, diseased and dying wood and "hangers" or other public hazards. Any hazard above that height wilt be reported to the City Engineer. 2.' The Contractor shall "tip-back" young trees whenever they encroach upon adlacent vehicular, pedestrian or equestrian traffic. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize each tree on each work site once per year with the appropriate number of Agriform 21 gram Plant Tablets, or approved equal, per size of tree. 4. The Contractor shall restake any tree needing restaking. (~{~ii ~g o o C~~C1~iU oO~C! Elnnus~l. F~ginae:'c S+npast Landscape Maiatenaace District No. S (Tot Lot) Approv William J. ib'l~T ,City Engineer dty of Yaacho AonoLL Eapaeer'a Repeat landscape Ed<alnteaanca DLtrlct Ro. D Cl'ae Lot) lLctl Tda 81/90 The 91/92 annual repoR for landscape Matrdenance DlstrlM No. 5 Clot Loo Ls prepared rn compllana with the requlrementa o[Artlcle 4. Chapter 1, Division 5 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of CabComla n ~„n...n,.. and Lighting /U:t of 1972). landscape Maintenance D1striM M51LMD a51 represents a landscaped Tot Lot. Th1s site is associated with a group d44 a>ngfe [amtly Parcels which all have a cammmt usage of the Tot Lot such that azry 6eaellt derived from the landscaping can bt dlrectty attributed to those pactlcular parcels. Because of this, asaG3menis ~equlnxl for this district are charged to those spxlOc parcels. a~mo~uni ~~ ~matnfalned 6y the dtntrlct. rt corutets da'tot Lot with a smaQ gmuod cover. IItequantit4a otmaintatocd arsaaeonvlat oC 5/30/91 ~5L3DL22 Ground Corer arsi Shrubs Q,$Q Q.3~ pens Tots] 0.33 0.33 " The ground ewer and shrubs are maintamed under contract. Capital improvements within LAID M5 were y~td by and constricted m conJunctfon with development of the 44 parcels wlthm the distr~t. The majority of the budgeted costs for LMD M5 are (or direct mamtenance of ground cover and shrubs. these functlons are provided through a Contract Services Agreement tAe City has with a private landxape maintenance company. The proJeMed costs to operate and malntaln LMD e5 are a9 follows: P!nma.d M-~ a-i"iN_"~ Byta:SS: 91/92 Regular Payroll 8350 t7inge Benettta ~lyp Mamtertanee and Operations $qgg Equipment Maintenance and 'S6 Operations Contingency -Tree Replacement 7450 ContraM Services • Landscape Maintenance $2,302 • Tree Maintenance 80 • Backtlow Testmg j;l~r • Misc. (elx., Plumbing, etcJ >BO Capital Expenditures -Projects 90/91 freeze/wind damage + Tm, sluvb & ground cover 80 replacement • Mobturc sensor and 80 controller/enclosure matallatlona ~ Capital Expendltttrea - Equlpmmt 80 Capital Expmdlturea • Vehicles 80 Water 8195 E1ecWc 8127 Subtotal: ~~4 Add: Assessment Adalcdatratton/Overhead 8515 Total Revenue Required Less: Interest and Penalties }.LLB Aaxasment Revenue Requtred 84.2U0 Pmjedai CMW have been rMuced by the dOminatlan Of the > dweat}ter damaged shrubs andgtwnd coven ht additWO. moWueeamsnrt~tallatlon has Gem ehminafed due to the nature of the fandvcaptog sal thug proving rot tubs cast eBecth2. Thb act. while deeteastrg lined capital Outlay. m~ have a detrimental affect m water usage. The budgeted atnoim[ forvater b 8195. No vehicle or equfPment putchaeta art budgeted for fa 9I/92. in 90/91, the Assessment Rate for I.IdD s5 suss 8105.170/AU. The rate vdli retaain at $lOb.lX7/AU. for 91/92. IA1D a5 mnst~ts of 40 ASatssmmt Unlta (AU.). Those AU. will generate 84.200 revenue required for the dlatrfet. Untt Y of Base Unit AdJusted laedLlSC 1$J2t 11Ltta S/ Ind Factor BELL Bt55aYt Single Fam11y Parcels 40 81115.00 1.0 8105.00 Total Revenue LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT MAINTENA}!CE SPECIFICATIONS THE SERVICE LEVEL FDR TURF MAINTENANCE [S: 1. The Contractor shall mow all turf areas once per week during the period of March 1 to November 1; and not less than biweekly during the period of November 2 to February 28. 2. The Contractor shall edge all turf grass borders coixurrently with each mowing. I I-A. -.... __._. _.._.. ......... ,.. , .,.~ _~~ `""° di cda in a~wruan~e wi iii 'aci,euuie 4. The Contractor shall mechanically aerate all turf areas both in the spring and the fall of each year and more often as required to reduce compaction and stress. 5. The Contractor shall mechanically dethatch aTT turf areas owe per year. This operation should 6e scheduled tmmed}atmly prfar to over seeding for those areas that are to be over seeded. 6. The Contractor shall on an annual basis over seed all areas that do not have a high quality stand of turn. 7. Concurrently with each mowing, the Contractor shall mechanically "bowl" around all irrl ga lion heads that are blocked Dy grass between mowings. 8. The Contractor shall on a weekly basis remove any trash or debris that accumulates on the turf. THE SERVICE LEVEL FDR PEST CONTROL IS: Complete and continuous control and/or eradication of all plant pests and weeds. THE SERVICE LEVEL FDR tltoUND COVER MAINTENANCE I5: ~ 1. The Contractor shall trim ground cover aAJacent to any hardscape, structure, fixture, plant, or other area in which it would not encroach such that a neatly trlmned appearance 1s consistently maintained. 2. The Contractor shall on a weekly basis clean any accumulated debris or trash from all ground cover areas. 3. the Contractor shall fertilize all ground cover areas every ninety days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. 4. The Contractor shall annually, at the Ai rec tion of the City Engineer, mow, or otherwise lower, all ove'rgrvwn ground cover to a height of three inches. 5. The Contractor shall mechanically "bowl" around all irrigation heads that are blocked by ground cover. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR SHRUG MAINTENANCE (S: 1. The Contractor shall selectively prune all shrubs whenever required such that each shrub grows vigorously and healthily in its natural farm without encroaching upon any adjacent area, improved street or sidewalk, or otherwise becomes a public hazard. 2. The Contractor shall fert111ze all shrubs every ninety days using 6-6-6 with trace elements or approved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR VINE MAINTENANCE IS: L. The Contractor shaTi trte vines once per year trt September. 2. The Contrutor shall re-attech to a wall or fence once per year to September vines that fall off the watt by using the attathments required on the construction plans for the site. 3. The Contractor shall annually, in September, rearove all vines that grow iota undesirable places such as trees or shrubs. 4. The Contractor shall fertilize all vines every 180 days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR TREE tdAINTENANGE IS: 1. The Contractor shalt trim to a height of fifteen feet above grade, trees on the work sites to maintain them 1n a safe condition including vehicle, pedestrian and equestrian clearance and free of dead, diseased and dying wood and "hangers" or other public hazards. Any hazard above that height w111 be reported to the City Engineer. 2. The Contractor shall "tip-back" young trees whenever they encroach upon adJacent vehicular, pedestrian or equestrian traffic. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize each tree on each work site once per year with the appropriate number of Agriform 21 gram Plant Tablets, or approved equal, per size of tree. 4. The Contractor shall restake any tree needing restaking. Cc~t~j o f ~`3c~c~ao C~.o annual Engiaeer'a Report I.andf3cape Maintenance District No. 6 (Cara Planned Conmm~nit~) Approved Wlllfam J. , city Engineer .~,~ ~. Lndscape >t<ratnten.nm ntahict No. tl (Caryn Punned Commnnlt7) )Leal Yqr 91/94 The 91/92 annual ttport for Landscape Maintenane District No. 6 (Caryn Punned Community( is pttpared m compbance with the requirements of Article 4. Chapter 1, Division S of the Streets and Highways Code, State d Caafornfa (fandscape and Llghthig Act of 1972). Landscape Maadenance Dutrlet MB (LMD a61 rcpcexnts landscaped sltee throughout the Caryn Planned Community. These sae arc associated with areas within that community and as such atty beneta dedved tram the undacape lnetalutlon can be directly attributed to those pamu wahtn that community. Because d this, asvra m.me required for thL dlatdet ace charged to those parcda ~rltthlR that planned community, Thb dletrlet conetsts d pathways. paseas and att egetesfrazt traa. The gnarttaks d ~++al^tnin.n areas canalft of: Protected Gmund Cover and Shrubs 8f 0% 6! ~ Acres Turf 2.00 289 ,• Equestrian Trails ~ ~~ ~~ Total 15.00 17.98 ^ The ground ewer and shrubs att maintavud under contract Capital Improvements within LMD MB were paid by, and constructed in conJunction with, deveWpment by the Caryn PLlrmed Community, The maJority of the budgeted coats for LMD M6 ate for direct maintenance d ground cover and shrubs. These funetlons aze provided through a ContraM 9ervlces Agreement the Clty has wah a private landscape malntenantt comparty. The protected costs to operate and maintain LMD a6 arc as follows: Pmo ad MaL ten- B do t 31/92 Regular Payroll $6,670 Fringe Benefits 92.220 Maintenance and Operations $15,364 Equipment Maintenance and $1,914 Operations Contingency -Tree Replacement 9D Contract Services • Landscape Maintenance 9161,000 • Trce Maintenance 95,430 • BacMtlow Testing $1,625 • Misc. (etce., piumblrrg, etcJ $2,000 Capital F]cpendlturee - projects 90/91 freeu/wend damage ~ • Tate, shrub & ground cover $11,863 replacement • Moisture xtuor and $6,000 controller/enclosure lnstallatlons Capital Dcpendltures - Fyufpment $0 Capital F]cpendltures - VehlrJrs $O Water $45.941 Electric $1,535 oub[otal: 0'161,982 Add: Assessment AdmirustratMn/Overhead $26.613 Total Revenue Requved less: lateteat and Penalbev lIZ.3@4 AaseOammt Revetnre Rapatred 511 Weather damaged ltees, shrubs std gimtm cauerwl8 be replaced at a cast d$11,689. Mobtun sensors wID be arabned at a cost d' $6.1100. Thb b expected to decreax seta usage. The budgeted anwrart for water b N5,941, I4o vehlrJe or equipment purchases an budgeted for to 91 /92. Aatlsla: Iri 90/91, the Assessment Rate for IMD M6 was $195,00/AU. The ltrcrea9E to $235.48/AU. b primarily attributable to Irx:reased water costa of $30,018. The following itemizes the assessment rate for the dlstrlet: Unit A of Base Unlt Adjusted 3&Dd 3184 1Y-II Ilnlts $Ll1ng Fi7CLOt 33SLC I3rseul3G SYngle Family Parcels 1,170 $295.48 3.0 $295.48 !275.511 Total Revenue 75511 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT MAINTENANCE SPECIFICATIONS THE SERVICE LEVEL Fql TURF MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall mow all turf areas once per week during the period of March 1 to November 1; and not less than biweekly during the period of November 2 to February 28. 2. The Contractor shall edge all turf grass borders concurrently Kith each mowing. J. IIIC VVII LI Ob WI i11O1. ICI LII.LC Y1. LY,1 OI GOi 11 pVVVI VpI,bG „I N, J..VGUVIG I I-a. 4. The Contractor shall mechan lcally aerate all turf areas both 1n the spring and the fall of each year and more often as required to reduce compaction and stress. 5. The Contractor shall mechanically dethatch all turf areas once per year. This operation should be scheduled lmeediately prior M over seeding for those areas that are to 6e aver seeded. 6. The Contractor sha}1 on an annual basis aver seed all areas that do not have a high quality stand of turn. 7. Concurrently with each mowing, the Contractor shall mechanically "bowl" around all irrigation heads that are blocked by grass between mowings. 8. The Contractor shall on a weekly basis remove any trash or debris that accumulates on the turf. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR PEST CONTROL IS: Complete and continuous control and/or eradication of alt plant pests and weeds. THE SERYICE LEVEL FOR GROUND COVER MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall trim ground cover adjacent to any hardscape, structure, fixture, plant, or other area in which 1t would not encroach such that a neatly trimmed appearance is consistently maintained. 2. The Contractor shall on a weekly basis clean any accumulated debris or trash from all ground cover areas. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize all ground cover areas every ninety days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. 4. The Cantrac for shall annually,, st the ..".i reclion of the Lt ty Engineer, mow, or otherwise lower, all overgrown 9rounA cover to a hef ghc of three Inches. 5. The Contractor shall mechanically "bowl" around ail irrigation heads that are blocked by ground cover. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR SNRUB MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall selectively prune all shrubs whenever required such that each shrub grows vigorously and healthily in its natural form without encroaching upon any adjacent area, improved street or sidewalk, or otherwise becomes a public hazard. 2. The Contractor shall fertilize ail ,1:r;:t: ~•._-; "+"etv days using 6-6-6 with trace elements or approved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR PINE MAINTENANCE IS: I. The Contractor shall trim vfrtn once per year in September. 2. The Contractor shalt re-attach to a wail or fence once per year in September vines that fall off the wall by using the attachments required on the construction plans for the site. 3. The Contractor shall annually, 1n September, remove all vines that grow into undesirable places such as trees or shrubs. 4. The Contractor shall fertilize ail vines every 180 days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. a THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR TREE MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall trim to a height of fifteen feet above grade, trees on the work sites to maintain them in a safe condition including vehicle, pedestrian and equestrian clearance and free of dead, diseased and dying wood and "hangers" or other public hazards. Any hazard above that height will be reported to the Clty Engineer. 2. The Contractor Shall "tip-back" young trees whenever they encroach upon adyacent vehicular, pedestrian or equestrian traffic. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize each tree on each work site once per year with the appropriate number of Agriform 21 gram Plant Tablets, or approved equal , per size of tree. 4. The Contractor shall restake any tree needing restaking. C~f~j ~ ~°3c~~~o C~c~c~o~ Annual Engineer's Report Landscape Maiatenaace District No. 7 (Etlw~ndt- NortL) Approved: ~ WNlam J. O' U lty Englrteer c1a of Aeneho cucemoya Annual ~aaoKr. fandeeape Malntenenee INetrlCt No. 7 (Etlwenda North) lLplYgr91/9Z The 91/92 annual report far landscape Maintetumce District No. 7 CEUwanda North) n prepared In compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, DNlsion 5 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of Calaomla (landscape and Llghtmg Act of 1972). Landscape Maintenance Dlstrkt M7 (I.MD e7) repreaente landscaped saes throughout Etlwanda Highlands. These site are aseoclated wah areas within that community aM as such arty txneflt derived from the landscape lrntallatlon can be dlreMly attrtbuted to those parcels within that community. Because of this, assesammis required For this dlstrtct are charged to those parcels w(thm that planned community. As the Ettwenda Highlands develop, more parcels w1U b< annexed mto the district. The saes maintained by the dbtrlct eonebts of ground ewer and shrobr., turf end equestrian Naas. 91/92 will bt the first year in whlrh the d1ehYM wIB mafntaln the landscaping, The quantmae of malntatrttd areas corselet oC Ground Cover end Shrubs Turf Equestrian Tralls Total 9/vn/ct Protected 5L34LS N/A 7,91 Acres N/A 4.55 " P{L@ 2.44 „ N/A 14.36 " The ground cover and shrubs art maintained under contraM. Capital improvements within LMD a7 were paid bY, and constructed in rnntuneHOn u7th, development by the EUwanda HlghLuids. The matonty of the budgeted costs Cor LMD k7 arc for dote[ mantenarce of Ground cover and shrubs. These functions are provided through a Contract Services Agreement the Clty has wah a private landscape maintenance company. The protected rnsts to operate and maintain LMD a7 are as follows: 91/92 Regular Payroll $3,790 Fringe Benefits b1,250 Maintenance and Operations $33,845 Equipment Maintenance and $1,334 Operations Contingency • Tree Replacement $20,000 Contract Servces • landscape Maintenance $169,650 • Tree Maintenance $24,000 • Becktlow Testing 8325 • Mlac. (elec.. Plumbing, etc.l $6,275 Capital Expenditures • Protects 90/91 freeze/wind damage • Tree. shrub @ ground cover $0 rephtttment • Moisture sensor and $15,000 controller/enclosure lnatallattons Capital Expenditures - EgWpmcnt $0 Capital Expertdltures- Vehlcies $p Water $27,ggq Electric /~21 Subtotal: Add: Assessment Anmt„latratWn/Overhead $26,946 Total ?~ Itss: Interest and Penallks ~~ ~ 015 Protected costa have been reduced by the elmlinatton of the replacement of weather damaged tees, shrubs andground cover. While Mofalure Sensors wN be installed at the developers expenx, a budget item of $15,000 has been added to cover posUbk moditicatlons beyond the developeYs responsiblllty. Moisture Sensors are expected to decrease water usage. Frost damage wi8 be replattd at the developer's expense, The budgeted amount for water Ls $27,584.. No vehicle or equlpmenl purchases are budgeted Corm 91/92. AAaivala: In 90/91, the Aasesatnent Rate Cor 1MD #7 was $75.00/AU. 'Ihe increase to $400.54/AU. k attributable to increased water coats ol$13,766 and Contract Sendces of $166,730 over that of 90/91. FY 91/92 Arerm...• rf..•.. The following Itemizes the assessment rate for the district: Unit # of Hale Umt Ad)usted Land ~ 1~' 14 ~Hllfl ?~LIID(1, F~SL4I BaL4 $~v ,HyL Stngic Family Parcels 769 $400.54 1.0 $400.54 > Total Revenue 0.906.015 IaMacape Maintenance District No. 7 Revtmv of P7aca1 Year 1%2/92 During Flanl Ytar 1990/9l. the folbwing tnuxa have been anne:ed Into thla dbtrlct: ~ jj TRACT YF N F Maw 18. 1990 13586 1990 18 90 AU. A . .D N ~rwAr-r " ]Yfjd . ivwvc_R 9RAfi ~ TRACT Mw 1B. IffAfl 13686-8 • 18 1990 38 AU. TRACT ~ . 19.586.7 1990 8 MA.tl TItAGT ' Ms 1 . 13685.8 8 990 43 AU. ~~ p TRACT Mav I . 1 13565-9 19 1980 '~ 9 40 AU. eNNF]IF.D TRACT . ~" 91 f![ 13812 153 AU. C4 RIBIT '~' ASSESSMElIT DIAGRAM 'Original Poor Quality . ~~\ ~ \ a~ ~ 1 j~~Y}{~~/~] I f ~ ~ - ~ ' ` `:. -.. i r ~ / .~ ~ %~i ~ / i r ~ n a V.' / a f ~' ° ~ ~~ ~ ,n ' ~.r r .. 'L~~ ///"' ~ . ~ t .; . , ; . . - __ _ ~ Go _..__ - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO T' TR 1.3565 4 STATO: OF CALIFORNIA _ S~ c~ L)~~,_ - ASSESSMEh1T DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTFICT NO. 7 \, 'Qri~~~~i ~°°r ~'~~~,;ty / ' s s '~ . 2 3 3 ~ ~ ~ \ 3 p IO /QJ 7 B Z n 4 I f/ ~` m 9 ,at TS /G ~ 1 ~/~ ~ ~ T@ /D ' E '' ~ ` ~ ~+ ZK 1S ~ Ti IF 1 37 ~ ~ ~ /2 1 .~G (.~ 3. -~' ~ .S3 27 1 TL I l2 /i • i H M a.~+a pTY MAMTAt11Ep IANDLCAOE AREA ~~ TREE w«TERANCE TRACT 1 3 5 S5 ..... EOUESTtUN TRAI IMMENANGE PHASE 5 4\1 Ett~t~ oE` °;~ CITY OF RANCIiO CUCAM°NGA w ~% ~ lam. / \ 'EXHIBIT a- 4.Yq t- 1! ~: ~, :~ N ., „~ .; un ASSESSMENT DIAGnA(vi LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTFICT NO. 7 ~~~~ Ofd' w/rta~ED WDSGrE AgFJ~ -~ rnff wwreuwff ...... eouESrnan~rnA<uax~aacx TRACT 13505 PHASE 6 nn~o~s ~~ ~~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA sister ~ S~ V ~ A 'E %Mi91T a' :e m '~ N i ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 ~~~~ tlTY MAWTANED IAMJSCAPE ggEA ~~ '"~""A'"E"'A"~ TRACT /13565 •~~~~• EOUESTiIAVJ TRAd MAwTENANCE PHASE / .o" ~ "`~O:r, CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. "`~`~ t~ :' ~ `. 'EXHIBIT A• 17r,e ~~ i= „n - 'z N ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 ~~~~ dTY MANTAWED 1AN0.5CAPE AREA THEE MAWTENANCE •~~~~• EOUESTHAW THAL MANTENANCE TRACT 13505 " PHASE 8 o« ""O•:~. C:TY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA Lich, ~° ' s, ~ ~\;~ A 'EXMI6iT A' ~Za-`n , ~~ W~, ;~ N ~ i~ YI li un ASSESSMENT DIAGRAIN LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 ~~ J/~ ., crrr u~xr~ waac.~~ u~ ~ .Nrrre~Nr~ muFStnw mgt w~uneu~rxE us~~ -w- ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM ANDSCAPE MAMITENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 STREET NAN7'ENAMCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 7 _ i _ .Ni. M~~Y W~~ ~~Y ArMMMIY~. ~ O ~ r. w.NCn+.aor. i3 ~"'c M .t. ~ VNwY r I al +I * R I ,: e s s ''i ±: 'I Ez i • NuN i- ~ I 3~ 3s . E: a st ^ ~t 3 ~~ s s: I ~ .. ~ w s ~ ^ ~ . ~ 1 ~ ..N. - 3 ...e.N..~..~ l I1 LI . ~ •I. ~+_ ~~~ ~ ~O ' ` I r~ ..im 1 L__ F . .4n ~. .s..« W I Mix ~ !T _ 4.u.. MM~~ .lCv...iSCr ..fcVC' ~_ I~ N.......n. ^~• ~; i sir r• ~ ~ 1 '1~ ~ i I ~'~ h i ~ i r 1 i _ ~ 4 , ~ ~~ i \ , i r7 t s ' ! 0 ~ - ~ , ~~ ~d• ~ \ I ~I ~ 1 ~ • ~d i ' w..Y~~ New ~~ • CITY OF RANCHO CtlCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA T_R r3Ar~'- -~ ~ LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT MAINTENANCE SPECIFICATIONS THE SERYICE LEVEL FOR TURF MAINTENANCE IS: I. The Contractor shall mow all turf areas once per week during the period of March 1 to November 1; and not less than biweekly during the period of November 2 to February 29. 2. The Contractor shall edge all turf grass borders concurrently with each mowing. a. •ho Cnntractor shall fert111ze all turf areas in accordance with Schedule fI-A. 4. The Contractor shall mechanically aerate all turf areas both in the spring and the fall of each year and more often as required to reduce compaction and stress. 5, The Contractor shall mechanicaTTy dethatch aiT turf areas once per year. This operation should be scheduled teeedi ately prior to over seeding for those areas flat are to be over seeded. 6. The Contractor shall on an annual basis over seed all areas that do not have a high quality stand of turn. 7. Concurrently with each mowing, the Contractor shall mechanically "bowl" around all 1rrlgatton heads that are blocked by grass between mowings. 8. The Contractor shall on a weekly ba515 remove any trash or debris that accumulates on the turf. THE SERVICE LEVEL iOR PEST CONTROL IS: Complete and continuous control and/or eradication of alt plant pests and weeds. THE SERYICE LEVEL FOR GROUND COVER MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall trim ground cover ad,{acent to any hardscape, structure, fixture, plant, or other area 1n which it would not encroach such that a neatly trimmed appearance is consistently maintained. 2. The Contractor shall on a weekly basis clean any accumulated debris or trash from all ground cover areas. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize all ground cover areas every ninety days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. 4. The Contractor shall annual ly ,, at the Ai rection of the City €ngi near, mow, or otherwise lower, aii overgrown ground cover to a height of three inches. 5. The Contractor shall mechanically "bowl" around alt irrigation heads that are blocked by ground cover. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR SHRUR NAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall selectively prune all shrubs whenever required such that each shrub grows vigorously and healthily in its natural form without encroaching upon any adJacent area, improved street or sidewalk, or atherwf se becomes a public hazard. 2. The Contractor shall fertilize all shrubs every ninety days using 6-6-6 with trace elements or aDDroved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR VINE MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shaiT trim rfrteS orte4 per year frt Sep[ember. 2. The Contractor shalt re-attaeh to a wall or fence oncr per year in September vines that fall off the wall by using the attachments required on the construction plans for the site. 3. The Contractor shall annually, in September, remove all vines that grow into undesirable places such as trees or shrubs. 4. The Contractor shall fert111ze all vines every 180 days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FIXt TREE MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall trim to a height of fifteen feet above grade, trees an the work sites to maintain them in a safe condition including vehicle, pedestrian and equestrian clearance and free of dead, diseased and dying wood and "hangers" or other public hazards. Any hazard above that height will be reported to the City Engineer. 2. The Contractor shall "tip-back" young trees whenever they encroach upon adJacent vehicular, pedestrian or equestrian traffic. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize each tree on each work site once per year with the appropriate number of Agriform 21 gram Plant Tablets, or approved equal, per size of tree. 4. The Contractor shall restake any tree needing restaking. G~~j o f ~3c~c~~o C~c~ ~ o ~a Annual En~nees's Report Landscape Maintenance District Nb. 8 (Etiwaada Soath) Approved: Wi1Lam J. O'N ity Engtt}eer eo~td • Lndflcflpe Maintenance IHstrlet No. B (Etlwanda 9otrtbt 1Yea1 Year 91/90 The 91 J92 annual report for Landscape Mam[<nance Dlstrtet No. 8 (Etlwanda South) Is prepared m comphance with the requirements of A[tlcle 4, Chapter 1, DMSIOn 5 of the Streets end Highways Code, State of Cahfomla (Landscape and Lighting Act of 19M). Landscape Maintenance Dlshict N8 (LMD NS) n`preaenis landscaped 6itea throughout that portion of the Etlwanda area of the Clty primarily beefed south of Highland Avenue, north of FoothW Houkverd and east of EflwarWa Avenue. These attt are associated with areas within that area and as each any benefa derNed from the laMacape Installatbn can be directly attributed to thox parcels within that area. Because of thu assaamenta requl[ed far thL9 district eie charged to tbme parceh within that portion of Etlwanda. The step me~lreed by the dmtrtct consbb ofgiamd coverall shmbs and tmf. 91 /92 wW be the Orst year In which the district w19 maintain the landscaping. The quanta+.. of maintaloed areas comlet of Ground Cwer and Shrubs Turf Total s/~nrsl Protected S G34L92 N/A t 023 Acres N1A 246 „ N/A 029 " The ground cover and shrubs are maintained under contract. Capital improvements within LDtD N8 were paid by, and constructed th mnJuncuon with, development wiihln that portbn oC Enwanda. The matonty of the budgeted coats for LMD N8 are for direct rnafntenance of ground ewer and shrubs. These furictlons an provided through a Contract Services Agrstment the Clty has with a private landscape maintenance compazry. The protected costs to operate and maintain I.s1D A8 are as follows: 91/92 Regular Payroll ggp Fnnge Btne9ts gap Maintenance and Operatlons $2,209 Equipment Maintenance and g37p Operations Contingency -Tree Replacement >0840 Contract Services • Landscape Mantenance $4,537 • ltee Maintenance $.900 • Backtlow Teating $165 • Misc. (elec.. Plumbing. etc.l $200 Capital Fhrpendltures -Protects 90/91 freeze/wind damage • Tlee, shrub & ground cover $0 replacettrent • Moisture sensor and >BO controller/endosun lnstallattons Capital 6cpetYllturea - Equipment $0 Capital FScpendtturee - Vehldee AO Water E611 ci.~..!_ i~io Subtotal: ~t3 Add: Assessment Admudatration/Overhead A1,1t30 Total ~23,~ZI teas interest and PermCks $4ZZ Assessment Revenue Requtred 610,601 ProteMed coats have been reduced by the eliminatlon of the replattment of weather damaged trees, shrubs and ground cover. Molatum Sensors w91 tie insta9ed at the developers expense as with the replacement of anY weather damaged landscaping. This act, while decreasing fixed capital outlay, may have a detrimental atfeM on water usage. The budgeted amount for waters $611.. No vehicle or equipment purchases aro budgeted for N 91/92. In 90/91, the 4ssessment K!c for LY.D it8 was fv95.OG/AU. Tire irlcreASe to $245.22/AU. is ettnbutabk to increased Operations and Maintenance of $1.016 and Contract Sen~lces of $1,790 over 90/91. The following itemizes the assessment rate for the district: Unit • of Hale Unlt Adtuated IaLdSLSt T7mS SlnltS / 2 Fac[or BBSC BaCOYG Single Family Parcels 73 $145.22 t.0 $145.22 ~jQ,6Qj Total itevenue $1s,601 LANDSCADE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT MAINTENANCE SPECIFICATIDNS THE SERVICE LEVEL FDR TURF MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall mow a1T turf areas once per week during the period of March t to November I; and not Tess than biweekly during the period of November 2 to February 28. 2. The Contractor shall edge all turf grass borders concurrently with each mowing. t Ttia r~s.,~~... "ti,n se.~ttt,e "n •~s . , t,. . ...A....e ~t.w CnFab A.. . .. .. __._ _.._.. _. .. .__ _.. ._.. _-o• ... ~__. __..__ II-A. ... _.. __..___._ 4. The Contractor shall mechanically aerate all turf areas both in the spring and the fall of each year and more often as required to reduce compaction and stress. 5. The Contractor shaiT mechantcariy dethatch alT turf areas once per year. This operation should be scheduled immediately prior to over seeding for those areas that are to be over seeded. 6. The Contractor shall on an annual basis over seed all areas that do not have a high quality stand of turn. 7. Concurrently with each mowing, the Contractor shall mechanically "bowl" around all irrigation heads Lhat are blocked by grass between mows ngs. 8. The Contractor shall on a weekly basis remove any trash or debris that accumulates on the turf. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR PEST CONTROL l5: Complete and continuous control and/or eradication of all plant pests and weeds. THE SERVICE LEVEL FUR CAOUNO COYER MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall trim ground cover adjacent to any hardscape, structure, fixture, plant, or other area in which tt would not encroach such that a neatly trimmed appearance is consistently maintained. 2. The Contractor shall on a weekly basis clean any accumulated debris or trash from all ground cover areas. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize all ground cover areas every ninety days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. 4. The Contractor shah annually ,. at the direction of the City Engineer, mow, or otherwise lower, all overgrown ground cover to a height of three Inches. 5. The Contractor shall mechantcally "bowl" around all irrigation heads that are blocked by ground cover. _ THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR SHRUB MATNTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall selectively prune all shrubs whenever required such that each shrub grows vigorously and healthily to its natural form without encroaching upon any adjacent area, improved street or sidewalk, or otherwise becomes a public hazard. e. Ine Contractor shall fertilize all shrubs every ninety days using 6-6-6 with trace eiements or approved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR PINE MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall trim vines once per year }n September. 2. The Contractor sha/T re-attach tD a well or fence once per year in September vines that fall off the wall by using the attachments required on the construction plans for the site. 3. The Contractor shall annually, in September, remove all vines that grow into undesirable plates such as trees or shrubs. 4. The Contractor shall fertilize ail vines every 180 days with 6-6-6 or approved equal. THE SERVICE LEVEL FOR TREE MAINTENANCE IS: 1. The Contractor shall trim to a height of fifteen feet above grade, trees on the work sites to maintain them in a safe condition tncluding vehicle, pedestrian and equestrian clearance and free of dead, diseased and dying wood and "hangers or other public hazards. Any hazard above that height will be reported to the City Engineer. 2. The Contractor shall "tip-back" young trees whenever they encroach upon agiacent vehicular, pedestrian or equestrian traffic. 3. The Contractor shall fertilize each tree on each work site once per year with the appropriate number of Agrifo~m 2! gram Plant Tablets, or approved equal, per size of tree. 4. The Contractor shall restake any tree needing restaking. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 3, 1991 TO: Mayor, Members of the City Council and City Manager I FROM: Rick Gomez, Community Development Director ~ SY: Wm. Joe O'Neil. City Engineer SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION TO APPROVE THE ANNUAL ENGINEER'S ooonomc nnm_ o_cc_n_r rr~rr n_nr r>nn _ _ ASSESSMENTS WITHIN STREET LIGHTING"MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS NOS. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 AND 8 FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991/92. it is recommended that the City CaurrMi hold the public healing and approve the annual EngineeYs Reports and Resolution establishing the assessment rates for Street Lighting Maintenance Districts Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 for Fiscal year 1991/92. @ACKGROUND/ANALYSIS Through detailed monitoring of revenue, expenditures and the increase to uttllty costs, it has become necessary to increase the rate in Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 1 from $9.25 to $10.18 for Fiscal Year 1991/92. However, Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 2 through 6 will remain at $20.00 for k'iscal Yeaz 1991/92. There is not any recommended increase rn Street Lighting Maintenance Dtstncts Nos. 7 and 8. This is the first yeaz these two districts aze being placed on the County Tax Roll. City Council approved rebates for Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 2 through 5 !n Fiscal Xear 1990/91. These rebates were never disbursed because staff is still working with Southern California Edison in resolving the issue of overchazging to the developers and refunding may be forthcoming to Edison. Additionally, slat! feels that any surplus that may remain after the issue with Edison is resolved, can be used towazds street signal lighting energy and repair as they become necessary and this strategy can be effective in stabilizing rate increases until these surpluses are expended. Street Lighting Maintenance District No 1 Arterial An Assessment increase is recommended in this district, from $9.25 ; . $10.18 for Fiscal Yeaz 1991/92. ~~ CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF PRELIYIiNAR}' ENGINEERS icEPU&f3 July 3, 1991 Page 2 CtM~[ .f t+ Malnt n n ~i ~i No - al There is no recommended assessment rate increase. The rate will remain at $20.00 for Fiscal Year 1991/92. S r AQhtin¢ Mantenance District No - Vi o P esl f+y; There is no recommended assessment rate increase. The rate will remain ar a~J.w for rwcai hear iyyijyi. Street ~ QhtfpQ Maintenannce District No 4 -Terra Vl cta PI nn d omm fw There is no recommended assessment rate increase. The rate wlll remain at $20.00 foe F1sraLYear 1951/92 l h fna ai ~ ~nrn p ocrirt IY 5 C Pl it d ~ O. - aren There is no rernmmended assesstttent rate increase. Gnmm~~n y anne The rate will remain at $20.00 for Fiscal Year 1991/92. Str .t A~htln~ Maintena_n ce District No. 6 - Comm r lal/Ind strlal There is no recommended assessment rate increase. The rate will remain at $20.00 for Fiscal Yeaz 1991/92. Street t i¢htin¢ Maintenance Di trio No 7 -North Ft iwanda The assessment rate for this district is $32.16 for Fiscal Yeaz 1991/92. Street LI¢httn¢ M fnt n *+ Di to No 8 - th E L+w da The assessment rate for this district is $121.92 for Fi scal Year 1991/92. Res p ectfu lly su bm itted, 2 ~ G ~ ' +d'>~ I~ ~/Rtck Gomez (i Community Development Director RG:WJO.ymf Attachments: Resolution Engineei s Reports ~ L12 IiE80LUTION NO. C~I.I O~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS WITHIN STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. 7 AND 8 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1991/92 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 IN CONNECTION WITH STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1, 2, 3. 4, 5, 6, 7 AND 8 WHEREAS, the City Councll of the City of Rancho Cucamonga did on the 5th day of June, 1991, adopt its Resolution of Intention No. 91-151 to order the therein described work !n connection with Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 which Resolution of Intention No. 91-151 was duly and legally published 1n the time, fay and ~+~^~•~ as requited by lam. sb~¢ h4 ttrr a~davlt ~Pa of esed Reao[utton of Eatentton on ilk ie the o~ae of tLe WftEREAS, said City Councit having duly received and considered evidence, oral and documentary. concerntng the Jurtsdicuon facts to this proceeding and concetntng the necessity for the contemplated work and the benefits to be derived therefrom and Bald City Councll having now acquired Jurtadlctlon to order the proposed work. SECTION 1: It is hereby resolved by the Clty Councll of the City of Rancho Cucamonga that the public Interest and eonventence requires the levy and collection of assessments within Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 for the Fiscal Yeaz 1891/92, and said City Councll hereby orders that the work, as set forth and described N said Resolution of Intention No. 91-151, be done and made; and SECTION 2: Be !t further resolved that [he report tiled by the Engineer is hereby finally approved; and SECTION 3: He !t finally resolved that the assessments for Fiscal Year 1890/91 and method of assessment in the Engineer's Report are hereby approved. ~y3 ANNUAL ENGINEER'S REPORT STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 (ARTERIAL) FISCAL YEAR 1991 /92 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SUBMITTED BY: SPEC4AL D1STR[CTS ADMINISTRATION APPROVED: GGGf WM. JOE O'N ~ I ,CITY ENGINEER City of Rancho Cucamonga Annual Engmeei s Report Street Ughttng Maintenance District No. 1 Arterial Streets Fiscal Yeaz 1991/92 The annual report for Street Lighting Maintenance DisMCt No. 1 (Arterial Streets) is prepared in compllanee with the requirement of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 5 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972). This report deals with the protected expenditures for fiscal year 1991/92 to determine annual assessments. The assessment wtil be used to furnish services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance as. provided by Southern Calitornla Edison Company. Maintenance is considered of general benefit to all areas in the District and costs shall be divided as indicated in the body of this report. Detailed matneenance activities include the repair, removal or replacement oC all or any part of any Improvement providing far Wummatton of the subJect azea. Street lights were constructed and installed by the developers cf the individual subdivisions. The plans and street lights aze as stipulated in the conditions of approval for each development and as approved by the Engineering Division. Fiscal Yeaz 1991/92 Protected Expenditures Assessment Administration/Overhead $ 91,143 Electric $ 92 566 Maintenance/Operations $ 30.000 $213,709 I.css: Interest/Penalties at69.203> Assmt. Rev. Req'd. $204,506 After review of the current expenditures, protected revenues and Increase In uttlttq costs, It was determined that the assessment rate for Street 1lghung Maintenance District No. 1 should be Increased from $9.25 to $10.18 per assessment unit for Flsca} Year 1991/92. Protected Revenue 20,289 A. U, x $10.18 $204,506 During fiscal year 1991/92 the following tracts and lights were annexed into Street [.ighting Maintenance District No. 1: ANNEXED September 1. 1982 TRACT 12045 S b 7 1988 9 A.U. ANNEXED PM eptem er . 11222 57 A.U. NVIV GGALL ~pLCIn UCl /. Ly00 TRACT 12969 26 A.U. ANNEXED September 7. 1988 TRACT 13825 1988 b 21 6 A.U. 4.p TRACT §~,ptem er . 13248 60 A.U. ANNEXED November 16. 1988 TRACT 13367 19 A.U. ANNEXED January 4. 1989 MDR 88-19 19 A.U. (1NNEXED Aori15. 1989 TRACT 13823 b 6 1989 5 A.O. ANNEXED CUP ,~gptem er . 87-OS 10 A.U. ANNEXED S~otember 20. 19$9 MDR 89-07 7.64 AU. ANNEXED November 1. 1989 TRACT 13930 23 A.U. ANNEXED TRACT ~uarv 3. 1990 13621 7 A.U. ANNEXED February 7. 1990 DR 88-19 12.08 A.U. ANNEXED Febmary 7. 1990 TRACT 13886 23 A.U. ANNEXED February 21. 19;40 TRACT 13664-I 28 AU. n 13664 10 7 Q AntNFXF TRACT M r~,Ch . 1~ ~~ 13890-1 91 AU. 13890-2 ANNEXED March 21. 1990 PM 12848 13.32 A.U. ANNEXED Mph 21. 1990 TRACT 13738 18 A.U. ~ NN EXED Apri14. 1990 TRACT 11428 14 A.U. AN~NFX_ED Aoril4. 1990 TRACT 13898 7A. U. @NNEXED Apri14. 1990 CUP 88-38 17 A.U. ANNEXED April 18. 1990 PM 11410 22.2 A.U. ANNEXED aril 18. 1990 CUP 88-37 .7 A.U. ANNEXED TRACT Mav i6. 1990 13565 30 A. U. ANNEXED ~.ilY 16. 1990 TRACT 13565-5 38 A. U. eNNEXED M~,v 16. 1990 TRACT 13565-6 38 A.U. evn~cvrn *e.... is loon TRACT 13565-7 44 A.U. ANNEXED Mav 16. 1990 TRACT r 13565-8 990 6 43 A.U. ANNE3 ED TRACT Mav 1 . 1 13565-9 40 A.U. ANNEXED jvj~y 29. 1990 TRACT 13316 123 AU. ANNEXED ~v 18. 1990 CUP 89-17 4.84 AU. ANNEXED Allyust 1. 1990 PM 12263 26.82 A.U. ANNEXED Syg~~t~gmber 5. 1990 PM 11286 22.89 A.U. ANNEXED S~r„ptember 5. 1990 PM E 12596 S b 5 990 19.04 A.U. ANNEX D PM eo[em er . 1 12781 19.14 A.U. ANN .X D CUP $gptember 5 1990 88-46 7A. U. ANNEXED September 19. 1990 TRACT F 13812 b 90 3 153 A.U. ANNE D CUP er . 19 Qc[o 88-18 2.48 AU. Aj4NEXED October 17~ 1990 PM 12854 1 A.U. ANNEXED November 7. 1990 PM 1 1473 8 A.U. ANN~XF.D November 7. 1990 PM 11940 1990 7 b 5.92 AU. ANNEXED PM Novem . er 13125 19.2 AU. ANNEXED December 5. 1990 TRACT 13303 96 A.U. 13303-1 13303-2 ANNEXED Dgcember 19. 1990 PM ED A 12338 ~0 1~~1 b F 27.56 A.U. NNEX DR ruary e 89-21 5 A.U. CITY GF RANCHO CUCAMGNGP. A~GFGSiV1~NT Di ;vFA~Y9 4fRE-i LIG'NTWG MAWTETtANCE OIS::~N0. 3 CfTY OF RANCHO CUC.'.'.'NGA COUNTY OF $6V aEWC1NO SPATE CF GC1lFORNiA 'Original Poor Quality A55cSSAfli:NT DfA•tSRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. t AND 5 ^I';!y I {'cor ~u-.. -pr;o,ncl I - ~ ~~ Qa ~ I I ...:~-uu:~~mnimn I I ~qII numm n n. a ...r g, 11111I1iln.ll0nt ' ref IOWUdIL - I .~ PARCEL 1 ~ q 'I ._° -- ~ I I '~ ~u~ ~ ..I. m iutl • V ti. ~ ~ ___ ~ _ 11 , b L-~~fnV Ir'I .. _ __~ ~. I ~ A ~I. 1.• ~ I VIII ~Widulnlnm ~I li PARCEL 6 I~ .p~;`~4k. ~Z QF HAN +~~ C,IQfv~fypvA ~ G' 1 ~ .. ,. I~Y ~• '- (:OtJN'IR OF BAId BS~NA8DIN0 - ~- ~- .3 BATS o~ ~~~- N -.-- cnr.:n t.l 'd" ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE N9AINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 rOrib~nal Pocr r<~al;ty ! , _ _ ~ -~ , ~ A ~ ~ i ~ ~ . ___ Y t `I ...4. •I ~ !! __P i ~ ~ a f _ -- D ~ ~ ~ +! ~ , w ~ ~_. ~: + 1C r i !F ~ • 1 • __~ ~ h ~ • S rJ .~___ ~~ { ~ i 1 ~ ; I ~ a ' -- ~ y` _ _ _ O " J .~ " i L,7RyTif~f1 r I --- ,. ~ r > o w r ~ 1 T ,1 ~i:neo.+ .T, 71a~~( s i ~ _~ 7j,'--'I i .r AmPl.1M( ~~ rv rwi ry I ~ .r~r:._~i _7 ~ '~ w ...~i t~ b u i~ +~u ~.:.'~' .'J'am ~ + ~ YY~6':.2.~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ 7{i M74~ l~~i~~ , ,. :: `~ ; ,,,, CITY 01 BANCSO ~CZJCAI[ONGA COUNTY OF BAPt HBi;NA8DIId0 R r p/ N EiUIIDTT 'A" ~ - AbSESSMENT OIAGRpM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 'Cr&'rui Tccr ~ual;ty ~~ - ~~ - .• - t..~: J.~. a I r ..~- J i - rrlC t 1. 1~ 1 f , [r 1 1 L+~_ i ~ i ~L_Ls.._~.: .. . ~~ ~ ,~v~~~:; CPPT OF BAPiCSO CQCA~LOIiGA ~~~' COU19'PY OF 8AN BSBNABDII~tO ., "~ i STATE OF CALII~O$MA ~T ~. E i ~! -..~_ _ _ _ IX9IETT "A^ ASSE5SMEldT QlA4RAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICY NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTR{CT NOS. 1 AND 2 `Or;~;;nal_Pccr_~,~a;; ty ..... _ , __ .. 8 a..a" •••• ~ +r. uri'r9 I.. .~.i.2_ ~ LOT •A 18j I ,y,. w.a ..~ .. ~ ` ~~, ~ w.. = fO . --~.~ . ~ ~ ~ rsr'~ ; ' a iS ~ : l S I . ~ w.... r i .... ...y..,. ~ . . ~ .i ' ~x~Y : _' ~ `CLY ~YV~ .w..a.~ ~ ' • O I ' '.~'~~ .~ e 1. ~ ~r __. ,^ ~. _..u i~ y~ l ..•..• LOT .~ w•aar+ ~ ~ ~~ Ia.•I~rr ~ f: W ~~~ CTPY Ot BANC80 CiJCA1[OIKiA ~ ~ = ~%- ~` COL1I!'PY Op 8AN BEStlA8DII~i0 ;: =~' SfATB OP CALI~ORMA ~ T 1V ,~ _ AS$ES8MENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANC& DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 -~~- ~- ~- ~~.`~h.,_ CITT 0~ 81-I'iCSO C17CA3LOItGA COZJH'PY CY SAAi HESNABDIIiQ •~ SAG 3 ~A~ ~~ C~~ 41L.` .m 1=~~7' A SESSMENT DIAG~. ~M LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND B ,foothll blvd. sit• tocatiort ,QCs GA. 9/ 730 ~: s C1T! OE L1KC80 COCA~[Olf!'!A ~• s COUM'Y 01 ilAN 3atNAiDII10 _ 6 ~ ATA17 01 CALIIOEMA a~~_, ~Q DQ 5'~- ° '' 1 `~ ASSESSMENT" DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 :¢ra, avrtuc 7 '-3- i : ,i ;- I ~ ~, ~; ILA .~I ~~' a-_~,-~-, ~.~,. .. ~~ its. - *"';- _.'a •-, ~, s f="~T~I ~ ~ ~ I~ ,rF~~~o~ J? ,~ •I I'7 i I I } ~' ~uac~+o ~reae s/Y crri o~ asxc$o cvc~oxas ~ 3 ~ , ,. aourrri o~ anx snx~n~o ifireTS o~ cwra~osMU- N Wes! Im ~~ srR~r u arcs. ~ uro s C04Y OR pANC~lQ CUC~YONIiA CaUNTY OR ~t1 ~QUIMOINO CUPB~n~ 3'~i4i OR CAL~1~lY~ EXNW7 •A~ ASgESSIY~NT ol~oaAM 6ANDSCAPE MANTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LH3NTMrl3 MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND B E ~ NlNfN lTRILT ~' - - r.~~ W Z i t ANC(( I ~~!i~lna! Poor ~ual;ty ._~.._., ~~ -xr !IM-; VMIII -~ I ® 11~f' fMm ~• 0R 1W~~p{~~~T~ppR~~~1 j 11~Y ~ IOIRCIA1l0~ ~i 4 ` ArANilAPI-iA (~ . ~ ~ RApI ~dAiNMM .4 r YOI i Ll I i A~A6fC = Y->l !C~ ~ I . CITY OF RANCHO C~ICAMONQA . C011NTY OF SAN BENNARDNilO Q STATE OF CALIFORNIA exHKair ~~• ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 ,,,y 9 V > ~ ' O 3 i M /.~fM. CT, - ~ r ' r I ,~~ ~~~ - ~ _ _~__ - ~ \ Il ~ ' _. 1 t~ ' y.~. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~ ~ ~ Q ~ n ASSESSMENT DfAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTMG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 w~ i a t ALMOI~O STREET ~ ~W W > > ~ W r < 9 ~ W 5 J C W t m ~ '~ > tll ¢ W _ _ t HILLSIDE pOAD AVENUE'' CITY Of RANCHO CtiICAaIIONtiA COUNTY OF ''SAN BERNARDINO - ,.; ..~ STAtS OF CALIFORNIA TK ~ ~~ •,,. ASSESSMENT D14GRAM STREET L1C.NTINti YIAINTENANCE DISTAlCT NOS. 1 AND 3 CI'PY of Rwa1CN0 gJCAYONGA _ cauNTtr o~ s~ setaaaRDUro ~,~sg~~ I ~ ST4TE oR cAUFOR~un ~dCis~113~ BOGY CalOlity .c.rt 'A• ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM lANOSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 2 wr/ wr t 'l1~Ct NO. 131 L O Z 3 h W eASa uNe ROAD CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA COUNTY OF $AN 9ERNARDINO '/_ X74 ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA T,~ ~; ~g~, / ~IIIY~T[ DIIIV[ IYIAIT •A• AasESSMENT DIARiRAM LANDSCAPE INAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 4 STRF.l:T LIGtITgrG_i~AA@ITENANCE DLSTRICT NOS. 1 AND 4 ~l. , / 19 ' c~ ~~' a. ~.®° ~ »~~ ~~ ':. a, i~ ., Po ~', /~. ~, ~' / ~y i I ti ' ;t ~ ~' ~ `-y ~ ~'~ I~~~~ ~`~ 1 ~/ ~.~, - ; ~~ i .~ CITY Of RANCHO CSJCAMONaA COUNTY OF S/l-N BEi1NApDINO ~- ~.r STATE O~ CJ1L1l~ORNIA ->~ ~ ~- umm~ -q• 4s.SESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTMG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 ~ <F~ S~ ti 2 Sn <y N ~ )I 5 W ~~ " ~ u 6 ~ W 31 7 y ~ L ~ k A li ~ Z H ]4 ~ 24 ie ~ 42 T7 W Ls ~~ W 4 se 2 !~ ~x ~ •o » ~ as ~' MARBCLU DR. ~4 ~ IS i4 11 le Is 20 21 MIGMLAND AVE. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA COUNTY OF $AN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA c+~n101T •A• ASSESSMENT DIAQRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 w '/ ~ U r. ~~~~ T pR a~ y < as ~ a a2 4 Z a~ ~ a i ~ 2 Q F' at ~ I 10 L sr I '• I ~~ n i is 21 22 2] I~ CITY OF RANCNO CUCAMONpA _ COUNTY OF sAN BERNARDINO ~ ~ ~. STATE OF CALIFORNI4 ~n rt..~.,.,t D..... n....rs, 4. ~~!teut a +~sr:_~~~~,~~ ASSESSMENT DIARiRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE D18TRN:T NO. 3 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOB. 1 AND B I . r~°' ~„~ i I .,... _ .. _.._ f __ W t j`i; 'EJt$ON COURT " ~ . '.~ ~ as ~a-. - .-~ ;'i ~ ( _ i•i '- i"i ~ ; ELL C RT ~ -=- ~ 'v I~~ ! 'Si t CITY Ole RANC~10 CSICAMONGA ~, ., CO~lNTY OR SAN 6ERNARDINO P ,~~ STATE Oi; CALlF':1!'RNIA 'A• AsiSESSMENT D~AaRAM L2-NDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. i sTR~T UGNTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 7 AND z L-_ ~ / '. w r ~ . ;, .. / ~ ~ l t i ~ i~ ` ~. .. CITY OF RANCHO Ct~CANpNOA ~ _ COUNTY OF RAN BERNARDINO t _~ STATE OF CALlPORNIA ~3 ~3~ 'Ori~;nal Poor_~ual;ty izwNr •~• As>~MENT DIASiRAM LANDSCAPE MAW~~ DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGNTINp MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AHD 6 .. /~ S~T~ - +••~~~7if: I .% LiT i ,r li r7q ~r.9`/ - 7~ '~„7Ti11~ / i 1 t it I ~ ;'' ~ I ~~~. n. 1 '. I = .I ill .).~ t ~ i ' ` ~. 1~~... ...~'.. ,'•.. .i _~ - -- _~ ~ ~ 1 CITY Ot< RANCHO CtJCAMONOA COUNTY OR sAN BERNARDINO STATE OR CALIFORNIA T~ //~"8 i ~ ~ ~ ~ .; pP No• peo ExH`e` ~ Q~P~S'~A~G,~ NOy' 1 55M~t1 pNC,E~~S,~`G Pgg ~~p~N~NpNG pSGpP Mp~N `- y 1 •,, p Vpa NZ~NG ~ ~ / S~P~~~ ~`G \\ ~%~ ~\~ c~ ~ ~S y 9 154 4 ~~~ 7 S ~ n ~ O ~ ~ t O O 0 i J ' ; . ~ ~. ~~ -~y . ppE OSG ~pN ~EGr`NOENOt ES ppES~Vf'~pt OE OSEES SS ^~ 1 N f. j~ O< < OEH OS E' Of,N ~? Get v~ S5 p4 41t ~ i 4t ~-~ ~~ G~Gp~O ~~`~O aP~G~O ~'~~a oA~~P OE~~~~ OF O Gp~~F F G~~~ '' r \098 i ~/ 1 UPI 0~4~ '~ c$ i .C .nom u- * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * CORRECTION CORRECTION *********************** c AnlelT 'q• ASSESSMENT DUMaRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 LEGEkO ~ DENOi ES lANOl CAGE ARU DENOTE! !10[wALN DENOTE! lT11EET LIGHT Df NOTE! TAE[! LLMON -~ ~,. LO ~1 ST u II Y I`Il` t NU~Q CUS C1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA ~' _ Ct~iiNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ,~ - ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~ 1e9e 'original _F'acr_ ~:~ al ~ ty_ - ~„~~ -.• •ssissM~ o~~nwM w+oscnve ww c~ucr ra. s sTp~r uo~+Yrro M~u+r~,uice oiaTn~cT ras. ~ ono e /~a~• haw srTSer ~ - •~ Syr ~ n e r w. uw.. +...s. ww• }jj 'III rlWr wYf1 WYt 3 Q }~~ AR Y rIAY YYr al erR3~~~ rn~ rvn. Ypl~ •rN~ T/~tf. ~1a11.Y~ 4~tINW Wvrw Wf~W ~~ AYT/IAI~~. ru~~ip NuR~ Z W n T C~~ ~~ ~~~C~~ C~ ' . ~ CUUNTY O~ sAN BEpNwpplNO a s~a-~ o~ csur~on~a~- ~rrb~nal Poor Quality% E%HIBIT •A• ASSESSMENT DIAdRaM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LKiNTINO MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 8 ':--- ~ ~ I . ~ ~~~ \ /~ ` ~ ~ ~ ~ .y ,', i ~ ~~ ~T.erJ-~.~~ _ r, • a ~ ~~~ I. iN'~-' liR'~' :5 ~_ i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN 9ERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA pM 1 I~J-!O ~~~~ ~ Resolution Ro. 30-16i ~ ~I<IiMEMT DIARiRw.ri "g` ' LANDSCAPE MAMTENANCE DIlTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIONTMq MANiTENANCE D16TRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 II s~ ~ ..~ ' ~. D W ~, ~~y ~~ g.~h MILER AVENUE 1 CITY OR AANCNO CYC~MONOA COVNTY OR !AN ~tltNMpINO STATS OR CALIROItIM 3 ~. ur~g;nal_Focr ~ua;ry cwn~mr u• ASSESSMEl~iT DIAGRAM // ~ j' ~. CITY OF RANCHO GUCAMONGA 'I COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO '~ -~ TR 1~5b~_ STATE OF CALIFORNIA _5 ~-hr:,;. - ~;.__ - ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 7 / \\ \ /\~~ ~ / ~ ' S ' / Z N 3 ~ s * n a s ~ ro /a s '+ ~ ~ 9 p /7 u 3/ B t 'fi S2 /L ] /o // ~f /T ~ 31 1v 2T /~ E ~ ~ Zs S Zt ,,,F 9 t~ I 37 ``66~i ~ AI Sd I l ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ SG T Z] 3fi // I /Z ~~ _. ••...•• •. u..i .TM ~. s ~ ~ ~~~ CfTV wNT~MEp LMCSUEE •NG ~~ TM~ """'E"""¢ TRACT 13565 ..... EOUESTNiw Tgl,t ruwTEN~NCE PHASE 5 ~ " "" :~r CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA "`~`% ~ , ` ' ' .~ v..r fc _ ~ E%MIBi is ~ - un I 1 r , -- ASSESSMENT DIAGRAfvi IANOSCAPE MgINTENA NCc OIS7RICT N0. 7 ~~~ t]fY My/t~p ~REn •• E«~,,,.., .,,~„~„~ TRACT 135E5 PHASE 6 t~.o s " .~1 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONCA ;. ' title; i na y i~ 'E%N~E • - VI Is un s ~~ ~ N ~---=, ASSESSh~;E~VT DIAGr'3AfJi LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 9~ ~m ~. ~ 9~ F ~~~~ pTV MAWTANED lANOSCAPE AREA ~~ TREE MAWTENANCE TRACT 135x5 •~~~~• EOllESTRAIN TRAG MAWTENANCE PHASE 7 ~.~ 'b cicle; " A`~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA c~ ji is , ~~~~y N - I~>T ASSESSiy1ENT DIAGP,RPA LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 _~~. gTyeuWTAWEDLAN0.5CAPEAREA TRACT 13565 ~~ TREE MAwTENANGE •~~~~• EQUESTRAW TRAL MAwTENANCE PHASE Oft Ali7s ~~~ \' ~. y `c~ 11,+.~i is i=. ~~ ii GL w is t1T7 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA //A\\ tale; •E tN I N ASSESSMENT DIAGRAIV~ LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 ~~~~ arr wwnwm wioscuE ~ t~ rr~wrourci •~~~~~ Ea~srnrw~rurtwrwe~ ,v title; r o~`' s CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA ~ ~~ N rrn •p. A:i5E5SMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 ~i'1 ' PAI~eL2 (w,~L DOaGFDZ10N) ~ ' v, ~ ^, ro M ~ ~ -9000 fj1MKL I ~ L2FAL ~ 1L•7,DL' OAR uNi ~_-_- I ~ ~ ype' N R']0'ii' 179.x' -r-r-r- / ~ ~ ~a i »I x. I~~ I7r ~~ I x~ 71 I i _ __ ~~ ~ ~ I I P~po ~ s~ennrsic,~ I i r ~+ -/ ~ ~ ~ I Ti7 AY7. !33!61 I I I ~ _ _ - - - -L--L-1 L-L-L.-L_L ~I ~ / 18 I~ I~ IX rN hQ 12 ~I ~I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA ~~ _ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ZR ~ ~ ~ ~~ exnfelr •4• AS3BSSMENT D4AGRAM LANpSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCff DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 'Original Poor Quality. Vii''.' ;; _- --= • ~ :_ -- _: ~=; - = ".=' Ill i• 14i _ s .~ F• y_ Z~.~r ~l:.i:.i y gLo I ^M1_ I .~'af~ I~ I al ~. ~A1~ ~) a1 3~~ ~fl~ Mf ~~ _~~4r ~ n / r A . i ~ _ n ~"" ~' .t. p s Si/ • ~1 ~ fb Vp H y/1 /// ~j / /(/ C~ / /f~~ l I ..:~.. ~• I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO_~J 1K ~ O STATE OF CALlFORNiA CXMYNI 'A' ASBRSSiMEli11T DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE AAAINTENANC~ DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LlGi111NG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 8 1 2300' I W ~~ ~2 IW ~> .~ y ~ _ .- I r ' a ~:~~ o Y ,_ 0 V ~ A .. =~ 1 t W I Q ' I 1 ~ ~ ~/ ~~~/~ • 1 Lt~~ ~ ~ I ~ __ ~ 1 r V . M'f i ~ C.. .r+~ w~~w '°" ""' '"'' "" ' 14tn STRH$T I .... ~- ~`Y 3 CfTY OF RANCID CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OR CALIFaRNIA CUP E9-/7 • axwaT •~. A~~ STREET LIGHTING M NTENANCE D STRICT NOS. 1 AND 3 ~Origi'na!-Poor (qualif ' y I I / ~ ~ R~.3."Tin :/ J ~ .... , ~~I~n ~ ~^ ~~ ;° n k ~ W L ~$ M ~ $ ! t: :~T ] n mreccc ~Crc LCJ __ ~~ 4i ` ~~ ii ° nom` ~ ~ ~+•avt e ;'~ - 'r ° ~~ Ya5 6 _ -, ~~ ~12 ~, .~~¢ .~ J ' --- _\ _ r! ~~ w~ ~O ~ ~ % ~ ~r ~, CITY OR RANCiiO C~ICAMONGA ... A COUNTY OF SAN gE3iNARDINO STATE OF CALJFORNIA ~ ~ i .~. ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE IAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0.4 STREET UGNTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 4 CITY OF RANCHO CtJCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO n STA'fi: OP CALiFORN1A r ASSESSaIIENT DiAGliAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 ANO e '.Or;g;r-a1_Poor ~ual;ty CITY OF RANC~IO CUCAMON~iA C01~NTY CF SAN BEliNARDIN® rr , M l~~ STA4i8 OR CALIFORNIA ~n1~~D~~ 'za t I ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIONTMIQ MAIN'T'ENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 ANp s '~r~,na! {'nor ~u:~?;`.y I o l a I m z (4~1 ( ~', r ~ a•~. ~ :._- to - • ~•~ ~1'11 ~I .•. .cn .- ~. f ~ • _.•.._ _. j ~ ,' ' , ~ ~u~.~• i c;:I ~ d , .. ,r .s., ~.. i •~ tl t. err ii W~~ ~ ~~~~ CITY of RaNCt•o cucwNloNar- . COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO - ',: ?A; STATE OF CALIFORNIA E.lMW1T •,~,• ARS~55MENT DUiR'aRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NDS. 1 AND B '6r;b;na1 f ocr ~un'ty _ ~~ _ BASc'LIME GVE. 'I e~ :l .~ i~ „~ ;~; ' ~~,,..~ I ~ ~,.• I I 1 ~ F:SRrc~ I i ~ i R~7Cc: .~ gr , «,...~ !.,:Is ++° I _ _ i~ .~,,,~__ i :Ii I , i P~~.s az: ,li I t+' i ~-nur amp I ;,, .. a u• ar PGS. 34 3 35 '~ttS \\ ;• ~ \'~ 1 1 ~ Q I 1 QC ~' Q I~ `` ir~ ` ~ V ~~ I W _ ?j ~ x ' ~~_ ~~ 1=.~: a g° i I ~~ ~ ~I~ c CITY OR RANCI~10 CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BEl;NARDINQ ~- i STATI= Ot: C~ll.llIORNIA ~...~ ~~ ASSESSMENT DIAAitiRAM LANDSGA~€ kIA1NTENANCE DISTRICT Nf3. 7 sTF+E~ uc~rr.~ MaMlr~ar~c~ ~c~r nos. ~ anin ~ ....~.w.... ........ j~ r ........~~ MYM 'dti ~L L ~ I It' I ~ ' I~ ~ I , i9 i ~ ~E ', i ~ ' bl t= I ~ j ' ' ' ' ; y~ ~ I ~~ ~ ~ ~ s ~I ;, ~~ ~~ ~~ ~.~ ~ 9 ~ 5 ~ I 4 I ~ i~ ` !fit ~ . I \ I i~ ~- T 1 ` ~ T n ~ ° ~ wsr _ L wt 'M v ~ ~' :MO _ } a y ~ i . .a .u ur •• ~ BY.•..• . } a r~ i~ ....'•~ I ~_ _ I NYN AWE ^^ rYl~•~ M a~.`w~ ~' ~~ U ~~ ~IM~ ,~ COTY OR RANCHO CUCAMONGA _ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO n } STATE OF CALIFORNIA TR 1381 U - .,,. ASSESSMENT DiAGRA-Nf LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE OISTAICT NO. 3 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 ~O ~y ,^: ~,'~J d 0 n ;~ U CITY OF RANCi~lO CLICAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STAGE OF CALIFORNIA CC~P ~~~~ - exNieir •a• - ASSESSMEWT D{AGRAI4C ZTREeT LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO.8 FORMATION /. V '~ ~I 11i /y~: •~ ~C NKNLAND AVfvuf - _ ~E cArACiA sr~~~; ___ __ _ ~. w IwW. ~'w. .e i _ ~ i \ ~~ ~ F•ri• ~• ,I ~I/fl./i Ltl~ • JC1lY-JtlIL ~ •. , . r J G - v • I • . k , I tats%~ %'~ `' . 3~1 -T o . t• i W I ~ = I `~I I ? rtr..oa tiw'n I ~ J _-_ i -______ M _ e • v a .~ S i O o i ~~ Z. 4i Z E ~ ~ t' Y ~' ~ S ~R.. r ~ I ~ 2 I W / ~ Y #: 1 1 1I i F ~ 2 ~ ~ a ~ F m O ~ Z '~ F ~ F U_ V m ~' y.F m m O f.'lww:I .mot: yr G~A'Dt I - III _ .. i ~•' __ -J - -- ( VKTO~/A STAffT ' - CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ,-- a • SPATE OP CALIFORNIA PM IL8's4 ~~ ,. exwmr •~• ASgESSINE9iT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 @! 1 •=~ n~~ririiui~ ~ ''' ~, ~,. ,` :i l '~ ® ® ~' ~ ~ i Jl ~~~~ . 1 1 ~ ~....,_ .,..,.~ s ~" -~,... „m. .- I ~ ~ € ~ ~ -- \ O 'll~ O ~ i ...~,.. Vn. 4y4 ~ ~ \ I ' I rre 5/TE ~%~ ~ .04 ~~ v CITY OF RANC?~IO CUCAMONGA " COUNTY OI: SAN BEANARDINO ~- -; ~ 11473 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~~ AISESSMENT DIAGRAM urmscwvE wu-wTeNANCe DISTRICT NO. a ~~T ~IGFITING MAgITENANCH D18TRICT NOB. 1 AND 6 CITY Of RANCHO, CUCAMONaA COUNTY Ote SAN BERNARDiNO PM ~ ~g40 1 .3 STATE Of CALIFORNIA ~Vrib~Yl~f ! ~., i,f ~.'' ~ 4SSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 8 '~` /^ / ~ / '~ r i I W i ~~ S~ I~ ~1 ~I` \ ~~ / ~~ '•~~. RROJECT SITE / '' ~~ -- il ~, ~~ ai sl I 1~ I~ ~I CITY OIe RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OAF CALIIrORN1A PM /3/~5 Aa~sSMENT a~oRAM LANDSCAPE MAWTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 STREET UGIiTING MAWTENANCE DISTRICT NQS. 1 AND 4 C1TY OR RANCHO ~GUCAMONi3A CO~lNTY OP SAN BEppARDINO . ~ STATE OF CALIRORNIA _I Q„~ - 2 ezXWT'~• /1SSESSM~UiT DiAGRAiyi LANDSCAPE MAWTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STAEfT LIONTMIG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 _+ ~ '' ~Y ".., 'ti 4 ~) J'~Irtl u ~ CITY OF' RANCHO CSICAMONaA COUNTY O~ SAN BERNARDINO STATE OR CALIEOpN1A p~~. ,~ :z:,o Wl~lf •A• ASSRSSiN~NT DIAGRAM urwsc~ns Mnwr~uNCe aa~ No. a ss~r uaNSwa ~ o~nict aos.1 aem a S/~' r SPRUCE AVE Q W ti 2 WH ~a4JC STREET ffWt CfTY OF RANCNO CtlCANONGA COUNTY OR 'SAN 6ERNARDINO STATE O~ CALIFORNIA CJR a ~- ~ i ANNUAL ENGINEER'S REPORT STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTHLCT NO. 2 I1.ocal Strects) -~-~ FISCAL YEAR 1991/92 CI1Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SUBMITTED BY: SPEC DISTRICTS ADMINISTRATION APPROVED: WM. JOE O'N L, [TY ENGINEER City of Rancho Cucamonga Annual Engineer's Report Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 Local Streets Fiscal Yeaz 1991/92 The annual report for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 (Local Streets) is prepared in compliance with the requirement of Article 4. Chapter 1. Division 5 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of California (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 19721. This report deals with the pro}ected atpenditurea Cor flscal year 1991/92 to determine annual assessments, The assessment wID be used to furnish services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation, servicing and restoration of street light Improvements as provided by Southern California Edison Company. Maintenance is considered of genera! beneAt to all azeas within the District and costs shall be divided as indicated in the body of this report. Detailed maintenance activities include the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement providing for illummaUOn of the sub}ect azea. Street lights were constructed and installed by the developers of the individual subdivisions. The plans and street lights aze stipulated in the conditions of approval for each development and as approved by the Engineering Divls[on. Fiscal Year 1991/92 Protected Expenditures Assessment Admfntstaatlon/Overhead $ 34,438 Electric $ 72..000 Maintenance/Operations $ 9.871 $ 116,309 Less: Interest/Penalties c95.009> Assmt. Rcv. Req'd. $111.300 After review of the current expenditures, projected revenues and the increase in utility costs, 1t was determined that the assessment rate for Street Lighting Maintenance Gistrlct Nto. 2 will resiain at $20.00 pu assessment unit for Fiscal Year 1991/92. Protected Revenue 5.565 A.U. x $20.00 = $111,300 During fiscal year 1991/92 the following developments and lights were annexed Into Street Lighting Maintenance Dfstrfct No. 2: ANNEXED September 7. 1988 TRACT 12969 26 A.U. aHNEXED ,September 7. 1988 TRACT 13825 ' ' 6 A.U. ANNEXEll TRACT 11. 14tftl ,~ eD[empe[ 13248 60 A.U. ~jVNEXED November 16. 1988 TRACT rFn 13367 19 A.U. pNNE? TRACT Ap{t15. 1989 13823 4 A.U. ANNEXED November 1. 1989 TRACT 13930 23 A.U. ANNEXED November 1. 1989 P&I 1 1685 1990 3 3 A.U. ANNEXED TRACT January . 13621 7 A.U. ANNEXED Feb_~y 7. 1990 DR 88-19 12.08 A.U. ANNEXED March 7. 1990 TRACT 13890-1 91 A.U. TRACT 13890-2 ANNEXED April 4. 1990 TRACT 13898 7 A.U. ANNEXED Mav 21. 1990 TRACT 13738 18 A.U. ANNEXED Mav 29. 1990 TRACT 13316 123 A.U. =XHI3L: "a° ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 ~(7Cig%n~~ F'Oi:Y ~i1:l~ih/ a•••ar wan _ ., ,~ . t. .-- _.~~ s 1 ~ ,~ ~ II _ ~ r_ ' . ~ ~ --- : a a a • ~ ~~ ,g . _ i -- a w ~ •i • ~ f ~ ___ s ~ ~ ~ 'i ~ I y ~. -- n l • -- ' 1 _ '~ ~s ~ r~ J t • ti ~ u 3 ~__ PPP - __~a r e SO i ~ ~ ~ i I .• ~ __~ n ; • i ~T ~ j n ~ - ~ p___ i _ _ _ » vsrayzs~fr ~ u 'e r 1 TT ,y y dlmai i :Ea•^~ I • • ~i r ~ ~ aar [rii ~ AtDS .•II~ Ia,y Y~ll.: .~ ~~ _ y ~ w. ~ ~ N ~ •i r,=: 7 .a Nl: • jr YJ ~~isr.~ ~ { ~ Ji../ ~,~,~~:, crrY of aArrcgo coal+~coxcs ~ ~ i ;; a COUriTY OF gAPi BSBZIA8DlN0 `' ~ 8TA'PE OP CALII~O$r1IA --,*-- N , SIT "A" - _ lt~38SSMEPlT DlASaRpM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DI$TAICT NO. 1 STREET ~IGIiTiNG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 ~llba'e.,l 1 vUI ~ _. 4~a1,.y `~1~. - - 3-- ~!3- -- - -'+ r r~ .~r "M~y A , i i ~ ~ jj ~ L~~ i t L~ i ~ I y 0 • -11.c'1 uJ Is i w ~ sm. ra[~ fid x C ~~~k,;_ CPP7 08 ECHO CZJC111LCNGA ;' . _; . ~ CaVZ1TY ~$ 8AN HRBNABDII'i0 a, :~3 '. '~" G STATg OP CALIF01tNIA ~. ~ -~~ I138E98M8T iaiAGAA~w LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE OtSTgICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 :.~ ~1.~.:;}~ - - _ ....~:n.~ ~ tort. _ k C.f %yL +.... i .. _. 1 ...~._ i a ~ '¢ . aC : ~,: ~ L::.' ~~ LOT ~y/.A~MiI 1 I ~1•y. ~fa.f ~ANO AV IFW~ -~ ~ar~~+av y CITY O8 BANC80 CQC/11[O1fG~ ,.~_~\~ COUNTY O8 8AN ~i'iASDIIiO 9TATS O8 CAL~ORNIA ,~ ~. = b , -- ~ Y.7al- i a ••r.r.w 11 C ~ ~7 Cam/ / w.t.\,. '~\7 l3 ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~T L i ~ • I ~ •~• u• 1 ~' ~:' ~~~ ~ ~ / N ASSESSMENT OIAGR~IM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 t ; 4 ,, .~__ .~~ii~!Illillll ~~i~ Cl'P! O~ 811P1C$0 Ct7C~ASO2KiA '~ I ~ ~ ,. - _~~ =_ COUNTY OH 8A1'~ BEENAS~p ~ -- _~_ 8lATS oa c.,rmleat~- N LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 cr = ~ ~1 I ~~ ~~;._ , ~~ --~ - ~.: ~ ~~ ~ ~ 3 Y..._,r-~ _ t ~,= 1 ~ Y '~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~I `:~. ~, ~~` ~ - ~I ~}y- "~ ~~ __ ~. ~' HZQ~J11p AYCQ c U' f' 1 ~.~ ~' C. C> {~ A~ sib crr: os snxcso cocwttoxaw ~ 3 ~ _ ' ~ covxr~r o~ a~x sa~xwson~o `, ~1 ~ ~A~ ~~ C ~~'~ -N ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS, i AND 2 ~ ~f'4~ -~ H /iffM ~"Tf _ ~ 8 , 'LLLL ~- a .~ ~ r ,I~j j--. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO T_F2 ?asp STATE OF CALIFORNIA nasESS~NT o~~asM LAf~SCAPE MAWTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 5TREHT LIdHTgKi MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 ~~.,; ai' ~, ~~ O. c~' -s~ F'1 ~: ~J .~ ~, eq( _ COTY OR 11ANCM0 CUCAMONO~ ~~ _ COUNTY O~ iAN ~l1NAR~10 ~ STATE O~ CALEtO!lNIA P ~ I I ~ 85 i A' ASSESSMENT DIAtiRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 ~ ~ - RcxaliQ rrneeT i s - W i s ~ o W a J ~ F m C N S W v s W 7 S W 2 5 ~ t s CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA ~' COUNTY OF SAN dERNARDINO - ~ ~ ~ "r.~ STATE OF CALIRORNIA ~F11O.e.v: ~~T '~' ASSESSMEIIIT DIAGRAM STRES'f LIGMTWG MAWTElIANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 3 c r-rG CITY OF RANCNO CsICAMONOA I C.DUN'r1f Ole SAN BERNARDINO i n~ S~ '~' s:aT~ ot= eaul:aRNIA .f _ exwe~r a• ASSESSMENT DtAGRAWt LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE D18TRICT NOS. Y AND 2 ~ ~ "`+V n x t• 7 ~~ ,b l al ~ ~ rt ~ V r 6 ~ far b ~ K K L • µ Y !! ~ Z N ]fr Z4 i• ~ 42 >7 W Z4 ~i W u ~ ~ 2• a ~ .o s. of i3 AAARBCLIA DR. 11 s ~• n le ro m zl HIGHLAND AVC. .. ;, _~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONaA COUNTY Of aAN BERNARDINO ~~~5~ STATE Ote CALIFORNIA ASSESSMEI~iT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET IIGHTMa IMAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 • " v ° ~. s s z i x > as < as az a ~ 2 » w s s ~ W of r ~ u , se 22 as :s CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONpA .. ~. _ COUNTY OF SAN BERNARD~NO .~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA 1-- i. w n i i• lXNM17 'A• ASSESSMENT DIARIRAM LANDSCAPE MAt1iTENANCE DltiTRtCT NO. 1 STREET t_tGNTING MAINTENANCE OISTRtCT NOS. 1 AND 2 `Qri~`~ns1 racr~~.+~';`Y 'i` -~~~' L ItLRi• H. t~ ~ .~ N f y l N\fHGYi CT A 1 A 1 ~ 2 O l LEND l O DENOTES ~ANOSCwE 3 p •REA J ^.7 OENOT[S IIDEWIN • Ci vR ESD CT OENOT[7 lTRL[T UONT ~ 9 OENOTL! TRL[! _~~ IIMON fT~_ CITY Of RANCHO CUCAMOMOA ~~ COUNTY OF SAN 6ERNARDINO r_ STATE OR CALIRORNIA ~ X3898 c.{iM01T 'A• ASSESSMENT DIAtiRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT Np ~ STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO3. 1 AND 2 .i.~ VV/ ~a.l ..i f+.y_ "Gr~~:n:•~_i ._ ; _ ; . t :. ~. ~., - - _ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONpA ~' _ COUNTY OF l~AN BEpI~IAppINO ~ /~73~' _~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA I~SESSMENT DiA~iANi L/-NDSCAPE AiIAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET uGHTING MAINTENANCE OISTRiCT NOS. 1 AND 2 C ~'~ i ~ /ARceL Ali.... os~la~traW) /~ ~ 4} , / j N61'9E'~!4'W lo.oo~ I I N ~ I \ v n ~-• . - ~ t~ i ~ ~ ~-~ ~tiRb 9 I n . ~ . I ~ ` 00'7A M 6 Z3At•L ` ~j+' ~a y`~ ~---~ I • ~ ~y~ tom` i ~ t!p 7~ 'i{. I M W} t ..ao.oo n, .L' fA I L I ~~ aN) ~ /o --7 . seep ~ .r-~rss ,e,. 1 _' PQ~ r - - r - r ~ T~'~1E'T-191..N ~ ~ ,~c,~v stntl~r ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~a ~ !~ I x l» ~ ~ Ib I !Q. ~ !I ~'~~ , ~ P~ s>~BOn-rsi~ ~ ,, , I i i i-- ~ --~i ~~~ ~l I raan iuM I I L L L L II------~~ _ - - - -L-JAI ze ~ V L-_-- 7 CITY Os< RANCNO CUCAMONpA COUNTY OF SAN g~NApp~O ~ STATE ~ CALIFORNIA TR 13 31ro :~' EXMIEIT 'o• IllSESSMENT D14GRAM LANDSCAPE MAINT@NAN1:E DISTRICT NO. 1 STgEET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. y AND 2 r+.... i !~:~~. ~,.; ~... c~TY o~ RANCHO cucAMONOA ~ COUNTY OF SAN 6ERNARpINO STATE OR cALIRORNiA j X33/io ANNUAL ENGINEER'S REPORT STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DiSTBICT NO. 3 Nictoda Planaed Commuait~) FISCAL YEAR 1991/92 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SUBMITTED BY: SPECIA. DISTRICTS ADMINISTRATION APPROVED: WM. JOE O'NEI . C ENGINEER City of Rancho Cucamonga Annual Engineer's Report Street Gfghting Maintenance District No. Nictona Planned Community) Fiscal Year 1991/92 The annual report for Street [.1ghUng Maintenance District No. 3 (Victoria Planned Community) is prepared In compliance rovith the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 5 of the Streets and Highways Code. State of Callfornla (Landscaping and ughtmg Act of 1972). This report outlines the projected expenditures for fiscal year 199I/92 to determine the necessary assessment rate. The assessments ~vtll be used to furnish services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation, servicing and restoration of street light improvements as provided by Southern California Edison Company. Maintenance is considered to be of general benefit to all azeas within the district and costs shall 6e divided as indicated >n the body of this report, Detailed maintenance activities Include the repair, removal or replacement of all or any par[ of any Improvements providing for the lllumination of the subject area. Street lights were constructed and installed by the developers for the Individual subdivisions. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for each development and as approved by the Engineering Division. Fiscat Year 1991/92 Projected Expenditures Assessment Administration/Overhead $24,902 Electric $56,256 Maintenance/Operations $ 1.000 $82,158 Less: Interest/Penalties <$3.538> Assmt. Rev. Req'd. $78,620 After review of current expenditures, projected revenues and the increase fn utility costs, it was determined that the assessment rate for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 3 wll1 remain at $20.00 per assessment anti for F7sea1 Year 1991 /92. Projected Revenue 3,931 A.U. x $20.00 ~ $78,620 Durtng fiscal yeaz 1991/92 the foliowing protects wfthln the Vlctorla Planned Community were annexed into S[ree[ Llghting Maintenance Dlstr[ct No. 3: Ayyust 1. 1990 PM 12263 26.82 A.U. - ew111eR •A' ASSESSMENT DlAi3RAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 3 'Orjg;na[_Foor ~uahty i• ,~.,m,.a«..~ ~° :nm K 3 C ::, t - 3 +.1W : ~ ...gym., -~ ~ n.,syc ~J c~ 7~ 'na~a a gars ~ ~ 5 ~- ~ i ~a :Edi ... ~ s ti -- ~ 9 ~ _.. - . c b -- ~c r-. ~az \ r' M k ~ -_ . .. '~.~ MOSL 9~.,~~~' w• , .., ... ..'.: w.v.. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON~#A COUNTY OR SAN BERNAR~INO ~ P. ~ - STATE OF CALIRORNIA ANNUAL ENGINEER'S REPORT STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 4 (T.rra Yista Planned Cowauaityj FISCAL YEAR 1991 /92 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SUBMITTED BY: SPECIAL ISTRICTS ADMINISTRATION APPROVED: . JOE O'NEIL C ENGINEER City of Rancho Cucamonga Annual Engineer's Report Street Lighting Maintenance Dts[ric[ No. 4 Te; <a Vista Planned Community Fiscal Year 1991/92 The annual report for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4 (Terra Vista Planned Community) Is prepared !n compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 5 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of Cahfornia (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). This report deals wfth the projecte6 expendNures for fiscal year 1991 /92 to determine the annual assessment rate. The assessments will. be used to furnish serv[ces and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation, servicing and restoration of street light Improvements as provided by Southern California Edison Company. Maintenance is considered of general benefit to all areas In the District and costs shall be divided as Indicated In the body of this report. Detailed maintenance acttvttles Include the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement providing for illumination of the subject area. Street lights were constructed by the developers for the individual subdivisions. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for each development and as approved by the Engineering Division. Fiscal Year 1991/92 Protected Expenditures AssessmentAdminlstratton/Overhead $14,141 Electric $50,000 Maintenance/Operations $ 8.612 $72,753 Less: interest/Penalties <53.133> Assmt. Rev. Req'd. $69,620 After review of current expenditures, protected revenues and the increase in utility costs, it was determtned that the assessment rate for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4 well remain a[ $20.00 per assessment unit for Fiscal Yeaz 199I /92. Projected Revenue 3.481 t1U. x $20.00 = $69,620 Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 4 experienced normal and routine expenditures during the current fiscal year. During fiscal year 199I/92 the following protects were annexed to this district: antntFxFn February 2l. 1990 TRACT 13664 NEXED F b 21 1990 24 A.U. ruary e . AN TRACT 13664.1 X h 5 990 2 A.U. ED ~yptem er . 1 ANNE FM 11286 5 1990 b 22.89 A.U. er . Q,j2 Decem TRACT 13303 96 R.U. 13303-1 13303-2 AsssssMENT oiAOEU-M LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. ~ STREET LNiFIT~MA9~ITENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 4 -~~- . ~; ~, 'ar~b;ne( Poor ~~lal~ty >: .>: ;~ I~ \1 ~ S/ J ~~~- ~ ~ ~~ ~ 4 ~ ~~~~ ~~~ .~ .,; , ,, ., C~TIf OR RANC1~0 Csl6AMONOA COUN4Y OF SAN BlRNARDINO ~ .: s~ASS oM cA~oaNfa r ~=» z '" euw~r •~• Asae~ss~NT o~~oRAM LANDSCAPE MAWTENANCE DISTRICT NO. • STREET MAWTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 4 ~, 'i. '~ i~ ,,~ ~~ .. ~ ~ ~ / ~• ' ~ ~e A '~~ /( ~ / y/. ;~ t ~y. ',~~ ' ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~. t ~; ~, _, ~~ ;,, , ~ ;,, ;,- ~ ~/~ ~ /: ~/ 1 CITY Of RANCMO' COCAMONaA COUNTY OR SAN SERNARDINO .: STATE OR CALlRORNIA uNOS~~ wr~u-rx No. s STREET LIGIITWG MAWTENI~NCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 Ate 4 CITY OF RANCNO CSICAYONIiA COUNTY OR~SAN BlRNARDINO ' STATE OF' CALIlIORNIA ~R ~ ~ ~ 2_ ANNUAL ENGINEER'S REPORT STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 (Carya Planned Community) FISCAL YEAR 1991/92 Cf1Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SUBMITTED BY: SPEC ~/~~/D~~I~STRICTS ADMINISTRATION APPROVED : ~j'~-GGICGIU . WM. JOE O'NE ITY ENGINEER City of Rancho Cucamonga Annual Engineer's Report Street Lighting Maintenance Distnct No. 5 Caryn Planned Community Fiscal Year 1991/92 The annual report for Street Ltghung Matatenanee District No. 5 (Caryn Planned Community) is prepared in compliance with the requirement of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 5 of the Streets and Highways Code. State of Caltfomia {Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). Phis report deals with. the pro}eeted expenditures for Rscal year 1991 /92 to determine the armual aseessmertt rate. The asx~ments w1II• be used to furnish services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operation, servicing and restoration of street light improvements as provided by Southern California Edison Company. Maintenance is considered of general benefit to all areas within the district and costs shall be divided as indicated in the body of this report. Detailed matntenance activities include the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement providing for illumination of the subject azea. Street lights were constricted and installed by the developers for the Individual subdivisions. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for each development attd as approved by the Engineering Divisfon. Fiscal Yeaz 1991/92 Projected Expenditures Assessment Administration/Overhead Electric Maintenance /Operations Less: Interest/ Penalties Assmt. Rev. Req'd. $ 7,605 $15.000 $ 1.848 $24.453 $23.400 After review of current expenditures, projected revenues and the increase in utltlty costs, it was determined that the assessment rate for Street Ltghung Maintenance Dtstrlct No. 5 well remain a[ $20.00 per assessment unit for Fiscal Yeaz 1991/92. Projected Revenue 1,t70 A.U. x $20.00 = $23,400 ANNUAL ENGINEER'S REPORT STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 6 lRnmm~rrial /inAuAtriall FISCAL YEAR 1991/92 C17Y OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA SUBMITTED BY: SPEC DISTRICTS ADMINISTRATION APPROVED: ,/' WM. JOE O'NEl lTY ENGINEER City of Rancho Cucamonga Annual Engineer's Report Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 Commercial /Industrial Fiscal Year 1991/92 The annual report for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 (Commercial/Industriap is prepared in compliance with the requirement of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 5, of the Streets and HSghways Code, State of Caltforma (Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972). This report deals with the pro}ected expenditures for fiscal year 1991/92 to determine the annual assessment rate. The assesa.,~„m~ wlll be used to furnish services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance, operations, servicing and restoration of street light improvements as provided by Southern California Edison Company. Maintenance is considered to be of general benefit to all areas rn the district and costs shall be divided as Indicate din [he body of this report. Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 was established for Commercial and/or Industrial properties mainly within the Industrial and Foothill Specific Plan areas. Areas included to the work program aze the street lights within the rights-of-way or designated easements of streets dedicated to the Ctty and are limited [o local streets. The work programs excludes maintenance of street lights in rights-of-way of major streets. Detailed maintenance activities include the repair, removal or replacement of all or any pazt of any improvement providing Cor the illumination of the subJect azea. Street lights were constructed and installed by the developers for the Individual projects within the district. The plans and street lights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for each development and as approved by the Engineering Division. Fiscal Year 1991/92 Protected Expenditures Assessment Administration/Overhead $ 2.965 Electric $10.500 Maintenance/Operations $ 4.580 $18.045 Less: Interest/Penalties <9<777> ei+~i~u. rcev. neq d. ~1/,'ltitS The rate of development and acceptance of street lighting within Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 determine the actual expenditures of energy charges. It was determined that the assessment rate For Street Lighdng Maintenance District No. 6 wlll remain at $20.00 per acre for Fiscal Yeaz 199t/92. Projected Revenue 863.42 Acres x $20.00 = $17,268 The following projects were annexed [o Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 6 during fiscal yeaz 1991/92: ANNEXED J~nu 3. 1490 CUP 87-29 I 3 1990 7.16 A.U. ANNEXED DR ~ anuarv . 88-13 12.76 A.U. ~11VEXED February 7. 1990 PM 12058 7.58 A.U. ANNEXED ~bruarv 7. 1990 DR 88-19 21 1990 12-08 A.U. ANNEXED DR February . 88-11 .80 A.U. ANNEXED March 21 1990 PM 12848 13.32 A.U. ANNEXED Aoril 4. 1990 CUP 88-38 17 A.U. ANNEXED Aril 4. 1990 TRACT 11428 l 18 1990 14 A.U. ANNEXED PM - peri 11410 22.2 A.U. ANNEXED Auril 18. 1990 ~:UP SR-37 .7 A.U. ANNEXED Julv 18. 1990 CUP 89-17 4.84 A.U. ANNEXED PM 4 of mb r 5. L 0 12596 19.04 A.U. Q[INEXED September 5. 1990 PM 12781 5 b 1990 19.14 A.U. ANNEXED CUP , ~GDtem er 88-46 7 AU. ANNEXED October 3 1~9Q CUP 88-18 2.48 AU. ANNEXED November 7. 1990 PM ~ 11940 7 I990 b 5.92 AU. ~jj IEXED PM . Novem er 13L25 19.2 A. U. ANNEXED ~cember 19. 1994 PM 12338 27.56 AU. !!r!o?~s'.~_!~"J~'1 iii i~M ~;~~ Y" . cwMItl1T •~• ~nNO~~ MSIM exaN~~ olsaTAlAcMNO. a STREET UGNTI!1G MAINTENANCg DI8TAIC7 N08. t AND 8 - i --~.- ~ ~I _ _ - .! _ •~~ 1(191 {{ •~ ~ ^ ~ r~ Qr ~ i~ • li I1~ I I- ii ;~ iil'~III ~ 1 I ; p . 1 II (I. ~~ ~~lieilllfl ~I~ UIIIWIIIIUS ~ i~ ~_ _. n . ~~\ t ~ CITY OF RANC010 CUCAMONIiA. COYNTY O~ SAN BENNANDINO 3 STA'i'E O!F C41.IFOQ3EYnA ,y . .. .~ `.•.xeri •p• A~ESSMENT DIAGRAM.. LANDSCAPE. MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. y AND 6 CITY Of RANCt10 CUCAMONGA COUNTY O~ gpN gERNARDINO j STATE OR CALI~ORNJIA -'~- ex~xsir v* ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGHTING µAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. t AND 8 I i ~- CT i ~~ rpY.nl Yp/ .r r'un ~ p i e ~1...'"iJ ~ C ~= ~ j rte, "--- - j I ~ ,.... ~! I :~ (~_, ~ ~ ! i-ars:~%ai. ! ; 1 I ~fiY~ Y/'•y" 1. r,a.~..r~ ~ 1 '.~K ti ~.- , M I >!~ , .~. i bc~l I ~ i /a l 2 I ^'^ ~ iliJ i+N~.arf> I 4rbl r..l F ~ ~ .f ~ I4., r.yi.a r _ _ i •'' i ~ i r n_../ i CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONG,A • COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO ~ STATfE OF CALIFORNIA ' ~ i - ~ _i e~nr.r :i a:~bi y~l~,y~Ilut 1 vvy~,^--. . iY1Y~li •M ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET UGNi91G MAWTENANCE t1t5TRICT NOS. 1 AND 3 ter, t CITY OF RANCHO CUCAYONGA I COUNTY OF SAN BEANARDINO ' ~ OF CALIFORNIA D2 88-19 .~ . _. 1•L. t n ..a i a'i',' V '~1')~~~fl~~ r u~~ ~ A,~SBSSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE YAWTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGNTNJG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 6 i~ Y z 7 C1 ~ ^ ~Yr~~~yA/V~f~Y VYV/~~y/~ CYYA ~ i Yr ~ YN~Y i STATt O!I CAL~0111~A DQf~9-/1 • i ... eu+~+eru.+~ue ws.~ ASSESSMENT DIARiRAM LANDSCAPE MANRENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET UGHTINp MAMiTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. ~ AND B GAYl1V-gGLLT~' ~_/IG i - ..! _~. ~-. _ _- ~+ W .r ' ~ •... a 4:; ~ ~,~' ~ ~ 'EJISON,000RT ~ -' ~ a .. _ ~ _,__ ~~ ..: e . ~i~ ~ I° ELL C URT '-- ~ ~ .._. _. ,k ~ _o ~ ..~ 11~ 9 _ . 'ICu" r - 1 I ' _~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ 4i i ~I- ,~ ~~~ C94Y OIe RANCHO CUCAMON~iw COUNYY OR SwN BERNARDINO Pal 2 aR ~ ~ srw4e o~ ewu~oR~nw i llf/Y4T •,r,• wsaESS~rr o~~onwM STAE=T LIGHTrIp q ~ aBTptCT NO. J ~ISTAICT NOS. 1 ANO 6 rrstl ~R'av~ lrT~~ "~~-~~ ~~ ~ ~~ 1W 4Way fn,Y~ .yr~ aC wr uran aeuat wrr Q raaL nn .. .raa r... ~TR!!T~ ~ WM .H1~ ~a..a wAaL ~fATwu ~aaua~.. u~.an wawa rwacr AaeNl.ua~. Yuast~e aawr• 1 1 W 3 2 i 2 W a COTY OR RA@ICRp CUCAMONOA .. ~~uN~r ®R snN s~nR~nro ~- S?4'~ OF ~1.lfORN1A ~,~~~ Q~"'~ .._..- s `-_-J~~ r j ®_ ~~,~ ~'/ ~• ~- ~i~~`~ i ~~ ~. F:'!', :..,.....: r.~.. W e W caT~r o~ nANCNO cucAMONOA ~ CO~lNTY Oi~ SAN BERNARDINO ', STATE OR CALIROitN1A 77? /!d_~ zxr+~r •x• ASSE8SNIENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAWTENANCE OIS7RICT NO. 3 STAEa`T LIONTNiG MA~NANCS DISTRICT NOS. 1 AHD Q `q^:;~"rr rr exweiT •~• ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAMtTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LKiMTIN(i MAMITENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 8 ,~ `' I - ; ., / • Y ~~ ~ ~ \ ~~ 1 I • ~ ~ . I i J 1 ~ .T r~A. ~ Y ~` _ ~ ~ ~ 'I ~ ~ f r i I : Y ~_ ._~ ~ ; il~. ~ ~ - r.r r ii l ~ ; ~ Y _~ i ~ ~ i ' i l •~ it~~ -~~r- .w r .n~u r. .~ CITY OF RANCNO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~M 1141 O [11q[R 'A' on_~a• Re sc lu::or Nc• ~ :E:sMENT DIwRiRr..rl °a9` ' LAln8CArE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIONTNO MAINTENANCE ONiTRICT NOS. i AND 0 CITC ~...~~ 3 W V"~ yam. ~~ ~! MILLER AVENUE 1 COTY OR RANCHO CYCAMONfiA C011NTY OR !AN ~RNARORIO l STATt OR CALIKORNI C7lIMWT •a- sssesslr~N~r olac~lw~ l.AND8CApE NIAa1TDlIANCS DISTRICT NO. 3 STAFs'T Llt;HTpJG IiAAINTEIIANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 8 r zaoo' .mil ~. -~ -~ ~~ ~2 j :t h - ~- i• I u ~~.r,~ C N Y V ~ H n ~_ ~~ N. ~ I W ~6 iT I` ~ ~i~ ~ Y-.~~i I t.r~ \ t ~~ - rr r . . rt aw ~ ~ ~m~ .r ~v / ~F '~ ~' ~ '7~ XI :.- ~..' ~•n y .. u , , Li r~ = c .~.... ~ _ - - •....:... ~.L MN , 19tH STREET ~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON~iA COUNTY OF SAN BEANARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA ~'11P 6~-/7 3 ,~ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND e CITY OF RANCi~lO CIICAMON~'iA COON ITY OR SAN BE3iNARDINO ~- CZ w S'~A7i'e OF CALIFORNIA ~~ " =~~.r ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE AilA1NTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET UGHTNIp MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND g O 2 •r . ~~ ~`1 I~ •~y• -t ~ .. r „~~F~ i .~~ '. JY :Y Rp~'L'^~y.~ . '. r• / Y•Sn ~ .G• Ie m ,p ~_ 1 a j`~- ? \ _ ~ { 1 1` r~ oy~ .~. ~ ~ ~ .~. .. 1 Y .ly I.y an yK w~~ r•y~ \: /RI~Y cITY oR RwNCao cucAMONaw- .. COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO I! 3 STATE OR cAL11:ORN1A /~ ?~ cxmeir '4• ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE AAAINTEIIANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STRE'aT LNiNTgIG MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 8 _~~ i __ aymo' I I I I ' I i I I {~ at ~al~f' . i I ~ dar. c~ I: i . ;, PA:1CZ_ 7 ; ; nur. act t8 I }. i ~I, i ::`,~~__ I ' ' i i ~ au+ .arn~ ~ I i i ---»_r su•ara ••m Z~ \\\ ^~ \• 1~`\ ~ 1 e ~~~'. ~.~.... e ,, ~~IW I.= i Z ~~: ~ .~;; ~ 6 .;~~- I~ e~ J '' lei I ;~ I 1 ei ~ ~C I CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMON~iA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CAL~ORNIA __cuP eP-en -, d Paz 1 I~dA? ~~85 PGS. 3C S .5 °^ '' ~Y 'A' Cf4Y OF pANCNO GUCAMON~ COUNTY OF 5AN BERNARDIN L 57ATE OF OpN1A '~- DIAGRAM Lp,,Hp~pE MAgITM'lA1M:f CISTRIC7 ~• y AND 6 ctwE~T L MAIN'1'ENANCB DISTRiC7 NOS. Assess~T o~AC~RAM ~ECAPE MAWTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STAN LK~IITMIp MAMfTB-1ANCL OIST111CT NOS. t Alm 0 ~. - - C~7'Y OR RANCHO CNCAMON!'iA _ Ctf1~NTY O~ ~ ~pNwpp~O I 3 STATE OF' CALl~ORNIA ~ G1[MINT 'A' ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREET UONTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 7 AND 8 3. I ~~ ~I /~ a L i~ ~1 ' =I /; ~, .,G-J- I ~ PROJECT SITE / ' I I ~I ~ 'I ~I ~'~ ' W I~~ ~' I ~ ~I~II ~ I i I~I CITY OF RANCHO CUCA1110NdA I COUNTY Of SAN BLRNARDINO PM 03/.25 STATE Olr C~ALIRORNIA ASSESSMENT CIIAGRANI LANDSCAPE NIAMITBNANCE DISTRICT NO. 3 STREiT LK,iNI1T11Ki MAMITENANCE DISTRICT NOM. 1 AND d ~ - it ANNUAL ENGIR'EER'S REPORT STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 (Etiwanda lYorthl s FISCAL YEAR 1991/92 CITY OF RANCHO CUC.4MONGA SUBMITTED BY: SPEC DISTRICTS ADMINISTRATION APPROVED: '~I WM. JOE O'NE(L, f !ENGINEER City of Rancho Cucamonga Annual Eng(neer's Report Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 7 IEtiwanda North) Fiscal Yeaz 1991/92 The annual report for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 7 (Etiwanda North) Is prepared in compliance wlkh the requirement of Article 4, Chapter 1, Division 5 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of Califomia (Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972). This report deals with the protected expenditures for fiscal yeaz 1991/92 to detemttne annual assessments. The assessment will be used, to furnish services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance as provided by Southern California Edison Company. Maintenance is considered of general benefit to ail azeas in the District and costs shall be divided as indicated in the body of this report. Detailed maintenance activities Include the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any improvement providing for illumination of the subject azea. Street lights were constructed and Installed by the developers of the mdividual subdivisions. The plans and street tights are as stipulated in the conditions of approval for each development and as approved by the Engineering Division. Fisca! Yeaz 1991/92 Projected Expendi[ures Assessment Administration/Overhead $ 2,861 Electric $ g,ppp Maintenance/Operations $ I.O81 $12, 942 Less: [nterest/Penalties <$528> Assmt. Rev. Req'd. $12,414 After review of the current expenditures, projected revenues and Increase in utility costs. It was determined that the assessment rate for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 7 should be $32.16 for Ftscat Year 1991/92. Projected Revenue 386 A.U. x $32.16 = $12,414 The following protects were annexed to Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 7 during (fiscal year 1991 /92: ANNEXED Mav 16. 1990 TRACT ANNEXED 13565 16 1990 30 A.U. TRACT ANNEXED . ~ 13565.5 16 1990 M 38 A.U. TRACT av . 13565-6 38 A.U. ANNEXED May 16. 1990 TRACT 13565-? 16 1990 44 A.U. p TRACT . ~v 13565-8 43 A.U. ANNEXED MAY 16. 1990 TRACT 13565-9 40 A.U. ANNEXED September 19. 1990 TRACT 13812 153 A.U. 4SSESSME!!T DIAGRAM /~ ~~/' I i CITY Of RANCHO CUCAMONGA 1 COUNTY Of SAN BERNARDINO ~ ~' TR ~35b~ STATE Of CALIfORN1A -5 ~i-J,r~ -4_ `_ . „~ ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAWTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 ~~~ CRV WMI~NED luC6CUE ANE1 .~ ~..,,~ •~~~• EOYESTpMI TIIK MIIMFNIWCE \` TRACT 13565 PHASE 5 , ,v tide; of ~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA w f ~ `\'_ , \ 'EXHIBIT A' s• ~xG ~ ~? ': fi ~ I= N ~, ,- un . , :,, ASSESSMENT DIAGRAfvi LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 ~~w art uwu~ wmeNE Allb ~~ 71B YNrtM111L7 ...... ®Inrluwnutwmeu~ TRACT 13565 PHASE 6 ~~ys.~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONOA "`~`~ fY' ~ ~ _ /~ s, ~q ,~T\ 'EXHIBIT x' 5 ~ '~~ 1 V / l~SSESSMENT uii~,GRi~Ni LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 °~~ ~"p~" TRACT 13565 ~~~~~~ EQ{lE5}q/J! rnw M~HTENANCE PHASE 7 off` ""O;~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA side; ,~ t 1= •exHlar A• ~^r:;a ~' {~+1 tc ~. _ - ~S i= N „n ASSESShRE~~iT p~AGRP.M LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 7 ...... E„,~,,,~.,,,,w1~+~ TRACT 13565 PHASE S ~\ A\I I, ~o S~ I `•. t / ~,la ~. ~ ~, .z VI I! Ian CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA <«<<: A •EXH N ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NQ 7 /~ ~, r~~ GTV WyTy~ W~tdU¢ ~IIiA TIIH WWiBNiR~ ...... mtsn~wTluiwVrteu~ TRACT 13565 PHASE 9 ' ~,„~ «~ ~i I 1 ~ a,. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMtlNGA 1 N c«i~; I i 'EXHIBIT a' I lXMWT '~' Asset D~aoRl-M ~ u-NnscavE~M~~E NDg, 1 AND 7 ca STREET LICF1'TNG ~; , wr~w.a wR.r .w ~~ .wi•vi.L"~i- w • ~,~wwwwww ~::.L +' ~' W .~ ~yrc. ,~~,u„~i r• .:7C w•w ...........w . ,~ O ~~, --- - ~t ~ b ' .wT ~~w ,. CJ ~ ~_ w..w~ ni. ~~..~ I(7 tt ~ ~ I U }~ -~ ~ ;;: T`( I~~ f,~. I y ~ ^ :~ S ` ' I . \ p •I : ~ ~ ~ 1. a3 . ~ ~ m ..r ~\ [ `.~ L 1 I ... ~ ~ ~v \. ~ ~ ~g ~ ' I 1 \ '~ «.. ... ~ T~' __ sv.~~~ 'w'w..w a "wr~..Yw~w~~.~ _ ~ ~~MI.Y~~ Nia fir u_W ~A.~ .a~ ~~~/ CITY OF RANCHO CuCAMON~iA ' ARDINO COUNTY OIe SAN BERM TD I~? STATE OE CALIFORNIA ~_. Q i ANNUAL ENGINEER'S REPORT STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT 1110_ 8 i I (Etiwanda South) ^ I FISCAL YEAR 1991/92 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA II SUBMITTED BY: SPECIAL DISTRICTS ADMINISTRATION APPROVED: WM. JOE O'NE1L, C11Y ENGINEER City of Rancho Cucamonga Mnual Engineer's Report Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 8 (Etiwanda South) Fiscal Year 1991/92 The annual report for Street Lighting Maintenance Diatrlet No. 8 (Etiwanda South) !s prepared in compliance with the requirement of Artlcle 4, Chapter 1, Division 5 of the Streets and Highways Code, State of Californa (Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972)• This report deals with the protected expendttvrea for fteeal year I991/92 to detemtme annual assessments. The assessment wtN be used to fumtsh services and materials for the ordinary and usual maintenance as provided by Southern California Edison Company. Maintenance is considered of general benefit to all areas in the Dlstrtct and costs shall be divided as indicated in the body of this report. Detailed maintenance activities include the repair, removal or replacement of all or any part of any Improvement providing for IDuminatlon of the subtect azea. Street lights were constructed and Installed by the developers of the individual subdivisions. The plans and street lights aze as stipulated m the conditions of approval for each development and as approved by the Engineering Division. Fiscal Year 1991/92 Projected Expenditures Assessment Adminlstratton/Overhead $ 14.14 Electric $100.00 Maintenance/Operations ~ 12.96 $127.10 Less: Interest/Penalties <85.18> Assntt. Rev. Req'd. $121.92 Afier review of the current expenditures, projected revenues and increase In utlllty costs, it was determined that the assessment rate for Street Lighting Maintenance District No. & should be $121.92 Cor Fiscal Year 1991/92. Projected Revenue 1 A.U. x 121.92 $121.92 The following protects were annexed [o Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 8 during fiscal year 1991/92: ANNEXED Q~gber 17. 1990 PM 12854 1 A.U. ur~~:r;a i'OGT 4ua~~lY E%MnuT'q• 4SSESSMENT DIAGRAM STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. S FORMATION ~'~, _~f iavvuko rveaa .~:_ ...n :.. . - ~E emcrs frw ;' ~~=ice. _ ., .. ' ~~ , ~~ ~i i yssi ;q . ~ ' 3 r ~ _ t ___ _~ ~ ~ ~__ Z F _ ~ o • a • ~ o v < v S Y~ i 4 ~ j i i ~ I _~ =' ~ ~ Z !' ~ ~ O a ~ I e ~ L ? W A ~ Z • -a F ~ • I ~ F. I r J ; ~ ~ m F i ~ er i i, p ., ~ i~ mo ~ ~ ' I a_ ?_ ! .. a -J _ ~ ~. . •.•~ { K10.NI l771[LF ya.~ _ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA p/~ IZBS4 ~, - - -- CITY ul'' RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~~xna+oy MEMORANDUM ~~' °"„ ~~ DATE: July 3, 1991 ~ ~ z T0: Meyor and Meabers of the City Council ~'~ y~; ~'I Jack Lam, AiCP, City Manager FROM: ~. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Betty A. Miller, Associate Engineer SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AY11 TiwTaTTVC o~orc~ ,._•~ ._ LUNA - Dea o ann ng o~ ss on s ec s ony o req~re that Parcel 2 take access from Northridge Drive for a residential subdivision of one acre of land into two parcels in the Yery Low Residential District located on the north side of Northridge Drive, west of Haven Avenue - APN: 201-182-29 (Related file: Yarian~ 91-OA) A request t0 continue the Wb11c hearing on the sub,(ect appeal for two (2) weeks has been received from the offices of Charles S. Doskow, the attorney far the Northwood Properties Community Association (letter attached). Staff has contacted the aDPlicant and both appellants. Although both appellants are agreeable, Mr. Luna strongly objects to the continuance request because the repeated delays have resulted in increased pro,lect costs (letter attached). The pro,)ect staff report has been included in the event that continuance is not granted. ReVspPec tfLul l y~suMbmintted, .T /d Y y Nm. Joe O'Neil V City Engineer NJ:BAM:dIw Attachment's ~C~, hack, +Z~ck <st~d Charles S. Do k w ALAW IOPPOPA TION Charles 5, DosMOw ~ ALchael B. Teaecu _~ ~a¢ o. June 25, 1991 `9~:-'~ ~?l,.l~~ ~• rl Debbie Adams, City Clerk `~C~. RECEIVED :, City of Rancho Cucamonga \~ ~' t.»~ Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 - AE: EINIRO8ME8T11L 1188E88EE8T AED TLlTfATIVE PARCEL IIAp 19693 - LONA - YOBLIC HBAAIEO OE APPBAL pA01t PLSEBIMG COMIIIBBIOE'8 DECIHIOM Dear Ms. Adams: This office represents the dorthwood Property Communities Association, an appellant in the above-referenced matter which has been noticed for hearing on July 3, 1991, before the City Council. Charles S. Doskow is the only attorney from this office who has been involved with this file, with complete knowledge of the issues and the parties involved; however, Mr. Doskow is currently on a vacation in Canada and will not be returning until July lD, 1991. He did not expect the matter to be noticed for a hearing to be held in his absence. we respectfully request that the hearing on the appeal be continued to July 17, 1991, or to some other date following Mr. Doskow's return, to assure that our clients' interests are most fully represented. Should you require further information concerning this request, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. ~Var~y Jt-ru~ly ypours~,//~ Michael B. TeBeau MBT:jf cc: Ms. Linda Frost Mr. Steven Luna a~3 Jane 26, 1991 City Of Rancho Cucamonga nuyiucea iuy ucyua e~~..~ P.O. Hoz 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91769 Attention: Bette Miller - Rngineering RH: Appeal on Variance 91-04 - Lana Snb Division Dear Mrs. Miller: It has come to oar attention that a continuance has been re- quested for tha July 3rd meeting of the City Council re- garding Variance 91-04. We strongly object to any time eatenaion of this meeting. This Subdivision has been dragged out for four mouths and it has ^ov come to the point where it is costing us substaneially, as interest rates have moved up in the last two weeks, and any further delays could cost us more with respect to our impending loan. All concerned were uotif ied of this pending meeting and allowances should have been made. Respectfully, ~~ Stevea R. Luna, Applicant SRL:crl Copies: Pile v C/ ~~'Ji~, y Y .\ Ii~f 7q . ••.N~ , a~~ CITY OF RANCHO r_UCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 3, 1991 T0: Mayor and Members of the City Council Jack Lam, AICP, City Manager FROM: Wm. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Betty A. Miller, Associate Engineer e~3•, SUBJECT: ENVIR014£NTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 13693 - LUNl1 - an appeal vi urc „dFG, Sy .~. " ^^. ' __ a nn 1n rare that Parcel 2 take access from Northridge Drive for a residential subdivision of one acre of land Into two parcels in the Yery Law Residential District located on the north side of Northridge Drive, west of Haven Avenue - APN: 201-182-29 (Related file: Variance 91-04) Staff recommends that the City Council uphold the Planning Comm155ton's decision artd elegy the appeal request by adopting the attached Resolution. BAdf6R0UND The protect proposes Lo subdivide a one acre parcel into two single family half acre parcels as shown on Exhibit "B" of the attached Planning Commission Staff Report dated March 27, 1991. The project was heard by the Planning Camm1551on on three occasions (March 27, Apr11 24, and May 22, 19911; therefore them are three separate staff reports and related minutes. The tentative map and related variance were approved by the Planning Commission on May 22, 1991, as modified at the meeting. This appeal was filed by Peter Fan, the owner of the adJacent property to the east of the pro,~ect, shown as Parcel 30 on Exhibit H" of the attached Planning Commission Staff Report dated Apr11 24, 1991, and by the Northwood Properties Cammunl ty Assocl att on, the homeowners association for the development to the south of the protect. The appeal letters are attached. ANALYSIS The adjacent property owners have appealed this protect because they ob,{ect to the Planning Commission decision to require that Parcel 2 take access from Northridge Drive. The Northwood Properties Community Association has protested the use of Northridge Drive for access to any of these parcels throughout the processing of this map, including CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TENT PM 13693 - LUNA July 3, i99i Page 2 discussion at the neighborhood meeting, 150 homeowner petitions, letters, and statements at each of the public hearings. Mr. Fan is obtecting to the precedence this approval will set for the portion of hfs property which also has frontage on Northridge Drive. The obtectlons can be sunnarized as follows: 1. Increased traffic in an existlag coaaaunity; 2. Dotential for parking RY's and large horse trailers on Northridge n..r.,a 3, Architectural and CCBR compatabtiity between different development districts; 4, Disturbance of Lhe slope landscaping currently wintafned 4Y Lhe homeowner association; a~ 5. Decreased value far the larger Tots on the north side of Northridge Drive. Ail of these issues were raised and discussed by the Planning Cowaission. The initial map submitted to the Planning Cowatsslon on March 27, 1991, had both parcels taking access Eras Cabrosa Pi ace with Parcei 2 using an easement along the north boundary of Parcel 1. T:he Planning Connission was concernEd x:th "arcel 2 taking access through an easement an Parcel 1 because of possible neighbor disputes, co~apromtsad access1bi11ty to Parcel 2 for emergency vehicles, and the constraints plated on Parcel 1 by an equestrian trail on ogre side and an access easement on another. The second report, dated Apr11 24, 1991, explored various master plans for the surrounding area to see if a better access could De provided to Parcel 2. It was concluded that the alternate master plans had disadvantages sufficient that they should not be pursued. The Planning Cemmlssion required that both parcels take access from Northridge 6r1ve. A third hearing was necessary to allow time to readvertise the required variance, which was revised to include lot depth 1n addition to average lot area, and to prepare a resolution reflecting the new parcel orientation. At the May 22, 1991 Planning Cosatsston hearing, the applicant requested that Parcel 1 be allowed to take access from Cabrosa Pl aee. The matori ty of the Planning Comaisslon agreed, resulting in the protect being approved with Parcel 1 taking access from Cabrosa Place and Parcel 2 taking access from Northridge Drive. The dissenting caawtssloners preferred that both parcels take access fray Northridge Drive. a~c~ cm couNCa srAfP REPOaT TENT PM 13693 - LUNA Juiy 3, 1991 Page 3 The Planning Commission was unanimous in its opposition to along access easeaKnt for Parcel 2 across Parcel 1, given that frontagge 1s available on Northridge Drive. They did not feel that the additional traffic would be significant aad resolved the issues of parking, CLBR coepatibiltty aid landscaDing matntenance 1n the conditions of approval. Using a street as the boundary where lot sizes change 1s caawon and front yards are Seen as more attractive than a perimeter wall for properties across the street. Although a particular roster plan was not approved, the Planning Coreaisslon did state that their decision on this parcel would affect the rremainder of the lots on the north side of Northridge Orive. After Lheir appeal request, the Northwood Properties Coaeuntty Association submitted a request t0 add a condition of spproval requiring that cots fronting on Northridge Drive become sabers of tMir Association (see attached letter dated June 1D, 1991). This 1s a change to their previous poslNon and rat one to which the applicant has agreed. The Planning Coraisston only intended tMt CC6Rs 'caayatlble with the applluble use restrictions of the Northwoods Properties Comaarnity Association's LCBRs" he dereiapad for the affected lots (condition no. 6 of Resolution No. 921). Respectfully submitted, 1~. Wm. Jce O'Neil v ~ Lity Engineer WJO:DAM:dIw Attachments: Appeal Letters Mqy 22, 1991, Planning Caaaiission Minutes May 22, 1991, Planning Loaralssion staff Report Apr11 24, 1991, Planning Cowlsslon Minutes Apr11 24, 1991, Planning Coratsslon Staff Report March 27, 1991, Planning Cormalsston Minutes March 27, 1991, Planning Coswlsston Staff Report Planning Ca~isston Resolutions 91-41 aM 91-42 Resolution a~~ Office of City Clerk City of Rancho Cucamonga .air or ~ '-' ~: •- ~~ California, 91729 Peter Fan, CpA ~~K 3 Ii70~ 840 5. Indian Hill Blvd. •~ d Claremont, CA 91711 ' '"• ~ (714) 621-4831 '~ Honorable City Council Members, , Ae the owner of tentative tract no. 14461, i would like to appeal the planning approval concerning tentative parcel map no. 17693. on may 22, 1991, the Planning Commission approved the subdivision of an 1.o acre land which allowed at least one of the subdivided lot to gain street access through the Northwood Community. In addition, the Planning Commission also approved a eoncen+u,.~ master olan r,.. «~....rcc - ~~,.,unuing properties. The master plan shows that future subdivided percale will also fees and access through the Northwood Community, as opposed to Camille Ave. which connects to the Nilson Avs. to the north. I Would like to appeal the Planning Commissions decision of allowing any access through the Northwood community based on the following reasons: 1. Accessing through the Northwood Community has been strongly oppossd by the residents of the community. The residents expressed tremendous concerns on the intrusion of privacy and safety of children caused by increased traffic and noise from these new subdivisions. (Please see attached) 2. The planning staff analyzed several conceptual master plans and concluded on the March 27, 1991 Staff Report, thak the number of parcels which used the Cart ills Ave. (18 parcels in total) generated no significant impact of public safety in the event oP fire or eartAquake. Therefore, nccesaing through Nor- thridge Drive mny not be necessary. 3. In my opinion, allowing access through Northwood commuin- ty will decrease the value of my investment and possible other investments in the immediate area as well. This will decrease the value of future homes there and lead to lower property taxes for the city. _ Council members, thank you for considering my reasons for this appeal. I hope that this matter will be resolved ae soon as possible. Since~r~eyy-lyy~y P ~~~i Fan ,~- . a~g CITY OF ItANCFiO CUCAMONGA ENGIIdEERIIdG DM3ION 1 "n IDOL r ~gY; pgRCEL MAP 13693 T~,g; VICINITY MAP ,~ A „ a -~ ~ >~rr ` ( U _ 1 ~~Y uMry ' .. ... II ~ I III L •'J ~ -- Y , o... ~l ~ . ~ ~: n 1 ~ I ~I I I:I I ~ .moo- - l I ~ A \_~~ _~ ~I I I I I !c i ~ j~ I ~ ~ :`~ .. I i ~ i .SS. '~'II ._ r I ~ e --. lam' I©;.- d!` R 1 I -d ~ I. Ry^ N ~ I i ~. : ~ti.. ~~ ~. ^ ~ . ..,, ~.,,,,.,,, ~ r, -., .; - . ~' F 2 r ~O ~ z V ~ PLANNING G01lMISSION STAFF REPORT TENT PN 13693 - LUNA MARLN 27, 1991 PA&E 3 2. Exhtbtt "D" dos allow tM local equestrian troll systew to be interior to tM VL dlstrlet rather then on tM perlerty, adsacent m Northridge Drive. 3. A detail wa provided, on tM ConcepWat Gradtny Plan (ExAlbtt "E") of a north-soutA cross section (Exhtbtt "F") taken through parcel 1 and Northridge Or1ve, m 111ustrate tM relative position of Musea, streets, trails, and stapes. Note that side of houses will M visible iron tM south side of Northriddgqe Drive in tM proposM tonflguratton, unless tM Might of tM perieeter wll is lneraased. Lnder tM alternate - - ~.- tw~~ vl... w.lA h~ n1 fMnt v~rdt. maw` ~.. r. 4. Sf access m parcel 2 is fatten froe cabrosa Place, that driveway will be non than 200 fNt 1amU. TM Ftn Protection D1strlct wtil need a way for ib rehlcles to Wrn arouM or Mve an al Lernaq ex1 t rout ava11 aDl e. B. Neighborhood Canceros• A neighborhood .sating ws Mld an Daeeeber 18, 1990. Attendees tnctuded residents of Northwood rtstas, a Low-Nadia Nestd.nttat developaMnt (t-8 dwelling units per atre) lnaedlaUly wuth of tM protect stu, and tM owers of a vacant parcel ast of tM protect site. TM residents of NortMOOd Y/sbs oD,tected m fronting either parcel onm Northridge Drive for three masons: 1. TM larger lots an tM rarth side of Northridge Orlve can accasagdab equestrian uus. Ose of tM neighborhood stmets by large vehicles suety a Mrse trailers would conflict with tM hoewawners association ProAtbttlon against recreational veAtd e smrage. 2. TM hanaowiMers assoelatlon currently eetntatns tM parkway slope on tM north side of NorMrtdge Drive. Resldenb oblact m peMM~ter fenctn~gttng 1JN ex sting slope landscaping and 3. TM msidMb percelre Nort:hwoods V171as as a close-knit cawuMty and feet that tM VL lob proposed would De uncMrecterlstlc of that eanauntty. TMy would not anttclpate tM acceptance of those lots tnm tM Mseowners sssoctstion, tf such a request were eade. Subsequent m tM nit rhootl wting, tM Ctty Ms reeNvea 133 signed fora letters ExhtD/t '6') iron naeMrs of tM Northwood Naaeormers Assoetatlon, objecting m aro plena m construct driveways or streets lading 1nm tIN eowunlty iron Northridge Ortve. TMy tat this could eagronTse t:Mir privacy and security. ae~ February O4, 1491 City Of Rancho Cuaamnnna Post Office Hax 8OT Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91719 .~a~ .:cur:w„... ~• ~ ~ U:VIS;GN AT': Y: Steve Rosa, Assistant Planner C+ear Hr. Rosa, I am a pomeowner in tha Northwood Community. i strongly abject to any city plans to eonsernet driveways or streets leading into our community from Northridge. The privacy and security of our community are of great importance to me. As a member of Northwood Homeowners Association and having a shared interest in all Northwood Community atlaira, I am entitled to receive information and notif ieation concerning hearings or meetings affecting the Norihwood Community. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA DMSION ~; ?NttEL. MRP 1393 ~7 TiTL1L~:SPMPLF. MOMEDw~1ER lEfrE ~~` ~~ N / n Sincerely, ' Euclid ~_ _~~~anagement -Company_ June 3, 1991 City Council Members City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 RE: Application for Parcel MaD 13693 and for variance-Luna Dear Council Members, x,~R _. .. ~ .-.,. ~,a~ ~~ ~~v ;; ~ it 4' As members of the Beard of Directors of the Northwood Properties Community Association, we were in attendance et the Planning Couieaion•s March 27th, April 24th and May 29nd meetings. We were represented at those meetings be Linda Frost, President of the HDA, the association's attorney, Charles Doskow and many homeowners. The members of the homeowners association are disappointed with the conclusions reached by the Planning Couiesion on Hay 22nd. Therefore, the Board of Directors and the members of the Homeowners Association wish to appeal the decision of the Planning Commission on the approval of the parcel map aDPlication indicated above. Please send all information to the following: Northwood Properties Couun ity Association c/o Euclid Management Company P.O. Box 1510 Upland, CA 91785 -(714) 981-4131 Respectfully, Board of Directors Northwood Properties Community Association 12S South Mountain Ave. Suite E Mailing Address: Box 1510 ~S3 Upland. CA 714/981-4131 Upland CA 91785 Euclid ~1lanagement June 30, 1991 ,;~N11 ]~i Mr. Brad Buller .. ., City of Rancno Cucamonga ~l' '• -1 ~ ~ ~ Post Office Box 807 a Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91729 RE: Environmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Map 13693-Luna .,..... .•i.. nuiier: Aa you are no doubt aware, our members were disappointed with the conclusions of the Planning Commission on the above aDPlicationa at its April 24 meeting. we intend to continue our participation in the approval process. Our Board of Directors does concur with the suggestion that any homes tonal rutted fronting on Northrid8e Drive be required to become subject to our area's governing CC&R's, and become members of our Association. Such inclusion would alleviate some of the concerns which our members have expressed, and would aid 1n assuring continuation of the quality of a.~r neighborhood. when it was su98ested that membership be made a condition of approval of the application, you correctly pointed out to the commission that any such membership would be contingent upon their acceptance by the Association. we have no doubt that action by the Association to accommodate inclusion would be forthcoming. we therefore propose that membership in the Northwood Property Community Association be made a condition of approval of the lots in the Luna application, subject to the acceptance of such lots by the Association. Tf you have any-correspondence, please forward to: Northwood Property Community Association C/O Euclid Management Company P.O. Box 1510 Upland, CA 91785 Thank you for your consideration of our views. Sincerely, Board of Directors ZB~( Northwood Property Community Association I25 Soulh Mountain Ave. Suite E Upland CA 714/981-0131 Mailing Address: Box ISIU Upland. CA 9i785 • • ~ PUBLIC HEARINGS 0. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSEaOMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 13693 - LUNA - A ~ subdivision of 1.0 acre of land Soso 2 parcels in the Vary Low Reeldsrtial District (less than 2 dwelling unite per acre), located oa the north aide of Northridge drive, west of Haven Avenue - APN: 201-102-29. (Continued from April 24, 1991.) C. VARIANCE 91-00 - LUNA - A tequeat to allow a redaction of the minimum average lot size from 22,500 to 21,540 square fast and s reduction Ln the minimum lot depth from 150 to 130 feat for a two-lot parcel map in the Very Low Raeldentlal ULatrlct (Lace coon c dwaii my F.. .~..), located on the north side of Northridge Drives, wear of'Havan Avenue - APN: 201-182-29. Betty Miller, Associate Engineer, presented the staff report regarding Parcel nap 13693. Sha indicated the standard aehool condition would need to be added to the Resolution. Steve Rona, Aaeletant Planner, preNnted the staff report on Variance 91-04. Chairman NcNial opened the public hearing. Steve Luna, applicant, 7090 Archibald Avanus, Aaneho Cucamonga, raquaated that the Commission approve the option with Parcel 3 taking aeeeea from Cabroea Place artd Pnresl 2 accessing Northridge Drive. Linda Frost, Pree ident of Northwoode Propa[Cise Community Aeeocintion, stated their position had not changed. They did not agree that the lots ehou ld face Northridge Drive, but felt strongly that if the Commiaeion determined they should front Northridge Drive, that the parcels should be subject to the CC6As of the Community Association. She did not feel het Low Hedium density tract should be mixed with equestrian lot e. She orated there would be a potential for .up to five late fronting Northridge Drive. Sha indicated one of the biggest concerns ie the potential for parktnq RVa and lnrge horse trailers on Northridge Drive. She requested that the Community Association be involved in the Design Review process iE the Planning Commieaion determined the lots should front Northridge Drive. Charles Doekow, attorney representing Northwoode Homeowners' Association, 222 North Mountain Avenue, Uplandr urged the Planning Commieaion to consider the applicant's original proposal with Parcel 1 taking accae• Erom Cabroea Place and Parcel 2 taking access from Cabroea P1aca via an easement aerosa Parcel 1. He wondered why the Planning Commission was spending ao mu eh time on a total of 1¢es than one acre. He indicated that the Trails Committee had approved khe layout with both parcels taking access from Cabroea Place and also the option with only Parcel 2 fronting Northridge Drive. Hearing no further teat imony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Planning Commies ion Minutes -2- / May 22. .... ~f1~ commies inner Vellette indicated that the Coamiae ion had heard the residents' concerns regarding acceee to Northridge Drive sntl was concerned with meeting the needs of both parties involved ae well as making a deeie ion reflecting gcod planning sense. She said it was for this raaeon the Planning Commteaion was spending eo much tinaa on one acre. She felt that good planning dictates that acceee should be from Northridge Driva. Commies inner Melcher liked the eompromiae o[ fronting Parts! 1 on Cabroaa Place and Parcel 2 on Northridge Drive. Xa did not feel Parcel 2 should b0 subject to all Brovie ions of the CeSHe of the NorGhwootla Propert iea community Association. He thought new CC6Ae aMulfl be drawn up Eor Parcel Z to include only the applicable provisions of th0 Northwooda Hoa,eowners' A89otiation. He indicated that Northwootle has two styles of arehitacturs, one with wood and one of v ..~ ..~ .__. «we h^mee on Parcels 1 end Z eheuld be of appropriate quality ~conatruct ion «but it should not be necessary to reatz ice: .... architectural style. Commissioner chitiea stated that the function of the Trails Conanittas is oat to approve tract layouts, but to indicate if trails can ba accommodated. She reported that the committee did not support • lagoui with nee lot taking aceeea from Cabroaa Place and the otMr lot !rooting Northridge Drive. She stated that Ehe equestrian trailn would not W adjacent to flu Northwoods community beoauae they would be located to tM north o! the two parcels. commissioner Toletoy egrsed with Commissioner Neither regarding the CCSAS. Hs felt they should be tailored to tM iuuee of compatibility with atreaiscape on Northridge Drive only. Ha felt both lots should taco Northridge Drive, chairman MeN ie1 stated that the dacie ion on thin parcel will of tact the remaindee of the lots to the north of Northridge Drive. He thoughC the question to be if some, none, or all of the lots should face Northridge Drive. Ha saitl that it would requite the paving of more ground if the lots da not face Northridge Drive. He stated that the parcel to the waet has easy aecesa to cabrosa Place and the parcel to the asst could be s flag Log, but more. streets would have to be built in order !o avoid fronting Euturs late to the east onto Northridge Driva. Ha indicated that theta hat to be a boundary where lots sizes change. He said the trails will not acceee onto of into the community to the south. He did not oppose taking aecees to parcel 1 from cabrosa Place. Commissioner Tolatoy stated that if Parcel 1 Eacea Cabroaa Place and Parcel ] faces Northridge Drive, then a aide yard would Eace a front yard. Ne felt bosh front yards should face Northridge Drive. Commissioner Melchet stated that the lot to the west of the two parcels fronts Cabroaa Piece. He felt fronting Parcel 1 to Cabroaa Place would provide a better view from the cul-de-sac. Motion: Moved by Melcher, seconded by McNiel, to issue a Negative Deelarat ion and adopt the resoluticna approving Environmental Aase9ement and Tentative Parcel Map 13693 and Vnriance 91-Da with modlf icatione to front Parcel 1 on Planning Commission Minutes -3- May 22, .?~l ~~ Cabroaa Place antl Parcel 2 on Northridge Dsive and provide a variance of the lot depth for oae Lnt only. Motion carried 6y the Following vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: NCNIEL, MELCNER, VAI.LETTE i NOES: COMMISSIONEBS: CBITIP,Ar TOLSTOY ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -carried • • x • r ENVIRONMENTAL A$$E55NENT AND T NT t --n`.- BwANO - A residentisj subd iviaion and den i9n review of 2B single family lots on 39.E acres Af d in the Very Low Residential Dlet r+~« ;•- , ~ swelling uni per ar. ` -~_ wn wllnon Avenue wart of Beryl Street, south of ritage Park APN: av1062-051-01. Aaaoetatad with thin project 11 T Removal Permit -O5. staff zacommentls ieeuanes of n Negat ive Deel at ion. E. v IANC - - A request to reduce the minima corner lot width from 100 teat o 90 test one the einimum lot area tr 0,000 square fact to 16,502 squat feet ort Lot 2B; to redoes tMe mini lot depth from 150 feet to 146.19 f and 145.75 test on Lots 11 n 14, respectively; and to reduce the minim average lot •Lze tram 22 O square Lest to 22,228 square feet within Ta rive Tract 34207, co sting of 2B single family Iota on 19.5 acres of la in the Very Low idential Dintriet (lees Chan 2 dwelling unite per acre), located on Wil n Avenue weal of Beryl Street, south of Heritage Park - APB. 1062-051- Steve Hayes, Associate Planner, pree t the staff report and a letter from resident Nieho lea Crow in opposition the variance for lot size reduction. He also apposed the configuration o Lo 24 and 25 and objected io a house being placed on Lot 25 in it9 pro aed to tion of 25 feet from hie property line. Commisaio.^.er Va llette questi ed the minimum ee ack from property lines far aide yards. Mr. Hay ea responded the the minimum setback ie 30 t t end the house on Lot 25 would be placed 10 set Lack from the 15-foot equestr n trail. Commissioner Melc r questioned why the developer is not einq required to underground the ilitiea on the opposite aide of Beryl Steee but instead is being conditio d to pay a fee to the Ctty for future undercrou inc. earrye Ha on, Senior Civil Engineer, replied that the main pr lam with under9ro ding the utilities now would be the tlifficulty in providing ervices to exi inq homes. Co saioner Chitiea asked the rationale for determining chat Lots 2d an 25 s u1d front Bery 1. Planning Commission Minutes -4- May 2., . 2~~ - CiTI OF R~1Nr'gr rULA:v1c? :`GA STAFF REPORT DATE: May 22, 1991 T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Conexlsston FROM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civ11 Engineer BY: Betty A. Miller, Associate Engineer SUBJECT: ENYIRON6ENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL IMP 13693 -TUNA - A su v s on o acre o an n Residential District (less than 2 dwelling u itssper acre), located on the north side of Northridge Drive, west of Haven Avenue - APN: 201-182-29, Related file: Yartancm 91-04, Staff recessends issuance of Negative Declaretton. (Conttrdud frog liprll 24, 1991) I. BACKGROUND: This item was continued fraa the March 13, 1991, Planning l;a~fss~-meeting to allow concurrent review of the related variance. It was continued from the March 27, 1991, meeting so that staff could investigate alternate master plans for the area to the north, to see 1f better access could be provided t0 Parcel 2. On April 24, 1991, the Planning Commission unanimously selected option 2(a), approving the Parcel Map modified to require that both parcels take access from Northridge Drive. Since the corresponding resolution was not available at that time, the Item was continued so that staff could prepare one. In addition, the related Variance 91-04 (separate report) required revision and readvertlsement. Copies of the previous staff reDOrts are attached for your reference. The applicants met with staff on April 29, 1991, and indicated that they are not sin agreement with the Planning Coamtsston decision. If the original proposal for both parcels to take access fray Cabrosa Place (option 1 in the Apr11 24th staff report) is rat accepted, then the applicants would prefer option 2(b), which has Parcel 1 taking access from Cabrosa Place and Parcel 2 taking access from Northridge Drive. they are also opposed to joining the Northwaods Properties Canmanity Association. The applicants' letter 15 attached as Exhibit "A". II. DISCUSSION: The Commission selected Option 2(a) because it represented e~esf-~anning decision for the area. Northridge Drive is a public street which was lntentlonally located along the north boundary of Tract 10827 (NOrthwoeds Camrmnlly) to provide access to the then vacant land PLANNING COMMISSION .Ff REPORT TENT PM 13693 - LUNA Mqy 22, 1991 Page 2 north of that tract. Encuatering Parcel 1 with a 20-foot wide access, easeeent sawed excessive 1n addition to local trail requtreaKntt and the need for Parcel 2 to have a driveway care than 200 feet long relsed firs safety concerns. The alternate of providing additional streets free the north is not to the best interest of the City at large, because it increases the overall Wb11c uaintenance burden. Use of the existing Northridge Drive frontage seeem the cost appropriate solution. The applicants disagree. They feel that coegatlbtlity slro`ndfael - - ~i--u L: t.~a- F,.. Vw.... I.w /VI \ MvQ nnwnM n/efrl~f They al thatyeixin9 custaa hoea!a on YL lots with Low Mediae (LMl tract haaies rill have a wbstanNal negative iayact on the value of their future houses. The applicants are suggesting that Parcel 1, at least, be allowed to face Cabrosa Place, as all other houses on that cal-de-sac do, instead of putting a rear yard between two front yards. Nh11e the appltaats~would prefer not to front either parcel oho Nerthridge Drive, they feel that facing Parcel 2 only in that dfracttort is a viffite tYaaprartse which they would like the Comaatssfon to eansfder. staff is concerned that tt ^aY be difficult to fit local equestrian traits into this arrangeeent. This alternative has been scheduled for a Trails Advisory Coawlttee review on Mey 15, 1991, Their coaaw!nts wtll be available at the Planning Caa~ission wreeting, along with an alternate resolution reflecting the alternative proposal if the Coawittee finds tt workable. The Planning Comuisston's decision to require that bath, or even one, of the parcels take access frw Northridge Drive necessitates sale additional conditions of approval which are reflected in the attached resolution. The landscaped parkway on Lhe north stde of Northridge Drive is currently alatntalned by the NOrthwoods Droperties Coaaiunity Association. The Association has expressed concern that ail owing the access will lead LO deterioration of the existing landscaping and that the Association's strict architectural controls and CC6R prohibitions will not apply to these properties. Therefore, Condition number 4 directs the Planning Division to review the houses for coepatlbilityl Condition nuelber 5 relieves the Association of eatntenance responsibility for the Parcel Map frontage, and Condition nuader 6 requires CCdR's for the Parcel Map capatible with those of the Northwoods Cowaunity. 2g4 PLANNING COIMISSION .FF REPORT TENT PM 13693 - TUNA Nay 22, 1931 Page 3 III. CONCLUSION: The Planning Caswisslon should consider the naw proposal by app cants and the additional Traits CoAwittee input. If the Comalsslon wishes to proceed based upon their decision at the April 24 meeting, then adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Oetlaratlon would be apprapriate. If the applicant's new proposal is preferable, then staff wi11 suggest modifications to specific conditions at the public hearing. Respectfully subaftted, ,~pA/J,yG/ir ~..ytyi~•l/ Bar_r_ye__fR. Hanson Senior Civii Engineer BRH:diw Attachments: ExMbit "A" -Applicant's Letter Apr11 24, 1991, Staff Report Resolution and Recamwnded Conditions of Approval -L~o City of Rancho Cucamonga May 13,1991 Planning Commission 1U500 Civic Center pr. Rancho Cucamonga, CA. 91730 Re: Fnvio ro~.n tat Assessment and Tentative parcel MaR,13fio3-.,nx Mr. Chairman and Commissioners, After listening to the proposed recommnedations from the Commission at the regularly scheduled meeting on April 24,1991, we had some concerns that we Felt needed to be addressed. When we purchased this property in November of 1984, it was zoned Very Low density. IC was our intent to subdivide and build homes consistent with others in the Very Low density area. B y'asking us to frcnt onto Northridge Dr. you will be mixing custom homes designed For the Very Low density area with Low Medium density tract homes. This will have a substantial negative impact on the value of our future homes. We feel that fronting both parcels unto tiorth ridge Ur. is unnecessary. By allowing Parcel 1 (the proposed westerly to ti to front onto Cabrosa Place as originally intended, we will leave 1 lot that is compatible with the surrounding area. ,~'o additional roadways or improvements wi12 be required From the city as ewe have already dedicated nor portion of the col-de•sac snd the street is in place. The area will have a balanced look with all of the homes Fronting onto Cabrosa Place facing the cul-de-sac instead of having one home with the rear yard facing the scree t. Another concern we would like to address is the recommendation that we join the Northwoods Homeowners' Association. Again, when we planned on subdividing, it was with the intent of having 2 private lots. Not lots that are part of a housing tract or association, lve are opposed co joining this llom^owners' Association. W'e see no reason to be encumbered with their fens since we have no intension of using their facilitiCS. In addition, from the resoonse of the Homeowners' Association President and their attorney, at the 3/27/91 and 4/24/91 meetings, they do not appear to have any desire for us to join. ~~PARCEL MAP 13693 ~,~ APPLICANT'S LETTE2 ail ~ „A., ~ar2) - in conclusion, it is felt that wltila we have no desire to front onto Northridge Dr., there is a viable compromise. !n the interest of all concerned. Parcel 1 facing Cabrosa Placa and Parcel 2 facing Northridge Dr., with the Parcel 2 property owner responsible for the landscaping Fronting their loc, in lieu of joining the liomcowners' Association, seems to be the best solution. k'e respectfully request the commission to seriously consider this option. Since;ely, y~;~~ S~ k~a ~~ Monica A. Luna cc: Betty Diiller Associate Civil Engineer ~p~;PARCEL MAP 13b93 ~~ Z 1i7l~ APPL) „ _ NT'S LETTER R L2 or L) AYES: COMIRES!!N CHITIEA, MCNIEL, NOES: COHNISSIONERS: NON NONE -carried __e 8. ENV'RONMENTAL AS SE85MENT AND T NTAT PARC 693 UN - A eubdiviaion of 3.0 acre of land into 2 parcels in the Very Low Aesidential ^iatrict (less than 2 dwelling unite per acre), located on the north aide of Northridge Drive, west of Haven Avenue - APN: 201-382-29. StatE recommends issuance of a Negative Declaration. (Continued from Mazeh 27, 1991.) C. VARIANCE 91-04 - LDNA - A requaet to allow a zsduction of the minimum average lot size from 22,890 to 21,940 squats fast for a two-lot parcel map in the Very Low Residential District (lace than 2 dwelling unite per acreJ, located on the north side of Northridge Driver west of Haven Avenue - APN: 201-182-29. (Continued from March 27, 1991_) EeCty Miller, Aseotfate Engineer, preemitl the atat! report sad at,.°w that staff had received a letter from Gha Northwoode Properties Community Association reiterating their opposition to either of the parcels taking ac ceae via Northridge Drive. chairman McNiel opened the public hearing. Steve Luna, 8990 19th Street. 1203, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he was availab la to answer qua at ions. Commissioner Me lcher asked if Mr. Luna had any objections to Parcel 2 tak inq access from r7arthridge Drive. Mr. Luna responded he did not, but would prefer the configuration shown on the proposed parcel map. Linda Frost, president of Northwoods Propert ire Community Association, stated they had presented their position in the letter and in testimony at the March 27, 1991, meeting. She felt approval of the project should 6e based on access being Caken from the north end of the lots. She thought Lhat the new homeowners would not 6e required to honor the CC6RS of the Homeowners' Aeaociat ion. She said the CCSRa include strict architectural controls and prohibitions on leaving garage doors open and trash Cana out. Sha reported that the cc&Rs contain monetary penalities to members who do not comply. She thought that allowing any of the lots tc take accaea from Northridge Driv¢ would lead eo deteriotat ion of the landscaping. She felt the City hoe an o6liaation to the Homeowners' Association to prohibit access to Northridge Drive. Planning Ccrcmission Minutes -3- April .,, :, 2~t 3 Charles Uoecow, attorney repreeenting Northwoode Homeowners' Aeeaciation, 222 North Mountain Avenua, Upland, felt that theca had been almost complet¢ unanimity ezpreeeed at the Harsh 27 meeting ragacding prohibit ion of attest from Northridge Drive. He supported the first option suggested In the staff report. Ne said he did not understand the eoncerne ratted by the Planning Commieeicn. N¢ roqu¢eted that it acceee were to b¢ granted vla Northridge Drive that at least iha exterior of Lhe homes be subject Lo CC6Ne. Ne thought the ie sue should not bs important to the re et at the CLiy ae there wore only two lots in question. He reiterated the objection of the realdente to having access via Northridge Drive. Jim Nichols, Board of Diteeiorer Northwoode Homeowners' Aeeociaiion and chairman of the landscape committee, 10257 Coralwood Court, Aancho Cucamonga, et ated that etc Ef had abiectad Ln nn n• •n. a.......~.... w........ _ require a four-way acceee. He •aid there ware several each intereectione Ln their community, and they did not pone any probl¢me. N¢ f¢lt that iE either of the lots were given acceee oft Northridge Or1ve, Lt would ee[ a precedent for the other three lots to b¢ d¢veloped in the future. Ha ¢aid the reeldente were concerned that the lots will be equestrian and vehicles would be parked acroae the street. He said the CC6Be prohibit parkd.aq on the rtteee. H¢ thought that if acces¢ to Parcel 2 were given arsosa Portal 1, tea owner of Parcel 1 would rot bn able tc deny arose. Ha showed picturaa at the landscaping to the north of Northridge Drive, the community, and horse tra ilera parked on a attest. Commie stoner Chit tea queer toned the ownership of the landscaped area north of Northridge Drive. Hr. Nichols responded that it ie public right-of-way owned 6y the City. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman McNiel closed the public hearing. Commissioner Helcher stated he was convinced that Lhe proposal ae originally set forth was auoerior to the other toenarios presented. He cemreated it would allow development to go forth and would not neceeearily lead to unsafe streets. He felt Alternative 2 would require more etreeta. He stated that Northridge Drive is a public street and he felt the intelligent planning approach would require that at least Parcel 2 take access from Northridge Drive. Commissioner Chitiea concurred with Commiasionex Meloher that acceee should ee from Northridge Drive. Sha felt both parcels should do so. She thought the residents would be better off facing the front of homes, than the rear. She reiterated that Northwoode ie not a private community. Commissioner Tolstoy stated he had hoped it would 6e posei6le for both lccs to take access to the north, but after looking at the ownership and exietir.q :ct sizes, he did not feel a street syet em could be well designed to acccrc::an chat. He thought good planning would dictate that the lots facing Norchr.:-e Drive have access to Northridge Drive. He suggested that the owners .... .._ join the Homeowners' Aaeoc tattoo. Planning Commission Minutes -4- April 2~y Commissioner Valletta stated the item had been continued to allow time to plan Eor a better at coat access. she was concerned that proper 'fire aeceae be providetl. aha Lndieated that although ohs would like to agree wish the community's wiahae, she felt at a minimum Parcel 2 should ba aeeeaeed from Northridge Drive. ~ chairman McNiel thought Ghat the additional streets were inappropriate in order to accommodate only a few percale. He did not feel that restricting accaaa to Northridge Dx1ve represented good planning. He concurred with the remainder of the Planning Commission that the ptopert isa adj aeent to Northridge Drive should be aeeeaeed Ezom Northridge brive. Commissioner Toletoy agreed that all properties adjacent to Northridge Drive should front onto it. Barrya Hanson, Seniox Civil Engineer, asked if the Commieaionere wished to add a condition to require that owners join the Homeowners' Ae soelation. Ralph Hanson, Deputy city Attorney, stated a condition could be added that the property owners coopazate with the Narthwoode Properties Conavanity Aseeeiation, but the Aaaaeiatinn would have to vote to acespt them as mamhaza. Barrya Hannon asked Lf a sidewalk should be required on the north olds of Northridge Drive. Commissioner Chitiea felt it would be appropriate to not raga ire a sidewalk as a trail will ba provided. Harrye Hanson stated acme addit ionxl changes would have to be made to the resolution, such as the elimination of atantlard Condition 4. Aalph Harts on suggested the Commission may wish to direct staff to return with a resolution of approval. Drad Huller, City Planner, auggeeted that if Parcels 1 and 2 front Northridge Drive, the Commission may wish to relieve the Homeowners' Aesociat ion from maintaining that portion of the landscaping. He said that typically development of one or two houses is approved at the staff level, but staff hoe the option of referring it up to the Design Aeview Committee. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing to ask Mr. Luna it he would abject to continuing the item. Mr. Luna consented to continuing the matter. Mr. Coleman suggested that if both parcels front onto Northridge Drive, it may change the variance request. Ralph Hanson stated that a change to the variance would require the item be readvert ised. Mr. Luna agreed to continue the matter to allow for readvert is ing. Planning Commission Minutes -~- April 24S Motion: Moved by Chltiea, seconded by Toletoy, to contSnue Environmental Aaeeeemant and Tantatiw Parcel Map 13693 and variance 91-D4 to May 22, 1991. Notion carried by the following vote: AYES: COMHIS$IONER3: CH ITIEA, MCNIBL, HELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE ~ NOE3: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: NONE -oaYried - VICTORY CHA PF:. - a., •+ ._ _ __ - ~~~~ „e„ ci,n appllc lan r Condit ionel U9e Permit 91-01 ie, incaspleta. • Thia applioani ie a re est to locate a temporary modular multi-purpose building of 9 square fee n the Bite of the axiating 6,000 square foot Victory Cha , locnted on acres within the Industrial Park Diatxitt (SUbar 7) o£ the Induetra 1 Area Speeif is Plan at 13837 Foothill soul axd, weal of Rochester venue - APN: 229-011-21. Related F11~: Conditional Vae Permit 82-0 Steve Hayes, Associ Planner, presented the staff re Commissioner Melcher as d if the applicant wool be permitted to occupy a temporary modular bu ildSng 'f they applied for a were granted a variance. Mr. Hayes responded that th Commi.asion c ld direct staff to require a variancz to relieve the applica of the quirement for a master plan. He suggested a variance could be proc eed i connection with the conditional use permit application. Commissioner Melcher felt the trail woo be permanent eo long ae the use ie there. Dan Coleman, Principal Planne stated that th CommSSaion policy in the past had been tc approve tempo ry trailers for a 'mited time, generally two years, subject to Commiesi approval of lima exten one. Chairman McNiel opened~Che public hearing Bob Wood, see istan pastor, Victory Chapel, 11337 Foothill oulevaxd, Rancho Cucamonga, state their main building ie located in an old sty buiidinq, which has a Si led life. He said they rent the building on a th-te-month basis. He dicated the owner plena to demolish the building build a business p k. He Ee 1t it would be impossible Eor the church to Quids a maatez p n because the owner has auhmitted a master plan. He said th owner of the roperty was planning to build a 10,000 square Eoot building fo the char and was in the process of submitting the project to the City. e eo soled that there are many modular buildings in Rancho Cucamonga and sat ey were willing to accept a time limit. He indicated they were willing to Plano ins Ccmmisaion Minutes -6- April 21, .... L'l ~-1' CITY OF &ANCHfI (;TiCAMONC.A STAFF REPORT DATE: April 24, 1991 TD: Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior C1vi1 Engineer BY: Betty A. Miller, Associate Engineer auoai wT. Ln:: n~i'.v`.:T.'.'.. '..°..°0..~'°!`T "un TCUnTIwc Daoril We 11603 - MINA - A su v son o acre o an n parce s n ery Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the north side of Northridge Drive, west of Haven Avenue - APN: ZO1-182-29. Related file: Variance 91-04. Staff reco~aends issuance of Negative DKlarotlon. (Continued from MarcA 27, 1991) I. BACKGROUND: This lies was continued from the March 27, 1991 Planning ~C~ission meeting in order for staff to Investigate alternative master plans for the area to the north to see if a better access could be provided to Parcel 2 of this proposed parcel mep. A copy of the previous staff report is attached for your reference. fI. DISCUSSION: The proposed parcel map and its relationship to the master p a~T's shown on Exhibit "H". Note that the Exhibits start with "H" in this reDOrt to not be confused with A thru G contained to the March 27, 1991 report. Several master plan layouts were investigated. The main constraint controlling the master planning effort is that only one street, aifgned with Cartilla Avenue on the north side of Wilson Avenue, can serve the master plan area fraa either Nilson or Haven Avenues. Both of these streets are arterials, with intersection spacing restricted to 600 feet. Even 1f closer spacing were allowed, an additional street connection would provide secondary access to the master plan area, but would not solve the concern of access to Parcel 2. The master plan shown on Exhtbtt "I" is the most straight forward in providing direct street access to Parcel 2; however, it has the following disadvantages: 1. It utilizes a four-way local to local street intersection which 1s discouraged because studies have shown that they Droduce more accidents than 'tee' intersections. 2. It imposes substantially more street improvements and right-of-way upon existing Parcel 28 which already has streets on two sides. 3. The additional street right-of-way will preclude the portion of existing Parcel 28 at the southwest corner of Cartilla and Street "A" from being subdivided into two parcels. PLANNING COMMiSSION .PF REPORT TENT DM 13693 - LUIU APRIL 24, i991 PAGE 2 4. Lot 2 of the future subdivision of existing Parcel 30 will be depeiMeM upon the development of Parcel 28 for access. ' 5. it restricts the future subdivision of the portion of existing Parcel 30 south of Street "A" to four parcels versus five as shown an Exhibit "K". 6. It increases the variance required for the proposed Parcel Map (an additional 6001 square feet of lot area lost t0 street dedication on Parcel 2). 7. Most importantly, the master plan does not solve the immediate concern of access to Parcel 2. The southerly extension of Cart111a Avenue, which would provide that access, is on property nvt owned by this applicant. The second master pt an shown on Exhibit "J" somewhat lessens disadvantages 2 and 3 of the master pi an shown on Exhibit "N", but introduces a skewed intersection which adversely affects safety. Exhibit "K" 1s a refinement of the master plan shown on previous Exhibit "C". It shows that an additional two parcels could conceivably be obtained south of Street "A" using that master plan street alignment. III. CONCLUSION: Staff was able Lo design a master plan that could provide onl g f:erm direct street access to Parcel 2, but that master plan dons present other disadvantages and does not provide an inamdtate access solution. The Comatsston appears to have the following options: 1. Approve the Parcel Map as proposed with Parcei 2 taking access across Parcel 1 to Cabrosa P1 ace. 2. Approve the Parcel Nap modified Lo require that (a) both parcels or (b) Parcel 2 only take access from Northridge Drive. 3. Deny the Parcel Map as proposed directing the applicant to reftle a new Parcel Map (and variance) conforoing t0 the master plan shown on Exhibit "I" or "J" and to obtain access rights across the adJacent property extending to Nilson Avenue. Respectfully submitted, ~r~~ /~ Barrye R. Hanson Senior Civil Engineer BRH: dl w Attachments: MMMaaastter pPllan Arep7at(E2x2hlbElhtthH"") I Master Plan - Alt: 3 4Exhtbit "J"~ Master Plan - Alt. 4 !Exhlblt "K" March 27, 1991 Staff Report ~C1 (b .~ ('~p tt „ ~~~ ~ality a z /V / la' 111P1_~LFL~ 9 r i 1 ~~ ~-~ ® ~ it ~~__ ~ ~ -. Q "~ i - --~ I ' ' -------------------'--------i :-; ' 1 i ~ ""'. ® i d , r'} ,~ ~ _.: --------------------- N ~.: ~rv ~grr.a -~ ' ~ _-__ i -- ~ i i~ t e I 6 ~ ~ _ }-_. _~ ~ __________ aOV _ osgigv) 2 c{ lp4(~ I ~ v l _~`V' -~ s.y A~AS~Ie \ O _.. i LAS `~' ;,~> ~, ~_~ ~ c-- -, li _, G~ OS U z 2~1~1 U ~ O z as w -~Uaiii~~ `(~iiginai roo~_~ y ~ ~z r,-\\ry. \ ~ i e y ® I ~ 1© 1 I I I ® C I I ~ ~ N y ~ ' __ __ %~ ~,_ ~ i -~ 6 '~ ~ ~n~ n P I ® _ ©__ __ __.w I ¢ I i G~: ~,~ oS ~ P ~ I ~ ~___ ______ ~ r F z .__ __ _____ _. aacjd ,auv4% C ~ _~ ^ `~ As r ~ I O ~ a u , i 2 ' Z ~ [[ I y oCd~~ W i I ® ~ ~ ! •-, ~ _ ~~: ~ _~. <~, - = ,~ -- ti,.o~ - 3~ -~ ---T--~~ j ;~_ ~- j v t t~ Il-. I"~~ I---- 2 ~_ ~_ ._,, ~~ i i _~ -~ a e o " ~ o U Q=a ~z '~ d z ~x ~ 'Qrig~nai Poar qua+~~ Qz _ -~ ~~ -=.w.ud- -~~ ~ i ® ~ ~ ~ + ~ i ~ -~ ~- i j ----- --- ~-:--~~ ---- -- - Y ; ~ l i {. m ~ ® ,t a I Y~ ~~ ~ ~ N ~ i c ~ ~ ~.1i ai ~ t ~~` ~ I_________ ~ t 0 _ _____ ____~_~ Z i~ a~yd °i~4PJ S ; ` M ~ I ~ i~ i a ~ < Q 1 i ] O w u' 2 i A ' ~ ~~ i. e_o ~ c I ~~ I ~ 301 .~ Y r e o~ U C7 O ~ Z v U p~~+ ~ ~Z 'dri~inal Poor ~`»'~+Y =- J \ s - -~ ~ --__ c-; c. L~\~J ~ '.. I ~ ~, ~ ~ I© ; I ~ n~ ~i I ~'• ~ I li • ra ~-~ F ' .a.. s•w5 H ~ ® ~ ~ r~ I,i a i ; ~, cnr ~~ ', ' r! -7 ,ctv ----- - --- -t-- - ~ _. -g N ~ N '_. ~ ~ i ~~ ~ ~ ` ~ ~ I' ... ~ ~ n_ 1 I ~ - i 1 I I ~ f Y ~ l I e _ w ;1i c ti ~ P v X _ k~ ~ 1___-____.. ~ I ~ l_~I ~~ x ~ S ._________ -' aav/d °~9°9 __ ___~ - S I ,= dIl ~ , _ ~ 4 I py~~ F _, ~~ ~ r ~ I .J K,~ Y . ~ O UI i _ i ~ Z 2 I ~ l ' ~ u I c ~1 ~ % i ~WW~~ ,. ', - e ~~ ~ - o `~ ! ~ ~, ~, ~ ~ _ i _..~ ~ _ ~... ~, I I U / y M . O U/~ ~• U 3OZ U a ~ ..... p, NVTAM1NMF TAi AS iSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 13693 - LUNA - A subdivision of 1.0 acre of land into 2 parcels In the Very Low Residential ~ Ole trict (less than 2 dwelling units per acre), located on the north aide of Northridge Drive, west of Naven Avenue - APN: 201-182-29. Stott recommends ieauance of a Negative Declaration. Icont inued fxom March 13, 1991.) E. VARIANCE 91-04 - LUNA - A request to allow a reduction of the minimum average lot size Erom 22,500 to 21,540 square feet for a two-lot parcel map in the Very Low Residential ^ietrict flaw than 2 dwelling unite per acre), located on the north eider of Northridge Drive, west of Maven Avenue - wPN: !U1-1tl2-1 Y. Betty Miller, Aasocinte Engineer, presented the staff report fox Parcel Map 13693 and Dan Coleman, Principal Planner, presented the staff report for Variance 91-04. Commissioner Melchor asked if the streets are public or Driwb. Me. Miller responded that rho strwts are public. Commieaiener Valletta asked if the street connects to the development to the west. Mr. Coleman stated that Northridge ^rive is the only street from Chia community which abuts other undeveloped petrels. commissioner N.e lcher asked the intent of Northridge Drive at the time the project to the south was approved. Mr. Coleman replied the intent waa to provide access to tAe projects to the notch. Ne ea id at the ruse the neighboring project was approved, the land to the north was zoned Low Medium, but it was eubeequently rezoned to Very Lou. Commiaeio nor Tolstcy asked if Northridge Drive was oiig innlly intended to be a cul-de-sac, Mr. Coleman replied there have been several master plane, come ere a knuckle street and some as a eul-de-sac. Rarrye Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer, stated that the street was constructed to cul-de-sac standards. Commissioner Melchor asked if a solid block wall was Doing added as a condition on the trail. Me. Miller responded affirmatively Commissioner Melchor questioned the equestrian easement. Planning Commission Minutes -5- March 2%, -. ~_ 303 Mt. Coleman stated there ie a 15-foot private easement for equestrian purpoeea. Commieeioner Heleher asked 1f the amount of frontage left at the southeast corner of Cabroea Place would he enough curb face for a standard ree identiaY driveway. Hr. Hanson responded affirmatively. Chairman McNiel opens] the public hearing. Steven Lunar 8990 19th Street, Rancho Cucamonga, stated he was available to enewer questions. Chairman HcNiel asked how Boon he plnnnad to builtl. Hr. Luna replied that ha hoped to build two sing is family residences within a year. He Bald he planned to live Ln one. Ha said that following the neighborhood meeting, he red¢aigned his lore to aecommodata the desires of the neighbors. Linda Proat, 1D36D Mahogany Court, Rancho Cucamonga, stated. she ie Prsaldent of the Northwood Homeowners' Aasoeiat ion, which represents 294 homes immediately south of the project. She agreed with the staff report and the decision agreed to by the developer. She requested thnt ree Ldante from the Homeowners' Association stand up 1n the audience, and approximately 20 people stood up. She said she had over 150 signetl letters from residents, and the major concerns were in the area of CC6A enforcement, particularly concerning landscaping antl traffic/parking control. She said they felt that the addition of equestrian lots on the north side with an egress to Northridge Drive •eou ld rct be in keeping with the higher density neighborhood to the south. She objected to disturbance of the slope's landscaping which is maintained b_v the Homeowners' Assoc iat ion. She said the CC&A9 restrict street parking. She indicated the Y.emeeuners' AasoC.ation supports the present configuration with the lots ba ckiny up to Northridy¢ Drive. Mike Nickles, 30409 Northridge Drive, Aancho Cucamonga, stated evetyene felt they had purchased in a semi-private community and they liked the limited access and were oppoeed to any houses taking access from Northridge Drive because of iner¢aaed traffic. He also felt the limited access deters crime. He thought it either of the new homes were to take across from Nort hrid qe ^rive, they would potentially have large horse trailers which could cause traffic problems on Northridge Drive. Charles 0oekow, 222 North Mountain, Upland, stated he had been asked o rte homeowners to comment. Me said the maintenance agreement requiring that the Homeowners' Aseotiat ion maintain the slope to the north of Northridge =r:~~e constituted a morally persuasive covenant, if not a legal document, ba:.aer. them and the City that the integrity of the neighborhood tour: .,~ maintained. He eaitl the ree idents feel the neighborhood's secur:a7 ~, . privacy would be threatened if any lots to the north are given acre.;, ~.. Northridge Drive. He felt that the change of zone to larger lots to tte •- 2lanning Commission Minutes -6- March 30~~ woultl chnnge any original idea that there should have been acceee to the north. Wayne Graf, 6347 Northridge Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, etated he hatl worked har$ to buy hi¢ home and ha had thought there ware no plane Lo open up the street. He opposed acceee to Northridge Drive for nny houses from the north. He was afraid people would Put thrcugh the community a¢ a ehartcut. Hearing no further testimony, Chairman MCNiel closed the public hearing. Chairman McNiel etated that the Planning commission moat make sure that traffic can flow throughout the community. Me thought Chet everyone would like a private community, but not all communities can ba Private. He said ~i,ac people anouae not aeaume that late will remain vacant of etraeca will remain closed merely because they era currant ly vacant or closed. Comm iasioner Tolstoy asked if Cabreaa Place is in place and improved to Wilson Avenue. Hr. Hanson responded that it Le in place, but eat fully improved to Wilson Avenue. He ¢aid th¢ col-d¢-sac is cuzr¢ntly a¢rv¢d by a t¢mpocazy aee¢aa to Wilson Avenue, and the ¢vantual street alignment to the east and to the north of the jog is not dedicated or improved. commieaioner N¢lcher observed that Cha Planning Commieslon'e jab is to ensure good planning. He felt the proposed plan appeared to represent planning by the neighborhood, which does not necessarily preduee the beat results. He thought chat Parcel 1 would be undesirable because it would have a horse trail on one side and a roadway to Parcel 2 on the other aide. He felt the man was a bad plan with poor access and said he would prefer that Parcel 2 would be ens it letl to future access to Northr itlge Drive, ae he felt that the owners of Parcel 1 might one day block acceee to Parcel 2. He did not feel that allowing one lot to gain acceee to Northridge Dtive would negatively impact the cammumty. Commissioner Chit lea etated she agreed with Commise inner Melcher up to a point. She did not feel that concerns of exceae traffic were justified because the atteete were not planned to go through. She ditl not feel it would be appropciate to acceee both parcels off cabroea Place. She also felt Parcel 1 ahoultl not face cabroea if Parcel 2 faces Northridge. commise inner Valletta etated that the convnunity to the eeuth of the proposed lots decided a long time ago to be an association and she felt further access to the community would invalidate the controls of the aaeociat ion. She said she had seen similar driveways in planned cenm:unities and although she did rot feel it necessarily represents good planning, she did feel it to be an appropriate compromise to the needs o£ the community to the south. Commissioner Tolstoy did not feel the two lots should face Northridge Dr:~,e, but thought there should be a better plan to provide acceee for Parcel 2. I:e felt the plan should be studied further, ae he felt each lot should -. 3~:e access Co Wilson Avenue in some other way. Planning Cemmissien Minutes -7- Marc^ 305 Chairman NeNlal asked what plane there were for access for the lots to the east of the Bite. Ma. Miller responded that staff had prepared the master plane included Ln the staff report, and there are no concrete plane for the area ae no projects have bean submitted ae yet. Mr. Hanson felt the current decie ion matle by the Planning Commission may well set [he precedent for which way other lots will face. Chairman McNiel reopened the public hearing Co ask if the applicant would consent to a continuance to allow further coneidaretion. He aaketl if it woultl be possible to contact the other property owners to master plan the area, ......,...e ... ..... ... .... e....e ,er ., rla..,: ...... .,er ,.,, ..,.. .~~s,.e a .,... ,.. sense. Mr. Luna responded that he hoped to start building within a year, but it was not neeaseary to receive approval this evening. Chairman McNie1 asked if Lt would ba uuptabla to the applicant to ^^^r.^,,. the item for two weeks to address a batter s,aatan plan. Hr. Hannon stated that two weeks would not allow enough time. He. Hiller stated that staff had skatchxd out the master plane and not asked the applicant to do a lot of master planning bacnuea it was felt that might be excessive for a two-lot parcel map. Commissioner Melcher felt a better layout could be found. Ccemissionar Tolstoy agreetl that more thought should be given to the layout. Mr. Coleman stated there was considerable discussion at the Trails Committee ae m where the Gt'ail wosid ba located on the two pamele. He recommended that the project be returned to the Trails Committee if thangee were proposed. Commies io ner Chit lea stated that if the lots were split with one facing north and the other facing south, horeekeeping on bosh properties woultl be effectively eliminated because of the distance from the neighboring house. Hrad Bu list, City Planner, stated that providing access would not necessac ily mean that a home woultl architecturally front a street. Ccmmissioner Melcher stated he was in sympathy with the idea that the zone change is a significant one because it is a matter of equestrian Iota adjacent to non-equestrian lots. He said he would .ika the land north of Northridge Drive Go be developed without access to Northridge, but hs did not feel the proposetl plan was a good one. He felt time should be taken to consider if a better plan could 6e developed. Hs. Miller asked iF the current proposal coultl be considered as a temporary eo lotion until development is proposed on the adjoining parcels to the east. Planning Conmisa ion Hinutes -8-2 / March 2. Jib Ralph Hannon, Deputy City Attorney, stated that any plan drafted at this paint would have tp be treated ae purely conceptual and aM ion could only be taken on the two parcels under coneiderat ion. Commissioner Melchor fait a ublic streak could ~ p potentially be brought down to the northeast corner of the applieant•e lot to allow access for both parcels to the north. Mr. Buller stated that any master planning would simply be used ae a reference document to be used ae future applications aze received tot adjoining propert iee. Ha asked if there was anything in the conditions prohibiting Parcel 2 from obtaining aeceee from the east or the north. Ne thought the Commission could approve the nrolect ana Further direct. ekafE t,. n.,vo~,... . master plan for the surrounding properties. Commissioner Melchor stated he wanted to ana the maetec plan developed Eiret. He wanted to know what would be a logical street system which would eventually give Parcel 2 legal accaee to a public street without having to go across another property. earrye Hanson atatad M would like tl:a davaloper to work on the waster planning. Hr. Buller suggested that the item be continued to Apzil 26, 1991, with the potential of continuing the item tuzehet it it were determined that more time would be needed. Chairman HeNiel asked if Mt. Lnna would object to a continuance to April 24. Mt. Luna replied that would 6e acceptable. Commissioner Chitiea stated that if temporary access were given from Northridge Drive, it would interrupt the Landscaping end there would be no guarantee that accaee would ever be available to the north. Ccmmise inner Valletta asked if the other Commiesionere agreed that access should npt be taken from Northridge Drive. Commissioner Chit iee did not feel it would be appropriate to preclude access from Northridge Drive ae no streets were being proposed ko be punched through to the north.- She did not feel it would be a severe impact to allow access for two lots, with a potential of only three additional lots, io a public street built to regular City standards. Notion: Roved by Melcherr seconded by Toletoy, to continue Envirp nmental Assessment and Tentative Parcel Hap 13693 and Variance 91-C4 to April 24, 1991. Motion carried by the fallowing vote: AYES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCNIEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE ABSENT: COHMISSIONE RS: NONE -carried Planning Ccrtm iasion Minutes -9- ~ Ma: ch :.' ~~ DATE: March 21, 1991 c1Tr of xat.cxo cucaslo~;ca STAFF REPORT e~3 - T0: Chairman and Members of the Planning Caawlssion FROM: Barrye R. Hanson, Senior Civil Engineer BY: Betty A. M111er, Associate Engineer SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 13693 - LUNA - R su v son o acro o en n paroe s n cry Low Residential District (toss than 2 dwiling units per acro), located on the north side of Northridge Drive, west of Naven Avenue - APN: 201-182-29. Related file: Variance 91-M I. DROJECT AMD SITE DESCRIPTIOM: A. Action nested: Approval of the proposed Tentative Parcel Map as sown on x t "B" and issuance of a Negative Declaration. R. Parcel Stze: Parcel 1 - 20,580 sq. ft. Parcel 2 - 22 500 sq. ft. Tata1 33;UB6 sq. ft. (0.99 ac) C. Existing Zoning: Very Low Residential 0. Surrounding Land Use: North - East half vacant; west half has two single family residences and a third under construction South - S1ng1e Family Residential East - Vacant Nest - Norse Corral E. Surrounding General P1 an and Develoaaw!nt Code Desl9nations: North - Very Low Residential South -Low-Medium Res/dentlal East - Yery Low Residential Mast - Yery Low Residential F. S1te Characteristics: Th1s site 1s vacant and slopes to the south a percent. ero is an existing wrought iron fence along the south protect boundary on the rarth side of Northridge Drive. ~nQ PLANNING COMMISSI~ STAFF REPORT TENT PM 13693 - LL..~ NARCN 27; 149! DACE 2 II. ANALYSIS: The purpose of this parcel nap is to subdivide a one acre parcel Into two half acre parcels consistent with the Very Low Residential District designation. Staff initially recoambnded that both lots front onto Northridge Drive, because 1t was felt that the fronts of houses would present a care aesthetic streetscape for the homes to the south than would a rear yard wall. There was also some concern about the raster planning implications for vacant parcels to the north and east of the protect site. Staff rxannmended that the applicant hold a neighborhood meeting on the tentative parcel map, since Parcel Msp 5496 to this vicinity had generated significant neighborhood interest. Residents of the development on the south side of Northridge Drive have made it clear, both during the neighborhood meeting and to subsegwnt canamnmcattens directed to staff, that they abtect tv lots fronting on the north side of Northridge Drive. Respxttng the neighbor's wishes, the applicant Ts raw proposing to xcess both parcNs aM a singTs drive approach on Cabrosa Place, with a 20-foot ride access esseamnt along the north property line of parcel 1 to favor of parcel 2. Both access configurations, using Cabrosa Place versus Northridge Drive, were presented to the trails Conelttee to deterwlne what the focal equestrian troll requirements would be under the two optional master plans. The applicable recawendations have been included in the conditions of approval. A Fire Protection District representative has also reviewed the proposed mp and suggested a condition of approval allowing them to rev/ew the access to parcel 2 upon development. A. Master Planning: Three large vacant parcels remain north and east of the project site. The City's xcess policy for arterial streets will allow one additional intersection on Nilson Avenue between Mayberry and Haven Avenues. Exhlblt "C" illustrates how this area might be developed if the concept of no access to Northridge Drive 1s also applied to the balance of the vacant property. Exhibit "0" shows how the same area could be developed if up to 5 lots were allowed to front onto Northridge Drive. The issues are as follows: 1. In both aiternatlves, all of the master planned cul-de-sacs exceed 600 feet in length. In Exhlblt "C", three cul-de-sacs (21 lots) will utilize a single access point on Nilson Avenue. In Exhibit "D", two cul-de-sacs (18 lots) will do so. The Ft re Protection District has not expressed concern with either aiternatlve, stnce all new home construction requires sprinklers. The difference between 18 and 21 lots is nominal. `3oq PLANNING COMMISSION AFF REPORT TENT PN 13643 - LJHA MARCN 27, 1991 PAGE 3 2. Exhibit "D" does allow the local equestrian trail system to be interior to the VL district rather than on the pert meter,' adJacent to Northridge Drive. 3. A detail was provided, on the Conceptual Grading P1 an (Exhibit "E") of a north-south cross section (Exhibit "F") taken through parcel 1 and Northridge Drive, to illustrate the relative position of houses, streets, trails, and slopes. Note that sides of houses will be visible tram the south side of Northridge Drive 1n the proposed conflouratton, unless the height of the perimeter wall is increased. Under the alternate :Waster plan, that vier would be of front yards. 4. if access to parcel 2 is taken tram Cabrosa Place, that drlvewgy will be more than 200 feet long. The Ftre Protection District will need a way for its vehicles to turn around or have an alternate exit route avatlabTe. B. Neighborhood Concerns: A neighborhood meeting was Weld on December 18, 1990. Attendees included residents of Northwood Vistas, a Low-Medium Residential development (4-8 dwelling units per acre) lwacdiately south of the protect site, and the owners of a vacant parcel east of the protect site. The residents of korthwood Vistas obiected to fronting either parcel onto Northridge Drive for three masons: 1. The larger lots on the north side of Northridge Drive can accommodate equestrian uses. Use of the neighborhood streets by large vehicles such as horse trailers would conflict with the homeowners association prohibition against recreational vehicle storage. 2. The homeowners association currently maintains the parkway slope on the north side of Northridge Drive. Residents obJect to driveways disrupting the existing slope landscaping and perimeter fencing. 3. The residents perceive Northwoods Villas as a close-knit community and feel that the VL lots proposed would be uncharacteristic of that camaunity. They would not anticipate the acceptance of those lots Into the homeowners association, if such a request were made. Subsequent to the neighborhood meeting, the City has received 133 signed form letters (ExA1b1t "6") from members of the Northwood Homeowners Association, objecting to any plans to construct driveways or streets leading Into the coewunity from Northridge Drive. They feel this would compromise their privacy and security. 3~ o PLANNING COMMISSION ..iAFP REPORT TENT PM 13b93 - LUNA MARCH 27, 1991 PAGE 4 Trails Advisory Committee: The Committee reviewed the pro,)ect on Gebruary 20, 1991, and recommended the following trail requirements: 1. If the proposed access conflguratlon is used (access from Cabrosa Place), a 15 foot wide local feeder trail should be provided along the entfre southerly boundary of Parcels 1 and 2, and a 30 foot wide local feeder trail should be provided along tha wN NAe ns o..,.,a o 2. If the alkrnak is used (access Fran Northridge Orive), a 15 foot wide local feeder trail should be provided along the entire northerly boundary of Parcels 1 aM 2. III. CONCLUSION: The proposed subdivision is caepetlble with ad}scent proper on the rarth side of Northridge Orfve and the related maskr plan (Exhibit "C"), although not optlelai, 1s workable. Skff has reservations about providing accass k Cabrosa Place for parcel 2 across parcel 1, but given the concerns of the existing rostdents on Northridge Drive, believes the applicant has offered a viable solution. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REYIEN: The applicant completed Part I of the Initial the yInltial StudyuckdNo adversenvimpactsioupond Lhe~lentvironmentilare anticipated as a result of this protect. Therefore, issuance of Negative Declaration is appropriate. V. CORRESPONDENCE: Notices of Public Hearing have been sent to surrourMing property owners and placed in the Iniand Valley Daily Bulletin. Posting at the site has also been completed. VI. RECOMIENDATrDN: It is recameended that the Planning Coentssion consider a npu an elements of the TentaLlve Parcel Map 13693. If after such consideration, the Cawaisston can reCOmaend approval, then the adoption of the attached Resolution and issuance of a Negative Declaration would be appropriak. Respectfully submttkd, ~i-rr ~tS~~'~a~v~ O `"~B~_ Barrye R. Hanson Senior Civ11 Engineer BRH:BAM:d1w Attachments: Vicinity Map (EZhiblt "A") TentaLlve Map (Exhibit "B") AAprea MaskMraPlan (Exhi(bit "C"") Conceptual G~a~~ngl~aV~E~~zhiDtit `t`") 1 Samp a NameowneriLetterh(Exhtbtt)"G") 3 t~ Resolution and Recoaanended Conditions of Approval I ~~-_ ,wG N ~y~.,PARCFJ-MAP 13bg3 T~~VICINITY MAP _ CITY OF ONGA " p, " R,e,NCHO CUCAM err, ~ QiGD~~G DIVISION 31'L II •T/~ l ~ m+^ ~ 8 MI .~ } { y Y. ' ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~-~ _ ` ¢ ~ i to ~ ., f, ';~ -~ - --T -_ I is i a . t ~ I, , I .~ i~ ~ }per /.YIE d~ i Ivv I ~ ~ ~ W I ,/ I v I iN i ~ ~ .. ,W ., /~"''~~i '", ~'Ix a ~~ ~ ~ - ~~ ~l~ tly)a~ fi ~ ,\ U 1 ! 1 •I V 1A i I/ `I I ~ ' ~ ' Ih~~ ~I I ~ K o~ ~„ ~~~ is m ~ ' ji ~ ~ ~ i ~--` `~ rv17 1 Ip M/ t 'i , , w ~ ^~ ~' I `tiY ~ a~a "S u~ ~'~ I l I i ` C'~ C ~"A: 1 O ,sp ~. ~ a ,~~ <r ~• eF I z. i u vi ~ 1 I I ~ Q~i :.~ $n / ~ . vcg 1 ~ f 8 O ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~; I ~y ~~R ~~ a 4 ~ A ~H~ ~ ~ ~ M Y 9., _ C1~ i ~ I ~J).3 U C~ w ~`''1 ~ /% ~ i ~~ 'Q~igina(_Poor Quality ~~ Y S I~ ~ ~ ~ I ~' / ~__~~ ~ 4 ~.; ~ ~ •c,~ .L-~s9ASv -~. ~-~ --. 3 ~ ~I L~ -''~ i O ._~ ~ V i~' ,,+ ~~ I ;' i. ~_ i ~.~:~ _,~ ~ ©:_1I ~' ~.-~~~ FI O,' ., ~. ~%~-~ i:;- /...=. _ ; I,_ ~ .: -- z~ U ~ O = U Z v U ~ ~ ~xanr canny ~_, , ~..R ~n; ~~ , . ..••bu~a~ i UUI__~J.,iiliy ~r `~: ~QZ ~'H ` • ~---~ %~ ~.. -o~ ~ . ~ ~ yiJ~p~ ,i ~ .O; ~' ;., ~:ii .e ;~~ ~- ~.e ~; .., ., , ~ -^~~ Q•-. ~ i ;. ^t ~~: ~~ uu y-10 ~.: 1 ~ >:. C~-~y ~I i ~.: l ~„~' ~` -, _ -- . 1.. _ :~~ 3i S C7 zgo Q ~ n U ~ O V ~z n U ~ '7~' • -`~` ;1 dr. ~,n,. F'oc, ~ uafity _~7ca 1 ~ ' ,~ -~ 1 ~ ~~? '~. i ~:`~ ~ ~ ~ i 1- :~` !IC 0 1 E9 y ~ ' ~ _ I ~ ~ a N _~' m ~* _ ~ t ( ~~ N - ~~ f ~~` /' Ni . _-_ 1~ 1 ' 1 ~J ' -_ .~ ~i ~ ; , ; ;--- ` -.a .; I jv I ~ r ~ ~V I~ _~.~ ' i 4 +~ I ' ~ ~ I' t T ~ ~'~ Y ~' F ~ `a -~' ~~ ~ ~~, ~ 1 __ ~ . ~ ~~ 1 ~ I I ~OiI -p -~i~l ~ A ~rl~" I J ~ V C7 . , i- --- - GTi 0 ~ F\ ~ O y ~ i ~ 31to~ '~ U ~ ~ 4I 'Original_Poor ~ual~ry ~~;: ~' ~ _. ~, ,, `31~ I _~ .~ .Q .3 _~ e O ~ ~ U ~ O U V U a ~ February 09, 1991 ~~,C City Of Rancho Cucamonga ••' CUf.;N9 `i a.' Post Office Box 807 "` ~~UIV~S~GN Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91789 ATTN: Steve Rass, Assistant Planner dear Mr. Ross, I am a Y.omeosvner in the Northwood Community. Z strongly object to any city plans to construct driveways or streets leading into our community from Northridge. The privacy and security of our community are of great importance to me. As a member of Northwood Homeowners Association and having a shared interest in all Northwood Community affairs, I am entitled to receive information and notification concerniny hearings or meetings aiiecting the Northwood Community. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ENGIIQEERING DIVISION 1TEM: PARCEL MAP 13b9'S TITLE;SANIPIE HOMFl1wNER LETTE EXI~IT: G 3-0 ~~ ~~ Sincerely, ' RESOLUTION NO. 91-41 A AE60LUTI0N OP THB PLANN INO COMMISSION OP THE CITY OP ~ RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, CONDITIONALLY APPROVING TENSATIV6 PARCEL NAP NUMHEA 13fi93, LOCATED ON TH6 NORTN BIDB OP NOATHRIDOB DRIVE, WEST OP HAVEN AVENUE, AND MAKING FINDINGS TN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 203-182-29 WHEREAS, Tantrtiw Parcel !up Number 13693, submitted by Nt. and Nra. s. Luna, applicants, for the purpose of aubtllvidinq into 2 parcels, the real property sitwtetl Ln the City of Raneho Cucamonga, County of ssn eernardlno, State of Cal lfornla, ldantllSad a APN: 201-382-29, loeaiad on th. ~ -!~ p,-. of Norehridn.. n+~..m .,oc_ ,,, ,,.re:. nvsnus, and WHEREAS, on March 27 and continued Go April 24, and May 22, 1991, the Planning Coaaniuinn held a duly advert iaed public hearing for the abovs- dsatribetl map. 8OLLOfiB: NOM. TFdRElOItE• TN6 RAECRO CUCAMONGII PLlIIIIITIIO C0t9t2 SEY0N RESOLVES AE BECTION 1: Thar the follcainq fintlings haw bNn made: 1. That the map L consLbnt with the Genssal Plan. 2. That the impsovament of the psopowd subdivision La consistent with the General Plsn. 3. That the sib is physically euitable for the propoud development. 8. That the propoud subdivision and improvement will not cause substantial environmental damage ar pu611c hnlth problems or Nave adveru atfeot^ on abutting properties. SECTION 2: Th1s Coaanias ion find^ and certifies that tM project has been reviewed and considered in compliance with the California Enviromaantal Quality Act of 19707 and further, this Commissicn hereby issues a Negative Declaration. B$,QTfON 3: Tentative Parcel Map Number 13693 i^ hereby approved eubjeci to CM attached Standard Conditions and the following Speual Conditions: 1. Parcel 1 shall take acceu from Cabroea Place and Parcel 2 shall take access from Northridge Drive. The aeeus easement over Parcel 1 in favor of Parcel 2 shown an the tantaeiw map shall be removed. 2. Provide a 35-foot wide local feedes trail along the a~~.:e northaYly boundary of Patcele 1 and 2. All other etaila •- . on the tsneative map shall be removed. 31~ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOWTION NO. '1i-,1 PM 13693 - LUNA May Z2, 1991 7aye s 3. Building setbuk llnsa shall b• plotted on the ylnal Pared Nap to the satLGCt ion of the city Planner. <. The structure on parcel 2 shall be caviawsd by the Planning Division for cgnpatlbility with the Northwoods Comaunity to the south. 5. The irrigation rystem for the existing landaeaping on the north side o[ Northridge Drive shall M madifles so that the portion fronting parcel 2 La connected to the new house, upon devdopaNnt. TM Northwoode Prorertiw C^"'""ni`.; 'o'- ..• .hue o• relieved of wlntenanee rssponslbility for •the portion o! Northridge Drlvs front Lnq parcel Z once that connection i• made. 6. Covenants, Coesitione and Asairletions (CC6AS) shall W places on Pareel 2 which are compatible with tM applicabU provlalons of the uw ceatstet~^~• of the Northwooda Ptopeetiw Camownlty Aesoeiatlan'• CCLAe, w approved by the Clty Plafiner aes Clty 6nginssr. 7. Install a decorative eEYwn wall along the south property line o[ Pareel 1, the design of which shall be reviewed and approves by the Planning Division. e. Private drainage dsvlees to convey flour from the cite and from the property north of the vita to the exist lnq public facilitio along the Wert and/or south boundaries shall bs installed to the wtisfaCtlan of tN Building O[fieial. Private drainage saeenNnts shall be shown on the Binal Parcel Nap a required by the Building and saHty Division, 9. Pursuant to pravisicnl at Cal lfornia Public Aeaourrw Code Section 33089(b), this appllcai ion shall not be operative, votes or final, nor will Du ilding permits be Suues or a map recordes, until (1) the Notice of Determination (NOD) regarding the awoeiated environwntal aeYlon is files and posted with tM Clerk of the Board of supervlaore of the County of San wrnardino~ end (2) any and all requires filing fws uwued pursuant tc California PLh and Gems Code Section 711.{, togstMr with any required handling charges, are paid io the County Clerk of tM County of Ban Bernardino. The eppliunt shall provide the 8nginwring Department with a stamped and Conformed copy of the NOD together with a receipt showing Ghat all fees hsvs been paid. . 320 PLANNING COMNISS ION RESOLUTION NO. 91-41 PN 13693 - LUNA nay 23, 1991 Page 3 In the event Chia application 1. Oebrmined exempt from ~ each filing fees pursuant to the yroviaLons of the CalifornL PUh and Gams Cods, or the guidelines promulgated thereunder, ezeept for payment of any required hnndlinq charge for filing a Certificste of Poo Exemption, this condition shall W deemed null end void. 30. Prior to the recordation of the final map or Leuaaee of building pernib, whicMVSC tomes Cint, the applicant shall wnuni to, oz participate Ln, the establlahmsnt of • neiiw-nwe c.a,munary rwaa acres uaacricc perucn>nq cm the project the to provide in conjunction with the appllcaDle school dLtrlot for LM eonstruetion and maintenance o[ neceuary school [aeil it lee. However, if any school district has pravlously established each a community Faoilitiea DLtsiet, the appllcasi shall, 16 the alternative, consent to the aonenalLon of iM project site into the teuitory of such esieilnq dietrice pzioc to the recordation of tM final map or tM 1a Nance of building permits, vhiehever cadre iiret. Further, if tM affected school dLtrict hen vrot [ormrd • Mel to-Roos Community FacilltLS District within twlw months of the dab of approval of the project and prior to the recordation of tM final maD or iuuanee of building permit for Bald project, Chic condition shnll bs deemed null and void. P.PPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 22ND DAY OP N11Y 1991. PLANNING COPQ~IISSION OF TH6 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA BY ATTEST r Chairman i, Brad eul Ur, Secretary of the Planning Commlu ion of tM City of Rancho Cucamonga, do herby certify that tM foregoing Resolution wu duly and regularly introduced, paced, and adopted by tM Planning Commiu ion o[ the City of Aaneho Cucamonga, at a regular meat ing o! the Planning Cooetieeion held on the 22nd day of May 1991, 6y the follouinq vole-to-wit: AYES: COMN29SI0NER9: MCNIEL, MELCNE R, VALLETTE NOES: COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, TOLSTOY ABSENT: CONMISSIONER9: NONE ZI 'prig~nal Poor duality P ., S ~-. _ -, _ t 'fr. ~8~ ~Fx a5 ~x_ wax :~^ :~ F}q j' ~___ ~~ ~~_ __ i ~ ~ ' o- . ~ ~5 ~ ~Y~ off ~8. g7. ~€C x~~' i..: _.: ~^~ as Q~ g~Y 'i 'I ~ I I ~ g .. ` ~ E.: " :~ p ~ a ' C° __ S x ~ $ S Y~ gay - S m A' B~ a~ • ~ ~ - e Le dz 8 ., ~E~~ 53 _ __ _~ ~~ yy c V - 7 =1 =Y ~ ~ E.- ~Y ~ e Y 0 _° ~ b - ~a~ Ex - = __ _ _ - a i 4g d'O ~~ I I ~~ ~ ~' t . ... =~Y ° E VI N tl ^~ -v . - M - &I I ,I 3 22 I~ I ~I I x :~ ,n - _- _ :_ -_ -- ~ - :A - - '_ f _ •~~ .Y. _a `o ~c _ :_ 9a8 gY Y~ _~ I -.Y_ * E3 3• -Y YY ~ I !-3 _ c o y ;le Y 'm = tl - ~Y Y ";&~ : - fie a~ -`a ~°~ ~ og`_ _ :Y eY - - 3 +6 _ .r ~e ~s 4s - ~E e ~E ~g _ E Z Y ~._ °_4' :€ €~ ._ - :Y S a°s e~ . _ I „: - al :E ;; - Sj Fe _,. q - H any ~ i ~~ `E ~~ °s ,: -x fiY ~' 5= ~~. 7G ~g~ S.~ - 'Y - gs~ „z ~. € 8 S ~_ ~~~ ~o :'Y ~g P-; - E" AI YES Y°~a 6~ Rao N.a. Org;r~i root ~~81;#y =? B E3 d5 P~: '~<^ Yoy~ I I o~ ~ ~ 3~~ ~ ~~ E Z„ fiS - .s __ ~o x= _ ~° _? s _, _ „s i 8 » oS ofi Y: fic _ - i ~ ` ~ „ i ~ ~: - °~ _ - --- 8 - ~~x ae ,~ ry ^ ~~ ~ i `a RESOLUTION NO. 91-42 A RESOLUTION OP THE PLANNING CONMISS ION OP THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMOMGA, CALIFOIINIA, APPROVING VARIANCE ~ NO. 91-OL TO ALLON A R6000TION O- TH6 NINIMDN AVBAA06 LOT SIZH PROM 22x500 TO 21,940 SQOAAL PEST AND A REDUCTION IR THE MIN INUM LOT DEPTH PROM 190 TO 130 FEET POA PARCEL NO. 2 FOR A TNO-LOT PARCEL NAP LOCATED ON TXE NORTH SIDE OP NORTNAIDGE DRIVE, NEST O! HAVEN AVENVS IN TNB VERY LOW RSSI06NTIAL OISTAICT, ANO NAEINO PI ND INGS IN SUPPORT THEREOF - APN: 201-162-29. A. (i) Steven R. Luna has filed an nppliontion for the ieaLLantf of variants No. 91-OL a dueribed in the title of chin Aasolutlon. Harainafbr in t^,• 9maolutlon, the au6ject Variance request la referred to a 'tM application.' (ii) on the 27tH o! Nareh 1991, and eoMinusd to the 11th of April and the 22nd oC May 1993, the Plam~inq Comaission of the City of Ranehq Cucamonga conducted duly noticed public hearings on the applltat lon and concluded said huringa on tMt dab. (Lii) All legal ptaraquisites prior to the adoption of thin Resolution have occurred. e. NON, TNEREFOPE, Lt Ss hereby found. debrmined, and resolved by the Planning Co®iaaion of the City of Rancho Cueanwnga as follows: 1. This Commiuion hereby apecifical ly finch that all of the facts act forth in the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution ere true and correct. 2. Sued upon subatutial evidtnn pruanted to thla Commission during the above-raferanced publ lc hearings on March 27, April 24, and Nny 22, 1941, lneludinq writbn and oral staff reports, together wlth public bat lmony, ehia Ca®lssion hereby spselfieally tlnds as follows, (a) The application applies to a vacant, undwalopad property located on Cabrosa Place, north of Northridge Drive with a depth o! 130 feat, a atrsai frontaga of 330 feat along Northridge Drlva, and approximately 40 Eset of frontaga slonq Cabrosa Placa~ and (b) The property to the north at the subject sits u ruidsnC ial, the gropsrty to the south of that site conaist^ of single family homes, the property to the cut is vacant, and the property to the west u aLo zoned for neldentlal use. 3zy PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 91-42 •JAx 9/ ui - STo JaN R. LQNA Nty 22, 1991 Page 2 (c) The four pamel• to the we et have sn average depth o[ 329 ~ fast, and tM progrty to the north is also La• than 150 Let. (d) Tho application hu been submitted to allow a rWUet Lon o[ tM minimum net average lot area and minimum Lot depth rsquirsmenis contrary to See[Lon 17.08.040 of the Development coda wi[hin the Very Low Accident ial District. (e) Both parcwL meet or exceed the minLum lot •ise requirement of 20,000 square twat. (t) Parcel No. 2 has a lot witlth of 373 feet, which greatly exceetls the required 90-Loot minlmm width. (q) txlrtinq aubdivLione immetllaiely north and west of the subject alto haw a winimum average lot LLzm o[ Lem than 22, SOB equexe feet and have lot depths Les tMn [M rsquirad 150 tut. (h) A variance to allow a redueiion in the minimum average. lot size and miaiaaua let depth requiresisnts wu granted for a fouc-lot subdivieioo adjacent Lo tN subject site. 3. Rued upon the substantial evidence presenGd to thU CammLsion during LM above-referenced public hearings end upon the specifte findtnge of facto set Lorth in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, this CommLcLon hereby fintl• snd coneludu a follows: (a) That strict or literal interpretation end en[orewnant of the specified regulations would result in praciieal difficulty or unnecessary physical hardship irconsistsnt with the obj set Luse of the Development Coda. (b) That these are exceptional of extraordinary cizcumstancee or eanditlone applicable to the property involved or to the intended uu of the property that do not apply generally to other properties Ln the same district. (c) Thst strict or literal interpretation and enforcement of she spec iflsd-requlatlon mould deprive tM appl leant of privilege enjoyed by the owners of other properties 1n tM same district. (d) That the granting of the Variance will not constitute e grant of special privilege LnconeLNnt with the limitations on ocher properties classified in the ean» district. (e) That the granting of the Variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare oz matecially Lnjuriou• to proper.ie• or improvements in tM vicinity. ' 6. Based upon the findings and conelueions of fodh in paragraphs 3, 2, antl 3 above, this Conimtssion hereby approves the application. 3zS PLANNING COlDIISSION BBSOLBTION NO. 91-42 YM 91-04 - 5?SYSN E. LCMA Nay 22, 1991 Pa4a 3 5. TM BacraUry co US^ CanmL^Son .hall c^rtl[y to th^ adoption of thla lu^olution. ~ APPAOVBD AND ADOlTBD TNIS 22ND DAY OP N11Y 1991. PWNMING COMJiI33ION O- TNB CITY Ot AANCNO COCANONGA I, Brad Bull^r, Saet^tar'f xit tM 11amting• Oo^BrlBBloa of tha cttp of Rancho Cucamonga, do haraby earthy that th^ ter^geioq b^olxKion xq^ dalp aM r^qular2y iDtlodue^d, pa^^^d, and adepew by tM Flaming Corlnlon ot,tM City o! Raeem Cueamnnga, at a sagulas awting of !ha Flaming Cosni^^1on M1Q an tha 22nd dap of May 1991, by tM tollaving voU-to-NSlx AYIS: COMNISSIONBNBx NCNZEL, MELCflER, VALLETTE NOES: COIDIISSIONBp9: CflITIEA, TOLSTOY ABSENT: CO/DIISSIONEASx NONE 3 ~-' W RESauTIONNO. "(~-l0~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CTTY OF RANCHO CUCANDNGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A REQUEST FOR A TENTATIYE PARCEL MAP, NUMBER 13693, TO SUBDIVIDE 1.0 ACRE INTO 2 PARCELS IN THE YERY LON RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF NORTHRIDGE DRIVE, NEST OF HAVEN AVENUE - APN: 201-182-29 a RK12a1 s. (1) Mr. and Mrs. Steven Luna have filed M application for the approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 13693 described above In the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter 1n this Resolution, the sub,Tect Tentative Parcel Map request is referred to as `the Tentative Parcel Mep." (i i) On March 27 and cantimud to Aprtt 24 and May 22, 1991, the Planning Coamtsstan of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public Nearing on the TMtative Parcet MeD and following tNe conclusion of said hearing, adopted their Resolution o. 91-41 thereby approvt~g the Tentative Parcel Map. (t11) Mr. Peter Fan, an adjacent property owner, and the Northwood Propertfes Coamuntty Association have filed a timely appeal of the approval represented in said Resolution No. 91-41 on the basis of the requirement that Parcel 2 take access free Northridge Drive. (iv) On July 3, 1991, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the subject matter of the appeal of the Tentative Parcel MoD and, on said date concluded the public hearing. (v) All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. NOM,~THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby resolve as follows: 1. The Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth Tn the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. This Council hereby finds Md certifies thst the project has been reviewed and considered 1n compliance with the California Environmental 32~ CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION N0. TENT PN 13693 - LL'NR July 3, 1991 Page 2 Quality Act of 1970 and concurs with the Issuance of the Negative Declaration issued On May 22, 1991. 3. Based uDOn the substantial evtdence Dresented to this Council during the above-referenced July 3, 1991, hearing, ind udtng written staff reports, the minutes of the above-referenced March 27, April 24, and May 22, 1991, Planningg Coewissian aeettngs, publ7c testimony, and the contents of Planning Caamisslon Resolution No. 91-41, this Council specifically finds as follows: (a) TAe Tentative Parcel Map applies to property locatee on the north side of Northridge Or1ve west of Haven Avenue within the Yery Low Residential District (less than 2 dwelling units Der acre); (b) The Developaent District and developamnt status of the surrounding property is as follows: North -Very Low Residential -Partially Dneloped South -Low-Mediae Residential -Developed East - Very Low Residential - Yacant Nest -Very Low Residential -Horse Corral (c) The Tentative Parcel Map conteaplates the develapaent of a 2-lot subdivision on 1.0 acre of land; (d) Variance No. 91-04 was approved Tn con~unctlon with the Tentative Parcel Map to allow reductions 1n the alniaua average lot size and minimum lot depth; (e) The requirements of Planning Coasilssion Resolution No. 91- 41, which specifies that Parcel 2 shall take access free Northridge Drtve, remain to be important and necessary to the subdivision of the property; (f) The developaent as specified w111 net Contradict the goals or objectives of the General Plan or Developaent Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and would not praaote a detriaental condition to the persons or properties to the laaeediate vicinity of the sub~ett site. 4. Based upon the substantial evtdence presented to this Council during the above-referenced public hearing and upon the specific findings of facts set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 above, this Council hereby finds and concludes as follows: (a) TAe Tentative Parcel Map with the approved variance 1s consistent with the General Plan and Developaent Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; (b) The design or improvements of the Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with the General Plan and Develogaent Code of the City of Rancho Cucamonga; 32"~ CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION N0. TENT PM 13693 - LUNR ,tuly 3, 1991 Page 3 (c) The subject site is physically suitable for the type of, derelopawrnt proposed; (d) The design of the proposed derelapuent is not likely to cause substantial envlronaxntal damage or avoldabte injury to humans or wildlife or their habitat; (e) The development is not likely Lo cause serious health prabiems; iii ine design of the developNnt will not conflict with any easesent acquired by the public at large, maw of record, for access through or use of the property within the proposed deveiop~ent; and 5. Based upon the findings and conciuslons set forth 1n paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and 4 above, this Connctl haraay approves the Tentative Parch Nsp subject to each and every condition set forty in Pfamrl~ Goawisslon Resolution Ib. 91-41 {a copy of rhich is attached herein and Mrkad as Exhibit'1'); 6. The Council hereby provides notice t0 Mr. and Mrs. Luna, Peter Fan, and the Northwood Properties Caarunity Association that the time within which judicial review of the decision represented by the Resolution asst be sought is governed by the provisions of California Code of C1vi1 Procedure Section 1094.6. 7. The City Clerk 1s hereby directed to: (a) certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and (b) forthwith transadt a ceRlfled copy of this Resolution, by Certified Mall, Return Receipt Requested, to Mr. and Mrs. Luna, Peter Fan, and the Northwood Properties Caaaatnlty Association at their addresses es per City records. 'mil --- -- Cl'1'Y OF MA;:CHO C1;CAh1GNGA STAFF REPORT DAZE: July 3, 1991 T0: Mayor, Members of the City Council, and City Manager FROM: Wm. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Mike Olivier, Senior Engineer ~~;. s. SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL INITIAL STUDY, DARTS I AND II, FOR THE PROPOSED HAVEN AYENUC_. RcNaarrtraT~ew awn NIDENlN6 PROJECT - 4TH STREET TO NORTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD AND APPROVAL OF THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION AND ISSUANCE OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION THEREFORE. RECal~lNwrrlDr !t is hereby reca~mnded that Part I, Emironmerttal IMttal Study arM Part II, Envfronmental Checklist be nvfewd and approved by the City Council and that a Notice of Determination be approved for filing with the County Clerk for the pro~ett under the guidelines of the California Environmental quality Act. DACK6ROBI0/ANALYSIS In accordance with the California Environmental quality Act, protects to maintain, rehabilitate and/or reconstruct, existing parkways and roadways require an Environmental Assessment. Said improvements generally entail widening Haven Avenue to 3 lanes to each direction; overlaying the existing pavement; striping; signal and utility relocations as necessary for street widening. It is the Engineering staff's finding that the proposed project will not create a significant effect on the environment in this case, and therefore recommend Issuance of a Negative Declaration. Respectfully submit ~1-"-a; ' NJO:JADay v Attachments CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1. Brief Description of Pro,iect: Ilaven Avenue Rehabilitation and Widening Project - 4th St ree[ [o north of foo[hi 11 Boulevard 2. Name and Address of Applicant: City of Rancho Cucamonga P.O. Box 807 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 3. Pursuant t0 the provisions of the Cal tfarnta Emtromnerttal Quill iLy ACC of 1970, the City of Raircho Cucmoortga has determirred that the above protect tvi11 not have a slgnlficant effect upon the environment. An Environmental Impact Report vrill not be requfred. 4. Minutes of such decision an6 the Initial Study prepared by the City of Rancho Cucamonga are on file in the Planning Division of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 8. This Negative Declaration is subject to the implementation of mitigating measures (if any) as listed on the attachments. Dated July 3. 1991 Dennis L. Stouc Mayor e J~J ~ '4r~g;nat~Pccr ~ual~ty ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM (Part I -Initial Study) G®aral Iefoesatlao 1. Name sad address of develapsr or protect sposeor: tirr of Nancno r ucamonaa. 10400 Civic Len [er Orive, P.ancho Cucamonga, 2. Address of protect: rd Aseeasor'a Block sad r: N/A 3. Name, address, and telephone aiaober of person to to eeaucted ooaceralog thle protect: Same add res s_ as above - Contact Hike Olivier 714-989-1862 4. [adicate somber of the permit epDlication for the protect to atrich this rotor pertaLvs: N!a S. List sad deecrlbe any other rsUted perms[! tad other public approvals required for this protect, Secluding those required by city, regional, state and (ederll agenClee: Syreet Closure Permit; Approval of Project 6y 6. Eklstlpg zaaing district: N/A 7. Proposed use of site (Protect for ahleb tbis foam la filed): Hajor 0i vi dad Rnadwwv Protect Daseriptlas - SEE AlTACHE0 8. 91te size. 9. 9glare footage. N/A to. Number of tlaore o1 eodetrllctian. N/A 11. Amalnt Of Off-etrNt parking provided. N/A 12. Attach place. 13. Proposed xhedullag. N/A 14. Aeeociated protect. N/A 15. Aatlclpated Lnctemeatal dNelopment. N/A l8. [f residential, include the auaber of ualts, schedule of ualt sizes nng- of sale prices or rants, sad type of haredrold size eapected. N/A 17. If c®erclal, lodirite the type, .bexher neighborhood, cLty or regionally oriented, aquare footage of sales area, and loading facLlttles. N/A 18. tt Lndunt rlal, indicate type, estimated ®ploymeat per shift, aad loading fac111tlea. N/A 19. If Lnetitutioal, Ladieata the maJo! tuectioe, estimated employment pee shift, estimated occvpaacy, ldding facllLtles, and e®unity beeefLts to be derived tram the pro~eCt. N/A 20. If the pro,Jxt levolvea a variance, oosditioal uw or reraoiog applln- t1a11, sate this aad lndlcab Clearly shy the applieatiaa L ~sq~lired. Are the folloslsa Ltess applicable W the pro~eCL or its atlacta7 Discuss beloe •11 items checloed yes•(attac6 additional shasss Y nae~aary). 2s No 21. Ctmnge le existinig telture6 of axy baya, tidelands, beaches, _ ~ or hula, oe s`tantL a14c-tlaa of ~~ omfa~a. 22. Clnhge Ln aceolC vlsw oe vLttaa ttv sslatioa rasidsatLaL 1 areas or public lands or suds. 23. Change !e patters, sale or character of geaenl area of ~ project. 34. 91gnlttcant amDUnta of solid oasts oc litter. _ ~ 25. grange Ln dust, aah, smlre, ems or adore in vicinity. ~ _ 26. Clangs in ocean, bay, lobe, strwm or gtaisd satar quality or x quantity, or altentian of a:toting dnimse patterns. ?.7. Substantial change In exiatieg voles or vlbntios levels Ln x the vicinity. - "- 2g. Site w tilled land or ae elope of to peroeat or moro. x 29. Uae of disposal o! potentially haatdous naterials, such u x. toxic aubm4seaa, tlasmablas or explosives. 30. Substantial chanp in demand for municipal aetvic~ (police, _ x_ fire, ester, swap, etc.). 31. Substantially tncl'eaM tamsll tual cconmpttoa (elxtricity, ~ oil, natural gu, etc.). 32. IielatLonahLp to a larger pnoJect or series of peo~acta. x 6n~1tO®EO41 $ettln~ -SEE ATTACHED 7J ?J 33. Describe the pro~eCt site t91 it exists before the pto~eet, ixludi ~ ~.,~,r metton an topography, soil stability, p1anW and anin•ls, and any -.. :n '. historical or sceeic aspects. Describe any ealstLa~ a[evct,rvti n ~-• site, and the use of the structures. Attach photog rsphs of the site. Snapshots or po larold ,photos wl ll be accepted. 34. Pest ribs the surround ing properties, tnc luding tnformatton oa plxn[s asd animals and any cultural, historical ar scenic aspects. Ind Sca to the type of land rise (reslden tlal, o®oerc lot, etc.), intensity of land use (one- family, apart~aeot houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale oC development (height, frontage, set-back, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vlclol ty. Snapsbots or polaroid photos •!ll be accepted. Cert111cat1oo [ hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for [h is 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 belief. [ further understand that additional information may be required to be submitted before art adegaate twsluattow caw be mach by the Planning Division. Date: Juiv 3. leas Signature ~~ tli ke Olivier Title Senior Civil Ena htccr 33 ~~ Attachrnt - Part I ProJact Desertption aM Effects: 8, 9, 13, 25, 27, 33,34 The Project consists of ut111ty and signal relocations, paveevmt overiay, widening and replaceuent of roadway pavaeaent, and repainting and/or restrlptng of the paveaw!nt for traffic control. The pro~eCt covers approxie~etely 2 piles of public roadway. The anticipated pro~ett schedule for construction is in fiscal year 91/92. The protect site is located in parttalTy developed cowercial/industrial AYMat. all C_t.tid_ Iw....n..r.wM 1, u.w we1.,-• !.- . inproveaants w111 noL Mve a substantial ~1 ~~ ~~ "°"' T"` Pruyvaau ~pect~ on plants, angels, lend resources or any obvious historical, cultural, or scenic aspects. Noise, vibration, dust and odors w111 increase at the project sites only during the paveavtnt reeovals and replacaeents, etc. After coepletton oP the pro~ecL, all noise, vlbratton, dust and odors crtatad by this protect, will uau to exist aad return to pre-prq{eci TewTS. 335 ENVIRONMENTAL ~"'6'nai-r~oor_4uai;ty CHECKLIST FORM (Part II -Initial Study) I. eacag~oum 1. Name Of PtoPOnent Si tv of Rancho ruran»nca 2. Address and Phone 4tmber of Ptopmeat tnsnn rtvi r rarer nri ve. Ranrhn ruramnnna rw u F ollin X14-aAa-186] 3. Gate of Checklist 9utmtttaE Hwy rre."_yaat 4. AgeecY ftequiriog Checklist c,~ ~~ nb..,,e 5. Name o[ Plbp0atl, tf applleable Haven Avenue Rehabi l'rar'nn - 4 h Street to north of Foothill Boulevard. II. Y~iaoo•~tal Iapcta (EJiplahatioes of all "yet" tad "maybe" aaaeers are required os attached sheets.) 1. Barth. 11111 the proposl result in: a. Uha4ble earth oosdltiona or So r2san<a• 10 geologic aubstructurse? b. Dtsruptlooa, displacenents, oDepaotian or overcovering of the soil? c. Change Ss topography or grolud outface relief features? d. '111e deativetlan, covering or modification of nay unique geologic or physical features? e. Any Lncrease !n rind or rater erosion of soils, either ao or ott the site? L. Uungea in deposition or erasion of bead! sands, or changes Lo sil4tian, depasitlco or erosion thteb mty modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any hay, inlet or !alts? g• 6tpoeure of people or property Co geologic harards such ~ earehquakes, ltndslldd, mudalldea, grouts failure,,,,or aimllar hazards? Yd 14ybe No _X_ _ x X x _ t C I T Y O F R A N C H O C U C A M O N G A Yes maybe Yo 2. Air. 11111 the pmposal result Sn: a. Subetantlal atr emiaaions or deterloritloa of ambient air quality? X b. 'R1e ereatloa of ob~ectlooable odors? _ ~ ,~ c. Altentton of air movment, molatun, or t®peniure, or any change 1a cllate, either locally or +egioallyt _ x 3. titer. Bill the propoal result in: •. C7utlgs La currsats, or the course of di- rection of ester atneants, la either arias Or treeb aten? _ ~ b. C71aaCs In abaorptim rtes, dnisags pat- taros. oe tha tzta tad aasust at aalgfasa ruaoftt ~ ~ e. Attentlcos to rLe oaursa or tae of flood aan7 _ x d. Change La the asolmt of surfau ester la aoY ester Jody? _ x e. Dixharge into surface aten, or In al:y altentioa of surface ester gality, 1o- cludlaa but ant llmtted to tempnture, diaeolved asyQen or turbidity? _ X t. Aitentiad of the dirsctioa or me of floe of Ra+ad aten? _ X g. Quage is the quantity of Round aLers, either thto11~1 direct additialu or arlth- dnala, or thtalgh interceptlaa of as aquifer by cola or sacaatloaa? _ x b. Substantial reduction la the amount of ester otherslse arallable for publlo aatsr atlpplies? - X - i. FYposure of paopU or DraP~f to ester re- latad hararda ouch Y tlaodin~ oe tidal avas? _ ~ 4. Plant ISts. dill the pt+opoal ewu1L io: _ ~ a. tylanSe Sa Ne divenitq of species, or som- ber of nay species of plants (Lacludin~ trees, ahrube, Anse, crops, and aquatic plaata)? - - 337 Yee Nayae vo b. asdueticn of the ¢uoberi of an9 unique, nre or endani'ee'ed epeelr of plaab? _ ~ c. Introduction of roe speclr o1 Plante Lnto an area, or 1¢ • farrier W the ¢orrl replaalsh- mmt of ealetlos epeclr? _ ~ d. Reduction Sa ureaQe of a¢y a~lcultunl arop? _ ~ S. Aa1r1 Life. 1611 the peoporl rewelt ia: a. fba¢te io the diveraltt of epeair, or mt hw'w of anv anwnlr M an1~1• lM nAw lw1 aaSaL inaludl»s reptilr, Lich and bell- fieh, bmthla ofRnler aT Seeecd)7 ~ ~ b. Reductlc¢ of the nuebera of ant unique, nn or eealtopred apeMr of aal~ler _ ~ C. Ieteadteatldrt Ot es epeesle- d a0!!!e 1IIrn L etear Ot iraa~uit IQ - barrier t0 the adQN tlae Or aetaat Ot afrlslet X d. Detarioeetice to esteLle~ tLh a ei1d11te 1rbltat? « 8. Ilolae. 7111 tLe peopnal exult in: a. InCe'Meee Lo ssirtln~ nDlee lerele? _ ~_ _ b. Ecpoeuf+s of people to terere mfr leeela4 _ ~ 7. Lt~L rd Olare. 7111 the proposal produce ens i1Wt a Aare? _ ~ 8. Lafai Ow. 7111 the pfopoeal fruit fa a auutr etaotial altet7.tim of the peeeaat or plamd land use of m ara4 _ x 9. IYtuflal WdlYeee. 7111 the peopoal exult !a: •. Iacreeee iD tse tsu of ur of aa7 trtunl fraefneart x 10. flat of Opwt. 7111 the ptopoal Suplre: a. A rlst o! r esplaeim er the rel~e et haardar neLertahcee (indludio~, Lut not llsited to, oil, prtloldee, cb~taale ae radlatim) 1a tte mnt o! aD tocidat a apse! a¢odlLioele? x 33~ Ye_a scree rb b. Foaalble fatartarenee elth ao emn'aa^~Y Mpoase plan or s. aaeraamp s'vaeuaiiae ~ play? _ ___ X tl. DoWlatlea. Hll the propaal alter the location, dletrihutioa, daoaitp, ~ sroeth me of tM hwan population o! as area? ~, IZ. 9neelni. 11111 the peopoaal t!leot ealetioa hoee- Soa, or cawte a dead tac addlttoeal Oeoaln~t ~ __ ~, 13. Ttae~per4tlN/Clrwlatlm. 1111 the ptbpoaal •. Gaeention oL autrtaatial addittmal vehicular avv®aatT _ ~_ _ b. 6ftenb Oa eslitlai parkle[ tanilitlaa, a< delved for ow parYda/r ,~ ~~ n. at1a1 lapaot ~4N aststlas tiaaapor~ tatla6 gstNa? _ ,__ jL_ d. Altatatidea Le pnar~t pttalea OL CS1Glla- tian or aa~snt o! paoyla aad/oe podfl _ _y_ e. Altentiaoa to •terhoeoe, ra1I oe air tra!!ie? _ ~ f. Iooreaae io trattlt: hoards to nrtor vehlnlN, bicycllata os pedNtrlaN? _ _ x _ 14. Dtlblu ~arelaN. X111 the popoal hen N etlacc upon, ar ratult Le a aaW for ow er altered /or- eroseatal eareidee 1o as7 0! the tollada~ arses: a. Hre prv'te6tlon? _ x _ b. Dolia peoteotids? _ x _ c. Sd11oo1sP ~ x d. Dart Qe other reoreatueal Yad111tier- ~ r x e. WSatNaade Of public teMlltiN, 1as1udla~ lads? _ x t. Other pnrhsestal Na'r1Ces? _ ~ 15. bep. till the plopaal rewtlt ia: a. tIM o! euhstaatial arlalalts Of flrl a eaerlt/1 335 1'cs 1tr l'tK-' nU b. SLbstaatial tae rease to d~rnnd upon e.U stt nx sources or energy, or require the development of oev sources of energy? _ 1 16. Ut111t1ee. Mill the propo.41 reeolt la a need for ne• systems, or svbstantlal alteratlocs to the tol loving utilities: ~- 17. Rumen pealth. Ml ll the proposal result Sn: a. CYeatloc of any health hazard or potential health 7raard (sac lading mental health)? _ x b. EScposure of people W potential health harardsl % 18. Aee [hetlca. Mill the proposal result to the obsirvctlon of my scealc vista or vle• open to the pnbllc, or •111 the proposal result la the creation of m aesthatiully offensive arts opm to public visa? x 19. Recreation. M111 the proposal result to an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recrrltlenal oppor rani ties? ~ 20. CLltunl Resources. a. Mill the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of n prehistoric or hlstorlc archaeological site? _ ~ b. Mill the proposal result So adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or hlstorlc building, structure, or ob,lectl 1~ c. Ones the proposal have the potential to cause a phyaieal change rhicb could affect unique ethnic eultunl values? - ~ d. gill the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses vithin the potential impact areal x 21. Ymdatory Plndinga of 91gnlficance. a. Does the protect have the potehtlnl to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or dldlife species, cruse a fish or rtldllfe population to drop belor self sustalning levels, threaten [o eliminate a plant or aninal cnmruntty, re- duce the oumher or restrict the range o[ a rare or endangered plant or an1~l or eliminate 3~l o 'Original Poor Quality ~t, , et~vlr, n„ Important samples of the m~Jor trritils or CalitorDia hlscory or pretttscory-? x_ b. Does the protect have thA ry~tenttal to aeb hve ` short-Cerro, to the dlsadvaluage of tuna-tend, I eoviroameDtal goals? (A short-term Lopact w the enviromoent is ova vhleh occurs to a rata- ' Lively brief, Aef lDltlve period of [!me •fi11e long-teem Impacts vlll endure yell Lato the future.) _ % c. Does the Prot set have Impacts •blch are Ind lulUlAliy iuuiiti, w: - - .-+- ',,,,.- siderable? (A protect my~lmpect oD~tro-or more separate resources .here the Impact aD each resource !s relattvety small, but Mere ~~ the effect of the total of those Smpact9 on the eavltooment la sigatticant.) % d. Doge the protect have eovtrvraoental et[eeta alttch H11 cause subatanttal adverse effects oa hu®D beings, either directly or SDdirectl~ % III. Dlecusalav of EDVlrouoeo4l BvaluatioD - sEE n7 rnC11Eo (Narrative description o[ eavirotrsental LmlacE~ IY. DeterminatioD (To be caopleted by the Lead Ag®cy.) Chi the bas19 of this 1Ditial evaluatioD: I find that the proposed protect CIJUID NILE have a slgDlticant effect on the eovlroomeDt, sad a NEI;A1'IYE ODr7AMT1(lN elll ha prepared. Q I find that although the proposed protect could have a eignttlcant etteci oD the eevirotaneot, here vlll Dot be a signltlcant effect iD this ease because the mitlgatiau measures de9crlbed oo aD attached sheet bare heeD added to the protect. A NEt;ATIYE DDCIJ4NAT[DN HILL eE PREPAIiID. I find ffie ptopoeed protect NAY have a slgnlflcant effect oD the enviroDlDeot, sad as FNYIRDNNQ![AL FACT FlEFL1ftt is required. Sv gnature (like Olivier Senior Civil Enni ncrr _ July 3. 1991 FOr 16e City of Rancho Cucam~~~~~_ __ Date ~• 1lttach~ent - Part II Discussion of EnvironaMntal Evaluation or Iepacts '~ I. Earth b. There viii be subgrade soils and aggregate base preparation and coepaction Por the replaceeenL and/or widening sections of asphalt concrote paveaent. 6. Noise a. Ezisting noise levels will lntrease due to equtpaknt operations during construction, but could De ^ltigated by the inateliatlon of noise aLtenuators and the restriction of hours of eperati on of equipeent. 13. Transoortatlon/Circulation a, b. d, and f. Dnrfng conatrecttoe epersttfom. LrefPic and perking will increase on• su-roundfag streets near the pra3ect periaatter. Aiterations to present patterns of vehicular and pedestrian circulation end any possibility of traffic hazards to ~oWr vehicles, bfcyclists or pedestrlain during construction can be aitigated by the proper use of raadwy warning and detour signs. 14. Public Services a, b, and c. This protect will have an tnteri^ effect on the present pattern of circulation of veAlcles (1.e., police, fire; scMoll. Such circulation pattern lupacts can be el ti gated by prior noLlftcatlon to the rcspeCtlve agencies of the proposed street work, giving time, date and duration of said work. 34 Z 313 CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ~~S ~~:.}~ HAVEN AVENUE (4TH TO FOOTHILL) N~ """"~"'~"~ STREETfMPROVEMENT3 RESOLUTION N0. 9/-~p,.," A RESOLUTION ~ THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCANONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ENVIROHiENTAL INITIAL STUDY AND ISSUANCE OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE PROPOSED HAVEN AVENUE REHABILITATION AND WIDENING - 4TN STREET TO NORTH OF FOOTHILL BOULEVARD WHEREAS, The City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga has revieved all available Input concernfng the proposed Haven Avenue Rehabilitation Protect; and WHEREAS, said program requires an Envlrorem!ntal Assessment; and WHEREAS, an Environaentai Assessment Stugy has been prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quaitty Act, as amended. NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that tlr City Coumctt of tlw Ct1~ Of Rancho Cucamonga hereby approves the Emfrommental Assessment TnitiaT Stugy aid issuance of a Negative Declaration for the proposed Haven Avenue Rehabilitation Pro,1ect. SECTION 1: The City Councll of the City of Rancho Cucamonga hereby D claratioo for he proposedsHave~n Avenue Raeha611{utioniPro~ect,of a Negative SECTION 2: The City Clerk is directed to file a Notice of Determine o~ti n pursuant to the California Environmental Qualfty Act. PASSES, APPROVES, and ADOPTED this 3rd day of July, 1991 AYES: NOES: ABSEA7: ATTEST: enn s u yor e ra ems, y e I, DEBRA ADAMS, CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, at a regular meeting of said City Councll held an the 3rd day of July, 1991. Executed this 3rd day of July, 1991 at Rancho Cucamonga, California e ra ems, er 3yu CITY" uF k°NCHU CLCn910:~1iA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 3, 1991 ((~~" - TO: Mayor and Mambere of the City Council V Jack Tam, AICP, Clty Manager lJ PROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: Jerry Guarraclno, Assistant Planner SUBJECT: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 89-15 - BODTM - An appeal of certain conditions of apprcval for the develooment of a bmi ldina contractor's office and etorage yard totaling approximately 8,500 square feeC on 1.35 scree of land Sn the Genecal Tnduatrial District (SUbaree 13) of the Industrial Area Specific Plan, located at 9037 Charles Smith Avenue, east of Rocheatez, north of 6th Street - APN: 229-271-61. ImDDN~WS7E7•: Tate Planning Commiaefon recomaenda approval of Development Review 89-18 through adoption of the attached'Reaolution. ®CIW.7DOlm: In August of 1988, the applicant submitted preliminary plena for the proposed project. The applicant was notified, by a letter dated August 19, 1988, of the Planning Commission's policy regarding landscaping of the adjoining freeway right-of -way (see Exhibit "B"). The applicant subsequently submitted a formal request far Development Review on June 10, 1990, and was again Gent a letter regarding Che Planning Commission's policy. On March 27, 1991, the Planning commission completed the Environmental Review for Development Review 89-18 and ieaued a Negative Declaration for the project. The City Planner subsequently conditionally approved the project on April 10, 1991. The applicant, John Dalrymple, appealed this approval on April 16, 1991, objecting to three of the Conditions of Approval. The Planning Commission heard the appeal at their May 22, 1991 meeting, at which time the Co®ieaion approved tM project and modified the conditions to satisfy two of the applicant's three concerns. These issues centered around outdoor etorage of vehlclea and the method of flood protection for the Bite. A third condition requiring landscaping (or payment of an in-lieu fee) of the adjacent Coltrane property to the east was upheld by the Planning Commission pursuant to Planning Commis eion Reao lotion No. 87-155. On May 31, 1991, the City Clerk received a letter of appeal from Charles D. Ca®inge of Sullivan, Workmen, and Dee, on behalf of JoM Dalrymple (see Exhibit "A"). Tha applicant is appealing the Planning Commission decision to require Landscaping or payment of an in-lieu fee for freeway Sandecaping. The reasons for the appeal are explained in nn earlier letter dated May 21, 1991, attached. CITY CONNCLL STAPP REPORT DR 89-18 - BOOTR July 3, 1991 Page 2 AWS8I8: The Planning Coamiaaion determined that the I-15 Preewny right-afway ie an lsportant regioonl treneportation corridor through the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In this sense, than, any property rhich adjoins the freeway should be landscaped in the same rray that all development ie required to landscape their "frontage° along Public ri ghtn-otway. It should also be noted that said landscaping will contribute to screening the outdoor vehicle storage proposed by the npplicant. Ca1lrane did not have plane to landscape this corridor, but indicated that they world allow others to landscape it subject to tMir review and standards. The policy requiring landscaping or payment o! leas in lieu of construction ores estebliehed by the Planning Comission in October 1987 (Resolution 87-185, Sxhiblt "C^). The pulley requires ^all new development adjacent to the I-IS Pzeeray to landscape and irrigab the Eranway rightro!-ray which adjoins their property." All new development projects along the I-15 treewsy wrridar hove since bem condttlonad ncrordingly. The subjeot property hu a lrsawy !rootage of 301 tent. Engineering hea eetlmted tae in-ltd tee to b• 91 cants par square foot of landscaped area. This PLnning Cooission pulley ras upMld by the City Council on a similar appeal (DR 88-22 - Nelson) in August of 1989. alyL10~laI. A88~l: The Planntnq Cosmission revieaed the project on March 27, /9911 and flndlnq no significant environmental Smpacte, issued a Negative Declaration. PACTS MA [ImINCB: The project le coneiateat with she Industrial Aree Sp¢cif is Plan en6 the General Plan. The project will not be detrimental to adjacent pzopertiee or cauce significant adverse environmental impacts. Reaps ly au Shred, Brad ller City Planner RE:JC/jta Attachments: Exhibit "A• - Letter from Charles D. Cuaeunge dated May 30, 1991 ExhlDit "e" - August 19, 1988 Latter to applicant Exhibit "C" - Planning Comission Resolution No. 57-185 Planning Commission Staff Aeport dated May 22, 1991 Planning Commission Aeeolution No. 91-49 31(0 LPw 01[r0 E5 ..,n [ Iuc.a.e<.• SULLIVAN~ WQRKMAN 6 DEE cNU.{s[ c•. ~o ...,.vw.~..o,a •,wa+[rolr ce..[..,ow . ea o a ~ a[[ e~ .wur+N .~op1 , ..c i o • N eoe spur., ncucwo+ s.wccr [uf• ~° xx °^ IAi ANp LLL1. CLLIIpI[NIA OOp V•3>731 G.[r •OV•~iC +Oxy [ • fCICIgON[ FIJI 6C1~p{K .n[f. [ ] net ...,..>..N~~<,..o .. ,. Hay 70, 199j VLF FEDERAL EXPRESS CTTV ('T.r'~4 czxx xu,1; 10500 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE R11NCH0 CUCAMONGA, CJILIFORNIA 9170 ~iN6 ba[[[[ ro{> o•nu ao, ~rwr w{.Nan[[. a {eomo{o{ [[~[CO•,{{ ~,IJI {aT r,[[ ~ 44f[ [[I[1. +O aY, [,~[ NO Ra: .TONM 1T.4 .R/D!!RrvaP!(~T 1lVTRa/ 69~ia~ROOTR/ ar. OP ITY P aael - raSl a n nraION Te ITY CD TMCI Dear CITY CLERK: Out lav fire repreeenta John Dalryeple. I a• encloainq herein a check for $126.00 as the Laa to appeal the decis!on oY the Rancho Cucaeonga City Planning Coeaiasion on May 22, 1991 regarding Development 89-18. speaitlcally the appeal ie directed to the daeieion oY the City Planning Coamission to require the payment oY an in-lieu tea for traway landecapinq. The grounds Yor the appeal era briefly act forth in ay latter to Mr. Brad Buller dated Nay 21, 1991, a copy of which is enclosed. Please notify ee of the data, place snd time of Lha hearing on this appeal. Very truly yours, ~/~~l, /J OM71RLE8 IY. 3ULLIVAN, iPOREMAN i DEE ba(CDC ec: Mr. John Dalrymple ,~. ~~_ '~;•_~\ ~~ y!, _~. 34~ ~Hr6rT '~ Low O/.IC.Lb ...car n.c+nou• SULLIVAN~ WORKMAN 6 OEE .w . uu.+•N . uu..m-. wc.~w.o ..wu. . ~o..a..°w, c ...u o c°n..waa "cc ioa o rwcL..- .Loon c a ono' w.u. coo aou9N ncucno. s*nccr wow u " LOa AN6ELC 3. CALVOaNI. 00019-E 6EI v.u< ` ow. C u.O+a~ ID r[~[nwON[ 131J1 et-~S Sw. w +oo n .. ^°^^ • -°""°•^ Nay 21, 1991 VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS Nr. Hrad Huller City Planner City Hell 10500 Civic Canter Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730 ono . .aaa .°a+ ar.~a • nao. .°. ..anu c. soot r.o.oe +c ~cco.m• um .,..aa 4t4[ w O OUw r r.'0 260256 0001 Ra: •Sohn DaL•'~+mpla/Develoament Review 99-1B-ROOth Dear Nr. Huller: i rapreaeM John Dairycpla, who is the owner of the subject real property and applicant for your matter Wombat Development Raviaw e9-19. 1 Nava reviewed your latter to Nr. Hooth dated April 10, 1991 as yell as the Staff Report which you prepared dated May 22, 1991. condition No. 1 of your letter of April 10, 1991 requires that Nr. Dalrymple pay and "in-lieu fee" to landscape Caltrans' property along the Z-15 Freeway right-of-vay. The in-lieu fee Pot Nr. Dalrymple based on the gcoGd charge of $.91 per square foot would ba approximately $30,000. It is my understanding that the City sacks to iaposa this fee in accordance with Planning Coniaaion Resolution No. 87- 185. the Planning commission states that it "!Soda it desirable to landscape the I-1S (Davos) Preevay right-of-way Gcauss of its ^ignificance as a regional transportation corridor through the City of Rancho Cucamonga." While this is a laudable goal, the imposition o! this raquirament su a condition to the granting of a building permit of the subject property i^ an impermissible attempt to ahilt the burden of providing the coat of a public benefit where there is no substantial relationship between the public burden posed by the proposed construction and the imposition of this condition. The United Statss Supremo Covrt'• ruling in Nollan v. California Coastal Commission {87 U.S. 82S (1987) has recent iy boon interpreted by the California Court of Appeal as requiring a substantial relationship 6etvaan the public burden posed by the proposed construction and the conditions iaposed by the 3Lt~ E X4.~b,.. ,\- '. Mr. Brad Huller city piam:er Nay 21, 1991 Page Tvo gawrnment to permit that construction. (aurfaida Colony. Ltd. v. California Coastal Commisaien (1991) 226 Ca1.App.1d 1260.) The California Court of Appeal has also hold in Liberty v. California Coaatel commission (1980) 111 Cs1.14pp,7d 491, 493-494 that: "Wham the eonditlons imposed are not related to the use Wing mods of the property but ara imposed bscaup the (public] anclcy COnCeiVaa s aaana ui N,aa i. i,ry i.uG iris+o, v. pr....-..~ »~- cost of a public benefit to another not responsible for or only remotely or speculatively benefiting from it, there is unrenaonabla exercise of the police pover• and thus imparmiasibls. ror the reascme eat forth abwa, i as respedttullp. raquutf.nq that the rlannL:q Coslesion of the City of Rancho CUCameeleje delete Condition NO. 1 riletimj~t0 the in-13ea !ee for the landscapialg of Coltrane' property. . Very truly yours, Cha~~~gs ~~~ svLLrveN, WORIDO:N c DEH CDC/ba cc: Commissioner Chitiea Commiuioner NCNial Commissioner Nelcher commissioner Tolstoy Commissioner Valletta John Dalrymple (By TeleCOpy) 3y~t ~j~ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA r,,.: n,+,;,~ ~,..wr,, x,,,,h,• [v.among., ni„o+,.,.. m-:~ ,-ul w;vsa August 19, 1988 Mr. Richard Booth 133 W ~ve fGnnlona Scw. uc...s..Fel CA 82472 SUBJECT: PROPOSED CONTRACTOR'S YARD AND OFFICE: PRELIMINARY REVIER 8B- Gear Mr. Booth: Thank you for submitting your protect for Preliminary Review. The Site Plan was reviewed by the PlanntmJ and Erlgtneertng Mvistons far desfgn and technical issues. Those caHHents are sulHaartzed below and are illustrated on the enclosed Stte Plan. Planning Division Issues: 1, The Industrial Specific Pi an states that special consideration shad be given to the quality of site design, architecture, and landscaping ayacent to the I-15 Freeway. Therefore, attractive screening of outdoor work, loading, storage areas, roof and ground Haunted equipment from significant freeway points of view is required. Outdoor storage areas shall Se completely screened from public view on the I-15 Freeway. 2. Tile following conditions, which apply to all protects along the I-15 Freeway are listed below for your information: a) Trees of a tali growing ability (60-70 feet in height) shall be planted along the freeway right-of-way. Tree plantings shall be clustered at various locations in addition to the row style placement. b) Tne developer shall provide landscaping within the freeway right-of-way along the boundary of this protect. The landscape plan shall be prepared in confomlance with the Caltrans Master Planting Plan for the I-15 Freeway through the City of Rancho Cucamonga; plans shall also be reviewed and approved by the City Planner and City Engineer. Landscape and irrigation shall be installed prior to release of occupancy for final building of the protect. If final approvals and/or installation is not caHplete at that tithe, the City wilt accept a eash deposit for future landscaping of the Caltrans right-of-way. 3S~ u~„ .ca~.~, Ihborah \. ara+.n lam r+ KmG ~Nra~rt Iknm. L <mut < harlvc J, auyuet II I'anmL, I N'n gh , ,..,: \: Nr. Richard Booth Preliminary Review 88-60 August Ig, 198E Page 2 3. As arborist report is required for preservatfon of the existing trees. The report shall address, among other things (see attached sheet) if the trees can be preserved during the construction phases. 4. Provide landscaping in red-lined areas shown on the enclosed Site Plan. Landscaped fingers or edges must be 5 feet ~mlMmi mil vi Ae li"a•~..a„- ~a____. __, __ .... _.. ... ....~....a.w,. 5. Use decorative material for all screen wails. 6. If a phasing plan will be used, please submit a copy to the Dlanning Division. 7. Indicate the anttcipated use of the gravel arer. 8. The 4 parking stalls closest to the east property line should be relocated or should have a paved access 4rive aisle to them. 9. Note: Architecture has rtot been reviewed at this time. Engineering Issues: 1. Show existing utility oles on the "petalled Site Plan". Also, refer to e a ac ed "Existing Overhead Utility Requirements" handout and provide a separate drawing per Section B of the handout. 2. Drovide a Oraina a Re ort per the attached "Drainage ReQort Requirements an ou Protect lies in Flood Zone A". Include Flood Protection in the report. 3. Show all existing and proposed driveways within a 600 foot radius. Include existing street intersections such as 6th Street and new Rochester Avenue. Attached is a copy of Development Review 87-23, a proposed project to the north, for your use in plotting the driveways. 4. Use drive approach Standard No.3O6 (Industrial) with a minimum 35 foot width. 5. A ,joint-use driveway at the south property boundary will be required. 6. A secondary driveway, if desired, must be located 150 feet north of the southerly property boundary. 3st Hr. Richard Booth Preliminary Review 86_60 ~935t I4, I388 Page 3 The next step 1s to submit four sets of plans (Site Pian, Conceptual Landscape Plan, Grading Plan, illustrative Building Elevations, and Site Utilization Map) incorporating the comcents in this letter for Technical/Design Review. Piease see the enclosed material for details. Ne look forward to working with you in the processing of your pro,)ect. Should you have nay questions or comoents regarding this review oroeacc. oleace do nnr h<gr._.~ to c„rfgCt ia~e rianntng Utvi5lon. " Sincerely, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PL~AN,Ny,IN~G-DIVISION //rx~' Brett Horner Assistant Planner BN:ml9 Attachment 3SZ RESOLUTION N0. 87-t 85 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMAISSION OF THE CITY OF NANCHO CUCAMONGA ESTABLISHING A POLICY REQUIRING LANDSCAPING OF FREEWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds it desirable to landscape the I-15 (Devore) Freeway right-of-way because of Its significance as a regional transportation corridor through the Cfty of Rancho Cucamonga; artd WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds this resolution neeessarv to give property owners and developers notice of this policy. NON, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVm, that the Planning Comntsslon of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does hereby declare their policy to De: 1. That all new development ayacent to the I-15 (Devore) Freeway shall De regmfred to landscape and irrigate the freeway right=of-way adfafnfrtg their devetoplmnrt site. 2. That the landscaping and irrigation shall be in conformance with CaTtrans Master Planting Plan through the Ctty of Rancho Cucamonga. 3. That the new development and the landscaped portion of the I-15 Freeway shall be annexed to an existing Landscape Maintenance District or a new Landscape Maintenance District shall be formed affecting the sane properties. APPROVED AND ADOPTED TNIS i4~hDAY OF October 1987. PLANNING COSMISSION_OF/THE CITY\ OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA ATTEST: I, Brad Buller, Deputy Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning Colnaission held on the t4ch day of oCTDaER 1987, Dy the following vote-to-wit: AYES: COMMISSIONERS; TDLSTDY, LHITIEA, SLAKES LEY, EMERICK, nC'~~C_ NOES: COIMYSSIONERS: WORE `\ Ca ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: RORE ~X, ~ \~ ~ 3 S3 ITY' Og RgN~~HO CLiL'A1IGNi,~ STAFF REPORT OATB: May 22, 1991 v TD: Chairman and Nembere of the Planning CommLsion FROM: Brad Buller, City Planner BY: ,Tarry cuarraoino, Aoistant Plantar _..______ __.____.._.._ __..__.. _. an appeu oc certar,n yVyV~~ conditions of approval for the dwalopeent o! • buildlnq contraetor'• office and storage yard totaling approximately er 500 aquas test en 1.35 acres of land in the Gneral Industrial District (Subarea 13) of the Industrial Ara Spaci[ic Plan, located at 9037 Charles Smith AvstAn, tart of Aeehastet, rtortlr of 6th St7'eet - APNS 229-271-61. 1. II PAO.TICT Alm SIT[ DABCAIPTIONt A. Baekeround: This project, was approved by the City Planner on April 30, 1991, attar receiving • Negative Declaration from the Planning co~iaalon on March 27, 1991. Planning Division condition No. 1 requires an Ln-lieu fee Cor future landscaping and irrigation of 301 tact a[ frontage along the I-15 freway right-ot-way. Planning Division Condition No. 2 states that "NO outdoor storage of vehielu, machinery or materlaL shall G parmttted without prior City planner approval.^ Also, Snginaerinq Condition No. 3 requires a flood protection mitiget ion measure io protect the ^ite frao potential flood flows from the north. The developer ie appealing all throe of those conditions. ANALYBIBs A. Freeway I.andaeaeina: On Apt11 16, 3991, the City Planner received a rsqueet to delete Planning Condition No. 1, the in- lieu foe for freeway Lndscapinq (ea attached letter from the applicant). The applicant stated opposition to the condition for coat eonaideratlona and aid that tM coats should be born by the City ss a who la or Cal-Trans. The City Planner based thin condition on adopted Comieeion policy and pant development uview actions. TM PLnnlnq Commission determined that tM Z-13 Freeway right-o[-uay Le an important regional transportation coscLdoc through the City of Rancho Cucamonga. In this sense, then, any property which adjoins the freeway should b. landscaped in PLANNING COMNISSION PP RBPORT DA 89-18 - BOOTN Nay iI, ii91 Pages Z tM same way that all dwelopmsnt la required to landuape their •lrontage• along public rLghts-ot-way. Cal-Trans did not haves plena to luduape thL eorrLAor, but indicated that LMy would allw others to ludacaps it subjert to tMir revive and standards. The polity requiring landscaping os payment of feu in live of conrtruct ion wu utablished by the Planning Camfsiuion in OctoMr 1987 (Aasolution 87-185, ExhibiC •D•). All nw development projects aloay the L-15 [reway corridor have since bun conditioned accordingly. It should aLo be nobd that uid laMSeapinq will contrlbub to i..y ,.iw vucuwr vuacae scorage proposae oy cne applicant. Tha policy require •all nw dwslopment adjacent to the I-15 Preway to landscape and Lrrigala tM freway right-ol-wry which adjoins their progrty.• TM subject property hu a freway trantage of DOl Cert. Evgineerlnq has emtlaated the in-live tw to b• 91 nests pex squmas lost. B. outdoor v~h1cL eta-aa~r Dnrirp tM Design Ariw proesu, the applleut stated that all on-sib storage would take place within tM buildings and the project wu conditioned accordingly. However, tM applicant is now expressing a need to park vohiel.a (i.s., pick-up trucks, list bad trucks, or stab bed trucks) outdoors. TM Industrial speci[ie plan allws outside storage of such vehicles subject to acesptabla screuinq as described Mlov. Vehicles !n this sus shall not include large, bulky construction machinery such u: bulldozers, tractors, trailers, campreuon, or similar verb dwicu. 1. The majority of tM parking is located wet of Lhs warahouw building which will screen this are of tM •ite from viw of the I-15 frreway. 3. Ths applicant has bean eondltioned to pay an in-lieu fw for landscaping of the treway right-ot-way which will further screen the alto from viw. 3. a solid masonry wall will screen the puking saes from public viw from Charles smith svuw. Baud on this Clty Planner dshrminatlon, no Casmiulon action is nseuwry on Chis portion of tM appeal. c. Plood Protection: TM Dweloper is appealing thr 6ngineerinq Division condition to obtain an easement for tM construction o! an angled hard faced or structural call north o! the bttopol itan Nester District euement on the adjaeut property to CM north, because tM adjacent property ownu to the north is not willing to grans u casement. TM Dwslopsr is willing 3S~S PLANK INO CONNIBSION ~ PP REPORT DA 39-18 - BOOTR NaY ii, i591 Page 3 to construct tM wall along tM north property lino of thin project in web a fwhion that !t wLll witMtaM and prefect the site Lrom potmtlal flood flow fras tM nerth. This coaditiaa L a mitigation msuure that wu neeewary to gran[ n Negntiva Declaration (i.s., not require an Environmental ImPtet Mport). Currently, tM cite ie wbject to potestitl flooding from tM unimproved segment o[ Day creek Channel Mtwen Atra+ Aoub and caw Line Aoad. TM esgwnt Se scheduled Co M completed the Day Crwk Channel 1sgrovwaU, it w111 M wewsary to provide llood protection toe tM siG. This can M aecompliehad Dy (1) allewlnq tM flow to paw through the cite while psoteetinq tM buildings (Z) ceestroetinq es ogled Wrw/wall nort4 0! tM property or (1) eonatructly a structural wall alooq tM mrth puajsat bmaadary. Staff teeL that optlonm (1) aoG (3) psevide khs was pgsitlw msthoda of flood proteellen. Nowves, Meauw ,the devalopsr hu bwn unabU to obtain aw eassmsnt tram tM property ow:»r to tM north, craft hw taken • cloves look at option (3) and [wls that it is • poesibility, subject to verilicatian by a final drainage study. TMrafore, staff U willing to modify the condielon a eonuinad in tM attached Resolution. IV. RECOMMENDATION: Stalf recommends that the Planning Com¢iesion approve Development 89-18 subject to tM conditions contained in the attached Resolution, which requires the in-lieu payment [or frssway landscaping, allows outdoor storage, and modifiu tM snginw inq conditions to alive conateuction of a structural wall .~. on th~ north projeM boundary for tM purpows of flood Brad City eE ac: j e AttacMantr. Exhibit •h" - IatNr tram hpplicant Exhibit "E^ - Bite Plan Exhibit "C" - City Planwr Approval Uttar Exhibit 'D' - Iusolutlon No. E7-185 Resolution of Approval 3~ April 16, 1991 John Dalrytrple P. O. Box 1071 Ontario, G, 91762 Drad Buller Manning Cepartment City of Rarck:o Cucamonga ?. C. Box 807 2archo Cucamonga, G, 91729 nnmr no~.mm onrrnu as is Cear' Mr. Buller; ,,.~,-- . ~ ~ APR 13 X91 ' m, 3 E'ave read your letter cE the findings and conditions dated the 10th of April, and I find it necessary to appeal to the followi~ conditions; Planting Division condition lil I f,~l. the cost of this laeulsmpinq sknuld be ha- iy nnre than just ane property owner, if not by GLkraos or the city. Planning Division condition ~2 I have ca In. ertion to stare machinery or materials out ci doors, but I c~ nc.d to park iv:'rting operable vehicles out of doors, and hereby rake a statement of suc::. I have no Intention of do:!~~g mechanical repair work. out of doors. ~gineering Division Condition. 13 My neighbor to the north has givEt o-rr'itten permission to mnstrurt a te~orary berm on his property as per request of Pin3 Ktn-"of the engineering department, Mr. Kho stated that this would not be required once that the Day Creek Flood Contml Channell was crnpleted. Dty Neighbor, Mr. Du Bois is not willing to soil or give an easement of a permanent nature on his property, 's'.der any conditions. i am willing to Design my North wall in such a fashion. as to protect my project fran a hypothetical 100 year flood, an3 to build it prior to starting the remainder of my project. '1HI5 LETTER. IS INI'&'`7DID TO BE AN OFFICIAL APPEAL OF '!HE AFfiVE ~WI'!TONB. Enclosed please find the required 562.00 appeal fee. If you stnuld like to discuss tMae matters please call me at 714-595-7924. Sinoe~ely, John Ualr}mq~le ~X 1--11 ~i'; \ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ., 3 s~ ter. 'drib na( Poor ~ual;ty ._.. - - --~ i i; .sac-- =fi~ ~ ` -, ~ ... ~.. ~ .~ ~ ~-'.~..... ~.. ... ~I 6 u~~~-~~ d O' i ~ 'J Y ~ -- ~FF'~ ~ _. ... .. ... - a tSYfY~'.`.a. srte vuw '~ ~o~ . ... :;i . ~~'.::~ -':A:: ''•..•'.Y i s, ~_ ~ `~ ~~ SAN ,.--,}.~~ 3s g CrTY OF F2AlYCI-f(X.;~UCAMONGA Tm.E: STi ylGn PLANNING DIVISION EXH[BCI': 3 SCALE: N 1 S .i \ ~ i1 ~~ ~ ~ ~~ \ `1 ~ ' `,, ~ , April 10, 1991 Richard Booth 130 f. Avenue Cornello San Clement, CA 92670 SIfBJDCT: DCiIELOPNfPT PEy;N 89-18 Dear Mr. Booth: Tne Oeveiopsent Wv1er prooos ror the abwa-MacrIDad project hu Deen euc<eaatuLly eanpletad and approval hu bean gcutsd bases upon the following tindinge and conditions. Think you for your psrticipaeie0 and coopsratlon during this reviav proceed. we airtarely hope that this proeus hu 6een t positive experisnq toi all involved. f~ A. That the proposed proisct is cosslstsnt with tW General Plan. B. TMt the pcopossd pmjact L in acwrdua with Us objectives of the Dewlogent Coda and the purpou of the district in rhich the ^its Sa located. C. That the proposed project, together with the conditions appllcabla thereto, v111 not M detriunGl to tM public hulth, ufety or velfare, or saterially injurlow to psopsttiss or Ssprovenents in tM vicinity. D. That the proposed project rill cosply rich weh o! Ne apyllcabl• provisions of tM Industrial atu specific Plan. Plannanq O1vi91on ConditlON This project is apptovd snbjset to the follorlnq rnndleions and the attached standard Conditions: t. An in-lase tN shad bs paid for landscaping ud irrigation the 301 fast of froneags along the I-15 Psssray right-efway. 2. No outdoor storage of vehicles, suehlnssy or rtsriala shall M persietad without prior City Plainer approval. 3sq ~_~ ~~~ RL-Hari aoo to Dn 4 -]°- anr1: .n, 1991 pegs 2 ]. No pnrmtu !or accufoty improvement, (i.e•, paving, pariubr walla, ii ghcinq, etc.), shall ba iseusd until all sits plans, grading plem, a lartdacapa and lrrlgation plane, and strut iaprovuene plena era cverdinatad Car eonal atenty. tngineering Diva ion The existing overhand ucilltfu (aiaetrieal) oo the project eida of Char Lea Smith Avenue shall ha wdazq[oundad tram t!M Lirec polo o[f-aiu north oC the Droj set myth boundary to the Bret polo of!-sib south et tM prof act south howdary, prior th public Lepraoamant ~~ qv w -..yL1..jr -.........- '-.»- .---~. _ -~- ---- y ragout a reimburwent lgrwant to raeoveC on•-hal! the^difCerenee betwun the undargrowdinq Coat of the utilitlae (aleetrleal) am the prof see side of tM street minty those lulaoae~unieaeione) on cM oppoaln eida of the stmt tray future dawleprant (radewalopmantl w it occurs on Cha oppuita aide oC the atroec. I• Stress cream along (aarLe filth Maeme shall b. provided per ' 8nginwcinq etamdardm. M eaaamene ter stress traam may be raqulred. 7. M angled Mrd Lased berm M aeruetmial rail north et the MKropoliean Nacer District aawent m !M ad~aaut pnpertp to tM north shell W wutructed to protest then sib Liam potential flood Llow Lraa the north. M easement for CM hart (tall) shall D• obulnad prior to the issuance of grading or buildlnq perdu. plusa note that conditions may epaclty aoaagiletion o! certain plans or work prior to :aauanw o[ building parmlu. This decision shall W Cinal tollorinq a tin-day appeal period Mglnninq with the dau of tnla later. Appeals mwt be tiled fie writing rich tba Planning Comiesion Secncary, ciao she ration for CM appeal, and ba aeeampaaied by a 36] appeal faa• If you should haw any questions, please Caal [rN th comuct Jasry Guarracino at 171U 989-1861. Sint y, Bra La\ Clty Mannar i Bm:JD:mlg Ateae)uant: Standard Conditlone ec: JoM Dalrymple 3(~0 s- ;'a .~?j- w k r ki dY 55"Z "~"S "_~ IFS ~_VgDB°"ZYS~ ~"s;~ Ci E ~P„s~~~~r9xi s'~='3 eke I~~ra~ t=: sg'''ppa":~"" YYams ;ss ~~~ks :€~ if~E°E<erga s8 ysFsY cj~ ~dr'~" €~~ i y 3 ~!<'"~a~.~i! ~s'=~ ELF F~~~g i~~Y ap_a_g5x~~: CIF's s~= -'~r5 F-m}: t~x~5i~~~~ Y di~f~ itE :'~B~E~ ~si`a °~ ;; ~~ ~~ ~ ~ 0 "a e Z ~ i i i pI E 1 ' FC53 k~Ms v ~~ ; ,I I Yid~g~~k a Fdf E ~i IQy;S }„~~. egg ~ ~, ~s ~~'"s~~s~,~ Y ~ °~a d E„_°~"e a ~~~ d g' ~~'A~~eSS ~ Sgl 6 Y ~~ ~~~°S "~'Y ~es #i CC= ~ g^ ~FE._a5 ~_ Y ?y~ 6 : -~ i~~YZ e^ _9 $k- ~ t 3~ ~~ ~~ I~~ a ~ ~ a - ~~ as"~"~=sa ~. .s ~ s~E~i~~~a ~`a; ~ s -e; icy $.is_ 38 k i ~~ ^I. ~I }$ ~. 7 li r ~g A .~ ~1 .zr al ~~sy -oaf go'Y p ~o=! ~frYa °~fi `Si: ~Y ~t i~~g a:~3e i73L~ 1; 'i fry i1 x9 o ~;C ~s=a Xi=~ 'fr:g E PgY B .~Y 8L ~4 C`~° °$ ~ ~LB~°°~A ° g. `zja :.eic:°: ?e~~ =i;3-i- °EE~ I~SYS ~L: Y86~~ Yf'IfiI=~7 -Y- ~ IIY~°~T.S:~ ~+ r ~SY=aY' DS ~~-_ -YI h~~~f ~••__ i.. I` 4 y I~;~~ JIS;: ~f1~~S ~I 77 $ug -~ ~e3 °Y ~~. ~: aC5 _~ viS Ca= ~~ ag~ ~: T~F .. g. g$Y f' §~ ge° ~~ YQa °$ s YF "•-~ _~ ~i?~ EYE Yfi^a €:~ "6ao ` ` ~~"~ 2 yy ° Y~FO ~ .6 ! I ~a 7 ! ~ ~ r IS L t I9~ 7 E '~ S~kI YS ~[: `°g D r I ~. ~b ~ i Yj tli ° s t9 f i~b ~~ ~;~ n C V7 ?sF ~ i~ jy~I~ 7YSSZ ie g ~~ L _F is ~_ ~ j .7+xFf r }} j^ .. i~~S~ •I E CL ,. ? 7 ~[ Y v::SZL ~gi Di I Y~1~~~~°6 ;~. S`a Y? IEe.Yi~~~ =`~ Y~ ~+ =i;-~~=~a ;e Yg _4= ~S gPEYe ~7~ }IZ S~ SgZZe g' ~4i ~I? I~Y ~g ~Y-t~~Y_~ .,:e :Ei x- ~:-pavan: °"sp Ei~ .~ ~siC~gl-rp Ysa'~ =4i ~~ ~YiS":jag 87y~yI ~°7 0~ Fg~g~~S~~'~.~' ~:E a:I <~ ?~:bfi~~I-YY ~ ~' 36z ~•r3d .`.°u3~ - 4__ 3 ~3~0 79fi5Y 7g8=„~ -5=..~ ~-" g ! ~ E7~. g~ SY gYg~ esy _ ~°5`C:! £gsfi~5 5#§°E°~Mg °2~:.tl E~oSaE O OL?. SJ~ '~ C i t 4 :_e- _YS :Y ~4 ~~~~iE~~'Y^ °fr ~~ky 'OY3 L F •yw ~';~Q ~ ~ ~~ Ea ~~EC3i;~'a3~ ~la~5 s ~~ ~"~ :g x~ E as Y° _ ~~s- aa~ ~YY E i~` i ~. '`fl ' ~d a. _ e~ asc_.• Y_r E~sE;; s _~5a 'o S°'~e Ya°N E. ~S3y R .e. .. r~y= ~ y=Y~ :e,fr E? ~$ !F~ ~° aa~~s=YE=~° i~yfY a= ~'''c! !?R ~&~ a~ ~is ~~ Y~~~~~~~~ic ;g~ii a~ rE}! ~ 3x=~ E .~ sz~ ! :Y"eEE~~aaE~~ •~si! 4~ __.. :_ ~ ;„s ~~! c«is= i's~. r =..E a a~ fd3Y~ _ ~~b _~_ ebb i .i e~ ¢ .! ;zis ra sa~a "!'=!'F _ ~Qr-y f ~~ _ Y ~ ZY _F_ e:~tEr ^Y ~ ~~ P. `t` ~' ! a_ ~Yy YY fr L ar _'Y '. Z..Y Y~ Vie; =~~: ?' ~g4 ~g3 ~ ag ~eE; :` a.~; :._e'_it SY=~ ~T~£ _'tF~ Y Y -~ ~~" €~3~ E`Y_ _Yygv-Y ._.: :.dY =. o. _oa GG :. _:~=: 55t ."Y~ ed o`a9A 3 .:s ~~: ~.a= €$ ii` ~t: ag~t i. Ot~~$ ~~~ i'~F ~~~ i ~5;: •5a apt ~~~ ~ :~~ °Q~~3 ~~~ $'~~ s° s /) ~F: x~! yF ~ ~~t »'[ F i ^!~ r pie i~4 F~-rt yES 5°° F$ .6 ~Y 6~ ~ Y~b °~! 3~-t- iy'~ ~~e s5r i~'~"~t RFC 3~~5 eE~ $ ''' ~~~~ ~~ :.~s r=s.p - rir ~3i~ ciFa` s~~Si e:i ~ ~i ~i ~I FoF d 2i~' i~$€ ~ ~;~ ` i =a ~i3~ a ~~£. is~Y t ^ -~ i t:: j 3~$s s _~~~ ~ -3 d~`c~ tY~Y iF a ~ f ~s ~ s ~~ r ~ =s,~ 3:~ i !~ 2 s FY .Y ii is ~Y! s 3g ~ r~3 ~ ~ $ 2 i $ ~ lJ• y~~~I s 5.. ¢¢ :.. ~ l~i~ _ ~i8 Yg# ~g ~7~~i i ~ ~ Y2 ~i ~i Wi _i .'~.. -~, `~, w -, -~, , o' -t 'G l ~~ ~Ec: £ 4 ii= gyZ 3 :Y € S~ ~i~ :t €S A8fi~ yy Q0.. C.Yy $ Esiy~ $ _tB a3 a"{{ 5Yes ~ ° S «~~ 1 _ s~-t ~ ~3 5^ a X~,. :fie°~ z _r g s aa~~ ? s°~~~' it ° $i_ ag ;x9 ~;,e s~Y~~ ~ F E s s~ F a&!s~ ~'f ~egt ;e Yryc ~~°= S~~=g `- - $?3- ~^- =_ Orr >~ ~< ~-8 a~zs • <<s ~- -~5~: ~ _`•Ma4g u. i-° ...fr._ M1.i Y~:_ ;~ Y8a iii ti~i _ ~~-I E:a f8E lSS A°d' dsfMgjFV ;,33 d I l l i~ F F I .i -ast s _ ~ ~ ~ ~ e E~a <` `C- E Y~'' b s ~ ~ a p~ J~k~s Ei~a-~ adi ~ F _ _ ~. ~'.k .5 Yd9 y~ t i V ~~ ~ !0 ,e~ y; : ~ Fi Z e ~ya~ x~rt~)I n~~: ~p k e a eI )'= ~ _si~idE ag e~Y Eat-dd! y" s~_i '~ = a D b~ y t = t ~ drrc d.aad_a~ a d:~~ d~ s s~ s .= w Y l s"~d~y is _ [L~ 3 S Y:. ~i ~-- ~~ fix, d s i" ~~ ~ -s r€ ~ a'k I ~~gl ~ I I ~k 3~` t~ ~:F~ .d i d i ~: ~3~~Y id ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~I ~ ~~ ~I _I 8: gx ao a dap ' a Y e dd ~ i y ~ a t ~ t k Y . s` 3Y e g -~ x g = ys`~ = i ~ a ik &Y ~ ?E 3~a t~ Y~ ~ YS ~ ~iN~ ~ e e ~ Er g ~ k„ xg ~ar° ~t Y ~.} xd = d y?s ~' .3_~ ~~.g: - ;~' a ___ ~y3 y May _.. 3« a Y6~i~jt ~°• E~fE.. .e ~ ~ r a " ~a at ~ yL - 5:~2 . " A"~ ~.~ ~~ F'i l S ~ xe ye : 9= y l ~$'.,. ' E Y e F .l ~ s V7 . ~ dk Fp aS 9 o c€4 [o~ E: `E== _; itgg-gg-~i ~gV i~ ~tE a_ :Ye' fio~j:~ a 11 ; 1 ~i _ ~r- r W Y~.•M ~~ E?~ ~ Y ~~YYS ~ 5` ~ Y er air a ~ ~E33° x 3 e fy 8. ~'! ~r '~~ ~ ~~ ~~ai~ ~ ~ e ~~ ~ ~V~"Y 3E i~~ Y ~i j ` 8 ~ E Sg3 ~$ a3R S ;~ ~~~i~ g2dg ~a € 6i ~ 5° i!! E ~~ Y° 3 ~„ r C :53~ S~ S C I t~ tb ~E~ & ~s F ~ Y 5z ~~ EiEi TY ~S i a~ Ci YF84° f,Y SS x'~ ~: Ek_ Y. ~i Yi LL F -.~$ e. FYF ~k Nf °'~st~~ ~t ~Y z~ t iY e ~i;s"3E ~i trd aL ~~ S~r~? 3~ Si ~E ; ~~ ~~ l pl ~I ~I ~I ICI ~I s ~I ~I x- ~ ? ;~ i " ' • $ si i • s x~ y pe =S S~ d as F ~ ga ~} f Y •~ YD ; =~ ;; •E ji ~3 x : Y -~ ~ { Y _3 ~E li =b s`s e~- Y" ! [e ~~ ~Sa SY E F j _ ~~ "„ ~ b 6 C y`Y .. b~ ! ~ ~ ? , ; i r:_ ~~ ~~" ° ~Y• i~+~, S~~ •° ~~ yM~ a~ ,",7 ~~ O _6t gf i~ €~t ~~ S'~ sr L, ~~r ~~ ~. ~~?# ~~i ~~~i ~~~ ~b~ i4~C 4il~c R- „YY F~~Ld YS ~JiS ~~~ ;iE?e ~Y :cam =~s =F3~= sus LY~~2 b YW_:Y _~ -a~ E~~ i~csc_ ~s ~"sa~ rg` gp?.g 't~ Yb= _3 ~-„ &E ~i¢s ~Y; ~~Y~: i~ -a E '' =~= aa~ -,Y~ Sx~ ar= ~~;~ SYZ x~~s =J3 =r3 r~~ ~o3sx .e_ 3~i~ _ c~~~ ~~~P ~I a ~$ i ~S ~L: Q~ oX Fx~ ~,, ~x~ ~i~ 4'A;l ~~ i ,~~ - a~~ r~ _ ~Eg -<. E ~~_: ~ _c _a _ • 6' ~ K °` I LSE ie; ~~; +#a ~gs"E i ~~ _ ~y'~: .I sex ~ CY~ S S ~ I I I °=- ~o Y~ 6 ~3 _ $ ~~QO 535 .'~.~ ~ ~.,~ ~e.: ~~~ x ~~- i-l E-r a~a ~ s Est '~:~ ~' E~ 7y~ E ~ H2 iY Ex ~E~ r3~ Y ; [ SE yE: `¢ g~~e i~~ o iGz 3 = ~x~ z-ys ~~ e ~- e~ x~ =p?g x:r~ ~ _" € gs E: ~x Ere ~_~ `~gyx :-~E ~ `•~~~ { ~~ {Y 30'x' `5 __ f .z- o ° s i_:yi' :oSY gvse ~: ~a i~ Y$E~ a '~ = 3S7 RESOLUTION NO. 91-r9 A RESOLUTION OP THE PLANNING COMMISSION OP TH6 CITY ~ OP RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVEIAPNEN'f PEVIEN NO. 89-18, LOCATED AT 9035 CHARLES SMITH AVEtlU6 Itl TtlE GEtlEAAL INDVSTRIAL DISTRICT (SUeAAEA 1]) O! THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPEC TPIC PLAN, AND MAEINO FINDINGS IN SVPpORT THEREOF - APN: 229-271-61. A. RwStaL. (L) John Dalrymple has tile0 an application for the approval of Dweiopmenc Rwiw Nc. E94B a duetibed in the title o[ this Meolution. Hereinafter in thl• Psaolution, the anbiact Developeent Revive ragout ie referred io as "the application.' (Si) On the 27th dy of March 1991, the PSaanlmg Crc®Lesimt of tsu City o! Rancho Cucamonga granted • mltlgaLd tlegatlw Du+-^~~^- tOt CM (alt) On the 10th day of Api11 1991, the City Planner granted conditional approval of tM application. (iv) The deoLion of the City Planner area timely appealed to thi• coamiesion on ApzLl 19, 1991. (v) on the 22nd day of Nay 1991, the P1annLnq Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conduetu • muting on the application and concluded said muting on that date. (vi) A31 legal prerequiaitea prior to the adoption of this Ruolut ion have occurred. B. Resolution. NON, THEREFORE, Lt is hereby found, deGrmined, and roolved by the Planning Commiuion of the Clty of Rancho Cucamonga ae Lollwsi 1. This Commission hereby apeclfically Linde Chat all of tM Loco set Loren in tM Recitals, Part A, of this Msolution azs true and correct. 2. Based upon wbeuntial widence preunted to this Commie.ion during the above-rsfenneed meeting on Mly 22, 3991, Lneludlnq written and oral staff reports, Chis Cawaieslon herby specil teally lands ar folio«s: (a) TM application appl ice to property located at 9037 cha r:es Smith Avenw with a strut frontage o[ 300 Lest and lot depth of approNimate:y 200 test and is pnwntly vacant) and (D) The property hoe a frontage of 301 lest 'long tte truuay to the east; and 3s8 Pf.ANNING CONNISSION f )LOTION N0. 91-+9 UR 44-14 - BDCTR Nay 22, 1991 Page 2 (c) TM progrty Co tM north of the subiect •!b L vaunts [Llde, the pzogrty to tM enuth o[ the db eoneleG o[ vaunt fUlde, the ptogrty to tM Nei U I-13 tseway, and the progely to the wet ie vuaat. (d) The progrty is located in a Plood Nasard Eonr a dw Co potential overflow tram tM unlmp: oved aegarni o[ Day CtNk Channel Mtwren arrow Roub end Baer Llnr Aoatl. That aagwnt it scheduled to M campLtrd 6y March 1992. 3. Beard upon Ghr aubstentlal evidrncs pnNnted to this Coe•iulm during tM abovr-re[arenced mretinp and upon tM epeeitia findings of [acts rat [orth In prrrgraphs 1 and 2 above, Chic f:ammiaalon Mrsby tilWS and eoncludu a follows: (a) TArt the progesNl proieet la eoaeietmt with tM ob]eetlvu of the Gnerai Plen) and (b) That Cher peepeemd vee fe Lo cosecs rith tlP- objeetiw• et tM. Dmlopmw`t code send tM DerPoeee et tlr dieeeloL io wblch toe elU it Lacatedt mU (c) xMt tM ptepeeed uss Se 1o caeplLnce with ach of the applicable provisions o! the Dewlopwnt Code( and (d) That tM proposed use, togetMr with the conditions applicable thereto, will not M drtrimantal to tM public Malth, gtsty, or wlfara, or materially iniurlous Co pmgrtiee or laptowarnts in thr vicinity. 0. This Ca®luion hu prwlourly, on Narch 27, 1991, rwlrwrd thr pro)ret for campllenee with the Callfornla ^nvironrrntal quality set o! 1970 and, [urthrr, !hl• Comiselon did lour • mitigated Negative Drelaration. 5. Bow uqn the findings end eoneluelons set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 3, and • above, this Ca®leelon Mreby apprevee tM applleuLon wb]ut to each end every conditioe set forth Mlow and in !M attached Standard renditions attaehW hereto and lneorporaled henln by Chia reference. Plennlne Disieions 1) Min-live fee eMll M qid tot landscaping and irrigation the 3D1 leer of frontage elonq tM I- 15 -teeway rlghtro[way. 2) No outdoor storage o! eaehlnery or nateriaL sMll W gceitted wlthwt prier City Planner approval. Outdoor storage o[ vehicles le grmltted wb~ect to adequate eorewinq n required by tM industrial Urea DpeCi[ic Plan. 3s~'i PLANNING COMNISSION OLUi ION NO. 9l-»9 DA 89-18 - 800TN May 23, 1991 Pegs 3 J) Ne permLG for aeeasaery improvamanta (L.e., ~ paving, perimebr voile, light inq, etc), •heil be Lsaued until •11 •its plane, grading plena, Landscape and Lrrigation plena, and Kreet improvaawnt plena are coordinated for consistency. v 1) The ezlstinq overhead utilltUe (aleotrieall on cne preycc ude o! Charles selth Avenue shall W undergrounded tram the fire[ polo ofL-cite north of the projeet'• nerthesly boundary to the first pole otf-site o! the project•• soutMely boundary prier to publ le improvement acceptance or occupancy, vhLeMVer occurs first. TAe developer aY regsamt a seimburesssmt agreement to recover one-halt thm ditlmrmnd betemin the under+greunQinq Croat of the ul111tiN (electrical) on [he Droject side of the street minus those (teleccaseunlcations) on the opposite •ide of the street !!rm future development (redevelopment) a it occurs on the oppoeLU •ide o! the street. Z) Street trees along Charles smith Avenue shall be provided per EnginNrinq standards. An aaasownt for street tress may G required. 3) II the project is to proceed before the completion et the Day Creek Channel improvements, flood protection maaaurq shall W provided as juetitied by a [anal drainage report inoludinq all necoeary hydraulic aM structural calculations. 6. The 6ecreGry to this Ccseluion shall certify to the -dopeion of thla Msolutlon. APPAOVED AND ADOPTED TNIS 47ND DAY OT MAY 1991. PLANNING COMMISSION O- TFg CITY OT RANCHO CUCAMONCA T~[y01ye1, Chairman 3~0 PWHNINO CONMZ SE ZON F )LOTION NO. 9C-+9 9A 89-!D - ~cOTA NaY 22, 1993 Ppa I, Btad eulUr, eaeratary of the Plannlnq Commluion e[ Chi Clty o! Rtncho Cucamonga, do harabY earthy Chat tM torpolnq Raaolution raa duly and ~ raqularly Lntroducad, puaad, and adeptad by the Planoitp Coaalaalon of tM Clty o! AaMho Ncaawpa, at • raqular maatip o[ tha Dlanaioq Coaatiaaloa bald on tha 22nd day o! Nay 1991, by tha Collovinq vote-to-vats AYESS COMMISSIONERS: CHITIEA, MCN IEL, MELCHER, TOLSTOY, VALLETTE NOESt COlOII SSIONEABS NUNS aDSiNTt ,xa~watltltunaatls avuc ..~~1~ E..Y D'.ebi;p_ 1 =Yx=;=~= ~_ . ~S x/Yg YYt CE "~o:-it E~Y~ j k ag x iia: .s z ~Ylf~ ii N a a :- in: r= -! ~~~ s~~ i ~'~ ~` ~~, ==1 :3 t`, ~~ ~~~ y a~D ~Y. s i~~ ~3 t eQf 1s >~t ~~ its +~_ _`~ i~ Fi= j Y~ ~i~3 3, ~I ~I 'aFy $_: ~~~ ~.zfii a' E-~~~ .. q~ ~~`'~ S4~ ~~l~ t~~ ~~. i~_-~ ~~~ ~_'~ ~~.~~ ~5tz~~' :~:~ g~ .: ~ I t4 I 5 e ~ e ~ = i_? ~ _ i i s I ~i tii gFY ~ ~ ~ ; , e ~~~ I 1 i~ i=i Y' y ~ ~ 3 r t s = ~. ~ ~ !I ~ t:f. i:'s ~ ~ ~ s I ~~ ~~c ~t ~~y : s : aii ~ . .. Fa: a i ~ a: F_1 ~g y, -~ ~~ ~~ ~I ~ 3Co2 i i i z I ~~ t, \ ~. i L :~ =; i~. ~~ i ;.j ~g~ ~YLE~I ~,^~~ .~_' 6S9Y t~ti~l_. fs `Y~~ i591S t~~- §=" .~= rg6~' Yr°Yaii~iN F ayyi n- -~t `~8: •3•kit •MEL s~i Aar t: as ~a3siie~~e F -6 io.i ii'i` ~~s Ei ~~a ~i3cf ~i~ti~ aas6F°s~#r~` ~I ~ °s=€e ~! "sag =y`y8Y Ei?= :C xi: 6: ~Y,e 'g~E Yr~ =i^F sgs r: ie. F~ F ~~ C'l -F:~ ~:_- a - eg a =_, aid` ~ Yts g ~k65 ~~~ ~Yae a " bV4• ~_ ~gg:• Cg 7 t -S •~- Si $~ e :_ 3 ~ '= i r .i: C ~' 3s~~ = es ~ rY- Z ~ -:, ~ Ys _~ c~~i x: ii n ~s r;~x i~ ~-"1~ ~~ ~~ i _ s ~r i~ ,~ l.S= ~ ~ ~is :e rr~; d•=s i~ f =..~is's s ~c~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~I _!'E -3 y ~ s: _~ :: ?~S ~i fs _ii~ti z`~S sY i~ =~s s ~3Y tr :- C~rtY i, °ts ~!t ;~ xs~!3i~ag ~3! iF• Jr ~ €pia-Z j_ E i y r ~nii.ti ~EL CYi F.- ~~y F.~f ~i ~~ Y•ri- iBiS Eii ~~ 3se~clxr :5~ ~~_F i•i !~ ~~t~t~t=~xr aY ~S 2~ di R2~~-i Fr[ 1 3(0 3 i~- 'Y~ss-ig €i'9tl 7rE„~ _5=~5 y_- i'~ ~r~fs i~£;'S :; Ei^ :i~~e. i=Y~~2 i gtl S~ it~k~~ 6Y iE 3~ „''s3~s ~ i<a` y Fgf~s ~se `S _:E3x xx:.o, Ic a., ~J . ~c f+ ,r L ;~ .. ~-__ as Y _. ~g saae~s„x..e ~.r~ _ ~3Ya ;__: 6Y 3Y .i 3~Di~5F`~3_ Y"Frb s a °_~ s 3 1~ ;: ia~~aiz~"- ~"srsss ' ;~Y$ QO-~~~ I~ s ~ .j ~ttFia:~'ss~ =~E~i s ~s i a t; .a ~ ~ ;egg it ~ ss 3t ~c..FFs-s~xn ~~FY i ~~:3 `~ 'az t.! b «E_ t~ sI~{F53:F:r sd~i: - -~"s'x (~ fi`~o Fs :a ?g! 1R x~:a•s~~°r YrI3= I~ ==Y= sass 3~; ~y ;c# ~F ~FS•+:srs siYi: YD ~tc~ ~~?R ypd ?~ ~:s - r3i~'3=»Eyii c=~"s~ ~~ ..s5 y~-s ,.~~ r-T Y~~ ~53~~ I~3~a iIsl ~~ ~ar~. -Y~€e ~s~ Is iF~ ~~= Fri°-°,~Yr 1-; ~~~~r ~~ ~i~s~ 'xisY ~`~ :~ :::°i ~zir z«!~~~~i3j~~ i~=iFs i~ ~F3a~ 'i ~~~ ~ ~ y ~~ ~ -1 _Y~ YgF iF Y£ Y Y~6T - s s ~_ :i , ~- _r-` 'fi`t ~_ '~ #~ ~ai .5 ~l YY F '~ fI - - '~~s -pr Y. - ~' F' C= EgQ ~i-}'= i I~ - i+ -3 t °u C 1. ~t?j sr~r air ?;t a; ~" irs;, ° ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~~ €_ ZSF =of ~i LxYt :.: Y io7 +TYT~Y .~ }}f~ is Y~EE ~rs~y~ ii - = _~tgt -i ~~~; t~Y-33Z~ _= 6 =: ~i~~Yi !o 'ei! ~s~s~~E 3E Iapps x!;i_T: s d' ?d ~~3; ~rsd3~~ yS~ YYY- F,;.3ltY Fs [L F. .3 lfffCC CY Y~a~~ §~~ Q~ o? II ~, '~ ~I i~ I i~.8 ~C Z=~Y Sri g~i Yx ~ ~~ _ ~s~a L_~ 11 ~~ ! Y~ 7C~ xi~ ~ ;e~! ~~i ~~: ~~ =~. Fs: "}' ~i'-~' 3~~ ~i YYY ~"~ ~ i~_t 56_ ag~ Y}J=t ~ . _" ~~~ 3~~y~ Y~F iYY SYY (~ \Y~. 3~~; i~ psi=~ ~ ~! ~!E _~s-s aai-,; ;~+sY his ~T~r tiY~ dfi~ a€'C3 i~:ii ek~ ~i ~i ~I `_#~~ si~~ ~sY=i 3 ~~r ~~YeF yF~Y CY~2~ ~~"Z ~z ri is ~~ ~ 2/~ C 'Y ~ !_ f "i "~ C~'~ - ~~ ~~~ v y ~ Z S "~ E.~ ~ $ j~ r7 s-iii ~ z~ ~ C£i~ S+3y ~ ~# i t ~V ~S'f:l ~ ~ ~~2 ~i ~i ~ -, F-`oS Y ~ ~_aa2 .,$ ~i~s s €~g i .a?~ i ~~: ~=" r fit: io x Yb = ~3r ~- f ~~t s, 3 ~ 3~ ~a~ ~ ~ tiFi' S ~ Y {ys ~Y ; ~r g g~~ S:ii Yt p ~ ° ~ t ~ i ri }~ i ~Zgg A: St -y~ ~ ~i~ ~_Y F _ E ifr `~ Y a~ EjY~£ _x 3sY ~~ R: " Ya x~~ ; Y ~Y Lie ~, 1 ASR GyY~ sF~ S 46= { LL Y s yT'Y'e, L • ZY ~ F ~ _ Y .~ F 7YY jj~~ ! ie Y ~C Yry YY 3" 3 ~Y~ 7 Y Fi ia e[ i~t ~ _ . -';:£ :~~ " Ta .e~. ioSV~ CFA e ~ i 8 yy ,=., °$3 :ci e~g s ~~ i;; iii• J y ~ /I €~ M1 ^' ~~~ ~~ _ 3~s ~Y~~ .-~~fO ~'~ 7~ I i i 6 ~ E ~Y~s ri~a-~ i~t ~ ~ a ~ a _s_-~. ~YOi x ~_z- :34 F~ a aY s r~ _~'"_~ * ~ J N ~ s 'Y'es 55 S5Y~ ?~E ~ps +~ Y ; 33 "! l =vi- SL=r=~1 ~'r is ..~ t w i j+ d - a ~ S Pi Y ~ ~It~l ~~ ~i 1~ e ~ i ~ I ~i ~I ~I e: Yx g, •e €~ es" i EY efix F }b ~fi! :SYg Y i Yi=_ 8 Fk `+' t Ye E ~~~i3 - i a a i; #~i ~:_~ ;- `` ~;a+ es I~ .+ ~+ Ci~~i i€ ~~ Y=i~~ ~Y. ~;g .: s~ s 7~ai ~ 'cI +I ~I 9+,~ ~ 1y+3 ~g - + i::, SFa~ gar ge 3j = z a~ ~'~ + ~r=+ ii;~ zai+ ~yi ~ ~i~~ :_ fie} ~ ~~~i ~'~~'{ ~BsSa _~ft1 r Y :f~! s sag- i° ; ~' iw=sf +sa- ^x~i~ .3 = e &_~ ~=~~ ~~s= t~f ~~~-~ '~ c s Y= fei:; ~5~os t p 's ~a~? ~_ ala~~ -; 3s i :i_sg t~s0 ~gaa 3r Y 'h= ~af{{M~ ~~ ~g ~ Ya _~ zs"i ~ia- ~~ L= S ! ~; 4j = '~6 goy ;j~+ jg=` _ Sg g E3 B .! + T~ s ~ ~~ x ~! _g Y~ ~~ x~ _: s„ -~ ~€ Yg sg ~~ y~ ~t 77+_ gE i~ ~~~ ~o 36~ - - - ~~, =_= eg - aka s ~s~Ms ~ a e J `Bed V a8~ r € .~_rY ; _ s nyd~X /~ a= k!f Y Y ~•' Et~iY = = i 5 b ' ..e;o 3e 5Y9 gp ~~ i ! ~~ 5 e S T ' ~a ~j ~ 6 ~ I e "; Y ' e ~b X ~ L 7 ~ _ Y 4 s p i B g 3 F~ ~ E i PS F ~ ' L _? QF Y ~ y C ? ~ ~ i ' !' f t i i t ~~ V ~' _ XFF~ !E f9 ~ [~Ti~ _{ YY _t [ ~= ~ ~. ,..: _ { ; ~~ ss Yy e ~~~ of ) ~i `I I~I o i NI `Y y ~k :~ Y.^ .b ~~ ? _~- Ai ~~' !x ~i `3r :a3 !f q# i. L °: YC ~° y„ _ gY g5 8 2 ~Y 3 z~s ._ rC~ 3a _. ~ Y .f ' a yf. ~~~ i6 O ss sY i c:~ a$ n. ~;z ~e z I 4 5 i r i~ 'i ~ ~~V i ~s: xr 5~~ Zr~ Y~ x.i fr- _~'t- i _6F (Y 5~ ~: EY ~~ ~~ Y Y9`-` g~=~ :Yi, €k~F .~~ ~~ p CS ^'S is .!~ fn Y~7 __ ~L~ ~~C EY ~=f a e.e1 ~Yi ~s=r a` ~ Je/ Ys _: ~Y~ i~- - y= _xs~~~'jyy_a i=?=~ _Ye~ ~2 ~~_._ Ya ~~~r qao ~•~x. t, -a: ~ _ ~~~b 'gig a;'~s -_- - ~ 3~ ~ =_~ Pa ~~ L I~ C t 1 i L ~o 6 ~5 fo 6C ~ ~~` oS F.tl `^y ~~ i~1 1= _ '~,, i 4 ~' i ! " 'il ~I ! 3 F .i I ~ eri .,~ I 5YY E_; °; Y6 i cif i Yas .I o ^:fiD __ ' L.^Y __ L Y `~°f ~ ~ Y ;~,;~ Se Fy`5 i C ~t iL 5^ ~_Y _ Yp y~~~ LL ~}~ n S ; ~ ?: hJ ~~ ~ = C Y 71S Y:-~ Y '•i~ i. i $~xi 1i ;i Ekk2 gii. ~Y- lkY~ A~' s:g~ ~ aLf~ ~_ `. :S-2 --= _ ~~1: Y. k5 <. ^ Q'~ L'"~; Z 1 O O !~ C'. ~ ~ E 9 Z yy .:i • ~ 6 _! y ~ : ; ~ ; f Y~~ s ~ C ~ L 2~_ Y f 9 L L ~ -_ _~ =1YC i.: =~ ' YY ti t :~~~ A~ '~~ ~~ ~: ~~ ~Y ~ ~F ~~ Yk~Y Y- ~~ ~£ ~~ :[:~ 8; iil ' l a: ~ y, l ~i r o= YS ~~ ~; YE~ fig' ~~ tl >y == ~~ ~ e .=n a ~ _~ s~~ ga P ~Vx ~~ # S ~~~ F of ~ ~ ~~~ Y _ 3~0 _ G ~~o~k ,,, ~ .. Qu~e . 3~~ RESOLUTION NO. 91- I t,] A RESOLUTION UP THE CITY COUNCIL OF TH6 CITY OF AANCHO CUC,AMONGA, CALIFOANIA, UPNOLOING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO AEQUIRE PAYMENT OF AN IN-LIEU P8E FOR LANDSCAPING WITHIN THE I-15 (ONTAAI O) FREEWAY RIGHT-OP-41AY, POA DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 09-Te, LOCATED AT 9937 CHARLES SMITH AVENUE IN THE GENERAL SKDUS?RZAL DISTRICT (SUBAREA 73) OP THE INDUSTRIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, AND MAKING PLNDI NG5 IN SUPPORT THEREOF A. Recitals ~~) .. c... Lairympie has filed an application for the approval of Development Review No. M9-1E ae described in the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Review regueet ie referred to aE "the applLcation." (il) On the 27th day of Merch T99T, the Planning Comsieeion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga granted a mitigated Negative Deelatatios for the application- (iii) On the TOth day of April 1997, the City Planner granted conait ional approval of the application. (iv) The deci aion of the Clty Planner was timely appealed to the Planning Commission on Aptil 19, 1991. (v) On the 22nd day of Nay 1991, the Planning Comma a9ion of the City of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hear.in9 on the appeal and adopted its Resolution No. 97-69 which denied the request to delete the condition requiring payment of an in-lieu fee for landscaping within the 5-15 (Ontario) Freeway right-of-wny. (vi) The Planning Comma asion's action was timely appealed to this Council on May 31, 199 T. (vii) The City Council heard the applicant's appeal at its July 3, 1991 meeting and Concluded said meeting on that date. (viii) All legal pzerequisltea prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred. B. Resolution. MOW, THEREFORE, it. is hereby found, determined, and resolved by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga ae follows: 3~D CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION N0. DR 89-1H - JONIi DALRYNPLE July 3. 199? rage 2 1. This Cnuncil hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals, Part "A,• of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. Hosed upon substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced meeting on July 3, 1991, including written and oral staff reports, this Council hereby specifically finds as tollowa: (a) The application applies to property located at 9037 Charles Smith Avenue with a street frontage of 300 feet and lot depth of son.....+..-~-_•_; 200 feet and is oreasn•~.. ••_:_...., ;...,. (b) The property hoe a frontage of 301 feet along the T-1$ lOntario) Freeway to the east; and (c) The property to the north and south of the eob1ect Bite 2e Vacant fields, the property to the east is 1-15 (Oatarin) Freeway, sad the property to the west is vmant. (d) New davelopvent along the I-15 (Ontario) Preeway corridor hoe been conditioned to install landscaping or pay in-lieu fees; and (e) The current policy applies universally to all proper tl ee which adjoin the freeway right-of-way. (t) The applicant had Full knowledge and disclosure of the recommended condition prior to the City Planner's approval of the application. 3. Hosed upon the substantial evidence presented to this Council during the above-referenced meeting and upon the specific findln ge cf facts set forth in paragraphs ? sad 2 above, zhie Council hereby finds and concludes d9 fO11oMe: (a) That the deletion of the condition for landscaping would not be consistent with City policy/ and (b) That the deletion of the condition for landscaping would not be consistent with the objectives of the General Plan; and (c) The granting of the appeal would not be consistent with the Ci iy's goal of providing needed screening and aesthetic improvement along the I-15 (Ontario) Freeway; and (d) That the condition for payment to install the landacapi.ng is not unreasonable nor inequitably applied to properties which abut the I-15 (Ontario) Freeway. 3?I CITY COUNCIL NE6OLUTION NO. DA 89-18 - JOHN DALRyMPLL July 3; 1901 gage 3 4. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in pnragrapha 1, 2, and 3 above, this Council hereby uphol de the Planning Commission's approval of Development Review B9-tf subject to those condLtions contained in Planning Commission Resolution do. 91-49. 5. This Council hereby provides notice to John Dalrymple that the time within which judicial review of the decision represented by this Resolution moat be sought ie governed by [he provisions of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 7094.6. 6. The Cirv r1e.~ _ __- -1 LZ naocno CVCamonga ie heroby directed to (a) certify to the adoption of Chia Resolution, and (b) forthwith transmit a certified copy of this Resolution, by certified mail, Teturn- receipt requested, to John Dalrymple at the address identified in City za cords. 37Z ---- ------ CiTi Gr icniQCiiil ci;cAMU1vcA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 3, 1991 T0: Mayor, and Members of the City Council I FROM: Joe O'Neil, City Engineer BY: Dan James, Senior Civil Engineer ~ SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR REFUND FOR PORTIONS OF DRAINAGE FEES FOR 13181 VICTORIA Avenue Mr. Banks has raised a policy issue regarding refunding of drainage fees that requires City Council consideration. Staff is also seeking direction for establishing a policy regarding waiver of increased fees due to delays caused by an appeal of a City tondi ti on. BACKGROUND The City Council, when considering Mr. James Banks Jr. request fora drainage fee refund at its meeting of June 5, 1991, directed staff to review situations of when increased fees are established and repercussion upon processing of projects. The concern is that if due to a City condition and an appeal thereof the delay in issuance of building permits could cause urea se in fees due to new fee amounts. The question is then, is there a reasonable method or policy by which a project could be deemed to 6e in delay due to no fault of its own thereby should not be subject to the increased feesZ The first area to be considered would be la.^.d development review for the more major developments. The first concern staff has regarding establishing a policy of this nature is how far back in time could a delay caused by an appeal of a condition be considered for waiver of the increased fees. Keeping log of these various delays antttipating possible increased fees would be a tremendous chore. A possibility would be to incur^orate the concept that any appeals during the development review process leading to Planning Commission approval of conditions would be deemed as normal processing of development and would not be considered as an appeal process which would lead to waiver of the Increased fees. Nith this in mind then the next stage of development would be development processing, the further submittals of technical plans and City Staff review for compliance with the approved conditions and City codes and standards. During this stage a more detailed review is performed and based upon this review the developer then comes to the realisation of the full ramifications of complying with the conditions or City standards. The Developer will often request meetings and leniency of these conditions from 7 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT .iercc nprprc July 3, 1991 Page 2 the G1ty Engineer, City Planner or Building Official. Resolutions are often. reached by the division head without an appeal to the City Council. The resolution is not a deviation from the conditions, only an adwinistrative judgaent. If a resolution is not achieved then the developer does have the right to appeal the condition before the City Council. Normally appeals of this nature does occur towards the end of the process and would affect the ability of the project to pull permits. However, it would be impossible to determine the time delay due to thfc nnn irem ~t rr, ,.verse... ~,. _..._ ..,_ project. There may be other non-controversial~condiLions Lhat are stillybeing worked on, therefore the project as a whole is not being delayed. Should a policy actually be approved to describe the situations by which a developer could obtain a waiver to any increased fees, this list of situations would have to be open ended artd subject to amena.ent an an ongoing basis. Neer situations would arise by which a developer could think that his project would be subject to the policy but Ctty staff would not. These would then b~e brought before the City Council and the list amended to specifically include ar exclude this situation. ' It is clear that the request from developers to yet a waiver fraa increased fees would be an ongoing battle if the City attempted to adopt a policy to describe who can and under what circumstance obtain a waiver to a new fee. This not only would get into new fees for building permit issuance but may also involve new ordinances such as the fire sprinkler systems or any new plan check fees which may be adopted. The above comments are brief considering the extend of the various scenarios which could occur with the major developments. A policy of this nature would only provide developers an opportunity to create problems or put the blame on City staff for delays to their project in order to obtain a waiver to new fees. It is staffs' recommendation, in concurrence with the City Attorney, that to undertake the task of formulating a policy for major developments regarding what type of a project, within a specific time frame, and under certain situations would be illegible for a waiver to increased fees or City ordinances, would not be in the best interest of the City. I;owever, there are the minor development situations which rely upon staff review only for compllante with Cify codes. These projects are usually much less complicated and more straight forward. It does seem feasible to classify projects of this type consistent with current City ordiance and separate them from the major developments. Tracking of these project and being able to determine the delays due to an appeal would be within the realm of the current staffs' record keeping process. 3~4 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REDORT JAkE_ 5hi~S July 3, 1991 Page 3 If direction 1s given by City Council to further pursue this policy far the minor developments a Hare detailed analysis of the Municipal Code is needed to dete~mi ne all the sections which may need amended to provide for this policy. A policy of this nature would involve all divisions of the Community Development 6epartment and further discussions with the City Attorney. In regards to Mr. James Banks, Jr., his room addition for his single family home would be within the category staff 1s pursuing to have included within the policy. Therefore staff is requesting due consideration be given for Mr. ~cyucSL of - ciww. oiaii uuea aLFtluwICUyC GIU4 rir. 1/6nRS Has accurately reflected the history within his letters to the City. A Copy of the June 5, 1991, staff report is attached for City Council's further review. Respectfully su ~~~ ila. J. O'Nefi City Engineer NJO:DJ:dlw Attachment 3 -i s CiT's OF ttANCNU CCCAMOYGA STAFF REPORT GATE: June 5, 1991 T0: Mayor, and Members of the City Council FROM: Jce O'Ne11, Clty Engineer BY: Oan James, Senior Civil Engineer ~unJtC is RE4UEST FOR REFUND FOR PORTIONS OF DRI gECp~ENOtTLYI Mr. Banks has raised a policy issw rtguding refunding of dratnage fees that requires CT ty Council consideration. BACKGROUND Mr. James Banks, Jr. is requesting a hearing before the City Coucil via letter dated April 16, 1991. Mr. Banks is requesting Council consideration of his withithe Tssuancefofda building permit for araroomgadditionetoahlsiresidenceion the facts as stated Dy Mr. Banks are accurate. In short, Mr. Banks obtained approval from the City for the rose addition in mid year 1989. Mr. Banks ob3ected to a condition of the approval try the City which required planting of certain trees in the right-of-way. During the time Mr. Banks appealed this condition to the City Council the Ordinance establishing a dratnage fee for all permit Issuance within the Etlwanda/San Sevaine focal dratnage area was approved by the City Council. The effiectlve date of the Ordinance was Noveeber 5, 1989. Mtth the appeal of Mr. Banks requests for release from the tree planting condition he was unable to pull his bull ding permit until January of 1990. Therefore, Mr. Banks was brought under the new Etlwanda/San Sevaine Drainage Fee which was not in effect at the time of his original approval. From the staff view point the Issue is quite c7 ear that the 6u11ding permit was obtained subsequent to effective date of the Ordinance providing for the new dratnage fees in the Etiwanda area. It is true the decay 1n Nr. Banks being able to obtain his building permit was due to a condition subsequently appealed to the City Council. Release of the condition was granted by the City Council. Once that release had been obtained, then Mr. Banks was able to go forward and obtain his bu it ding permit. 3~~0 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT 13181 VICTORIA ST -JAMES BANK, JRS. June 5, 1991 Page 2 Since the building penelt was received after the effective date of the Ordinance, staff does not have the authority to grant release in this situation through adielnlstratlve review. F1na1 interpretation as to the effective date of the Ordinance relative to the building per+eit application by Mr. Banks is an issue the Cou~tl will consider during thfs pubife hearl~g. Letters fray Mr. Banks detail ina the issue and a wannnu 1.N.. s..r .~ ~! y are attached to this agenda tta~ and tMse letters cieariy state the facts relevant to this request for release. If approved by Council tM refund would be approxlaxtely 14,700. P~spactfully subeltted, COININITY DEVELOPMENT DfPARTMEtF( EN6INEERLI6 DIYISIBtt~ Joe O'NeTT ~/ City Engineer JO: DJ:d1w Attacharonts 377 Baa~ce & Ritc ~ie s~i.c zo u~m ~cN.eP ,.ew or"~r. ES .EYES 9p Nn 5,.P i0 )"B^C ~v iC CC N)CP OPiVC .. _up5 0 Gi .Nii, P~ryONO <U<.NONO.. CF l1.OP N1I, p~)JO .iC9Ei' = n\..=SEN 11 December 1990 ~)~~~~ o"o~J")) Jerry Fulwood City Manager's Office City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Centnr Drive cucamonge, Ceuxornia raiau Deer Mr. Fullwood: I am writing to you beeeusa you do not know me. That may seem bizarre at first, but I don't want to put any wf my friends et the City "on the spot" by mskinq a fival ds~seM for pa7me::t of money I feel the City owes me amt pat them into a position of having to reject me. If yon rejsct my ragnest, I can eimplp file my suit against the City with no hard feelings. Since you have no previous background with my problem, I will explain it briefly and then thoroughly. Tha problem arose when my wife and I sought to put an addition on our home aL 13101 Victoria, Eiiwandn, California, legally described as the East one-half of Lot• 2 and 7 of the Preliminary Map of Etiwanda Colony Lands. The City of Aancho Cucamonga imposed a condition on the issuance of a building permit for an addition to our residence. The City of Rancho Cucamonga, in effect, required us to plant a row of Eucalyptus trees along the Victoria Street frontage when the time is right to do eo by the recording of a "lien" against the property. The Etiwanda Specific Plan (ESP) i^ the planing map and program for the Etiwanda area of Raaeho Cucamonge. Tha BSP puts conaidereble emphasis on the preservation o£ existing windbreaks and planting new ones where old ones have failed. The ESP provides for n Sucalyptu• Maculatta windbreak along the south aide of Victoria Street which i• the north boundary of our property. The BSP contains maps which show the location of the Eucalyptus Maculatta windbreak. I don't know the exact distance, but for purposes of discussion it is sufficient to say that the ESP calla for a Eucalyptus Maculatta windbreak 30 feet south of the center of Victoria Straat. Our neighbors to the east and went have windbreaks which axe roughly 30 feet south of the center line of Victoria Street. The windbreak on our property i• approximately {5 feet south of the center line of Victoria Street. lu n condition of obtaining a 3~~ Jerry Fulwood City Manager's Office 11 December 1990 Page 2. building permit for improvements to our home, the City Engineer ..J •4_ ~~~ p.~..1•-•~ u .low cu.;a iy Plua flaCUlaLta windbreax approximately 15 fast north of our existing Bucalyptur Globulua windbreak. This we^ patently absurd but it was what the ESP required and the City Engineer was incapable of seeing any logic in varying from the ESP. MY position was that the policy of the BSP was the preservation and promotion of windbreaks end that the rem.i resent of planting a nw wiodbrwk 15 feet north of an existing, seventy-five year old windbreak with 100+ foot trees was sanseless~.either the new trees would die very quickly or they would compete with end eventually kill the existing, mature windbreak. I explained this to the Citp Engineer but he was unmoved. I paid an arborist to visit the Bite and evaluate the City's position as agaiaat my position. The arboriet concluded either the new trees would languish and die or they would eventually kill the old trees. The City Engineer was still unmoved: we had to plant the trees or net receive a building permit. Firmly believing the City Engineer's position to be irrational, we appealed the decision of the City Engineer through the City channels and ultimately to the City Council. The City Council heard the explanation of the (Planning) staff, studied the maps and the arborist's report and then informed the City Engineer that his requirement, while technicslly correct, vas inappropriately applied under the circumstances. As one City Council member told the City Engineer, "That'^ the dumbest thing I ever heard.' The City Council infozmsd the City Engineer that he should come up with another method for resolving the situation, The City Engineer then suggested the ides of a "lien' to assure the planting of the windbreak in the new location at the appropriate time. The "lien" is our promise to the City of Rancho Cucamonga that, when the conditions are appropriate, we will install approximately 20 Eucalyptus Mnculntta trees and provide for their irrigation in the ESP alignment in front of our property. By direction of the City Council, the appropriate tuns to do this would be when the existing windbreak has substantially died out. 3?~ Jerry Fulwood City Mannger's Office 11 December 1990 Page 3. :;.:e I,a uiuiem tooK tnree or four months to resolve. During this procea• many events occurred but two ass of particular importance and i list them in the order of occurrence: 1. We satisfied all the raquirsmante of the Planning and Building Depertmante and substantially ell of the zaquirements of the BmJinsering Department eavi»q and exespti~tg the wfadbrsak regairesmnt. T. The City Council, without notice to us, increased the drainage fee requirement by approximately $0,000. Payment of the increased dry=~'*~ fee wee required as a prerequisite to the iseuanee of the building permit despite the fact that substantially all City requirements had been met wall before the effective date of the increeee in drainage fees. I paid the increased amount "under proteet^ and I soon began to request a refund. I have written multiple letters to the City end to the City Attorney. The City staff has stated that they just don't know what to do with my request and the City Attorney has not responded. I have bean extremely patient. This is my notice that if i do not have a full refund of the increase in the drainage fee by the end of this calendsr year, I sa going to file a Complaint against the City and seek to recover the funds by court decree. I would much prefer to have a parson of Bound judgement intervene end do what makes good sense. I em hoping that will be you. I hops to hear from you on or before 2-January-1991. 'F ncereml~lfl GJ~ii ~a , ~~ . JBJ/dn 380 - ` ~ ~nNCKO cv'c~~~oNCn April 10, 1991 James Banks, Jr., F.sq. Banks & Richie 10788 Civic Center Drive Suite 120 nau.,iw Cucamonga, l:A 91730 Re: 17161 victoria Request for Refund/Appeal of Storm Drainage Fees Dear Hr. Banks: The following is fn resportsa to your ragaaat for mq review of your protrlam regarding the above-referenced matter. I have now had the opportunity to review all past correspondence and discuss these matters with the pertinent staff members irvolvad, and i now feel confident that Z can respond to your concerns. In review oP the correspondence on this matter, it appears that the central facts and circumstances have been well documented and are not substantially _n dispute between you and City staff. As I understand it, this matter originates from the imposition and interpretation of two particular conditions imposed as part of your application to construct an addition at the above-referenced address. These were, as you know, a condition !or windrow tree preservation (relict granted by appeal to City Council) and the imposition of standard local drainage improvement fees. The difficulty arose when, pending final resolution of your appeal on the windrow condition (and prior to issuance of building permits), the City Council adopted its Ordinance No. 402, thereby establishing the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area Storm Drain Plan (the boundaries of which include your progerty), together with applicable fees. Pursuant to the terms of the ordinance, these fees would ba (aa in your situation) cal.culatad and collected at the time of building permit issuance. However, the Ordinance also established new tans to approximately double those you had anticipated at the commencement of your project. Your position, as I understand it, ie not eo much a dispute as to the applicability of doing a drainage impacts in your local area or the calculation of fees, (either based on Ordinance 402 or its predecessor) to your property, but rather the timing of the Mayor DenMS ~ $~OU! CauncJmember Diane 6Vilhtlm5 Mayo/ ~6:¢m yyllllcm J AI¢yantl¢f Caunalmember Pam¢Ia J Wngr• .qcK Lam AIC?, CAN "dgnager ~ ~ Cquna,Temoer Charles J 9uq~-~ ,~~. -. r Mr. Jame9 Banks, Jr. April 10, 1992 Page 2 affective date of Ordinance No. 402 based on the circumstances applicable to your particular situation. Specifically: that you should not ba prejudiced or penalized by pursuing your appeal rights when that adversely affects other conditions, Essentially, that when an appellant is succasalul, all other conditions (i.e., the drainage tee) should have been frozen to the law applicable at the time of seeking those appeal rights. on review of this matter with the Engineering Department, it appears that city Engineering staff applied the basic policy approved by tha City Council as to the applicability of Ordinance No. 402 to pending application. That is, the Ordinance was dratted and presented to the City Council on the assumption that the new leas would ba uniformly applied tC any dawel0pmant application which had not previously paid Leaa at the time of the attactive date of Ordinance No. 402. Although Ordinance No. 402 contains an appeal provision to contest the applicability o! local drainage impacts of a particular property or the calculation of Seas to a given property, there does not exist a relief procedure to the basic policy assumption as to the effective data of the Ordinance. This was the situation when yon initially requested relies from your condition from the Engineering Department and, I believe, continues to be the applicable situation today. I hope you understand that this analysis is offered not without sympathy to your position or that your argument is maritless. As I am aura you must suspect, a number of applicants ware caught 6y the same ordinance change (most with dramatically higher tees than involved in your case). In discussing this with the Engineering Department, many, it not moat, such applicants also complained as to the effective date and impact of the new Ordinance. on review of these instances, I believe that the Clty treated each equally in their liability to pay Leas. Tha simple conclusion Prom those instances, as in yours, Se that from a stafL perspective, the City must treat all applicants (large or small) on an aqunl basis. i sincerely regret any confusion or delay in responding to your concerns. Plaasa Taal free to contact ma directly if you have any questions or comments with regard to any of the matters contained in this letter. ~ /S/~i. n c~~e r e~ /l y , B ~, erry B. Fulwood Deputy city Manager 3 ~ z- JSF/tlr JBF:357 BankH & Bi~~kie ,rv .SS OCT. e:O~ O/ .ii0 uy,.5 TAMES BANA S.JR r.p M05 B NiiC Y,IE Ri BERT! NNV~SEN qp~ 17 1991 CIP! Oi G ECHO CO;,, '77SA, r:~:e~~y_e~ ~r~c c:us:o~~ 16 April 1991 City of Rancho Cucamonga 10500 Civic Center Drive Post Office Box 807 Cucamonga, California 91730 S~iiF iE0 C iviC .EN iCw L.w Cf.iC[3 i0)tlB C.~~C C[NiER ORIVC R..ryC Vp CV CI.u CNGA. C.. Li,O RNi.~ il~)l0 ~ ~)i.1 9B0~0 B)) RE: leou~ak fnr r~fand nr nnrN nn of A~ni.. e,.. s.. Dear Clerk: I request an opportunity to be heard by the City Council concerning my request for a refund of a portion of the drai.mge fees I paid is connection with the iaeuance of a building permit for an addition to mp residence. I hamc made several previous requests Eor this refund and my last appeal was denied April 10, 1991 by Jerry B. Fulwood, Depatp City Manager. While Mr. Fulwood's letter of April 10, 3991, gives an excellent review of the question, I would like to review the problem in a little more detail and present my position as I believe you will present this letter to the City Council to acquaint them with the problem. I applied for a building permit to add on to my residence in Etiwanda. I passed the requirements of the Historic Preservation Commission, Planning Department and Building and Safety Department. I passed the requirements of the Engineering Department with one significant exception. The Engineering Department interpreted the Etiwanda Specific Plan in a fashion which required me to install a new row of Eucalyptus trees about fifteen feet north of and parallel to the existing windbreak along Victoria which is approximately 75 years old and in relatively good condition. While I could have acceded to this requirement and conformed to the condition for a coat of less than 51,000, I regarded the condition as absurd and protested it. Although I was willing to pay all fees and obtain my permit with the understanding that I would conform to the final decision on the tree issue when it was made later, I was told that neither would fees be accepted nor would a permit issue until the tree issue was concluded. I proceeded through an appellate process with Brad Buller to whom I furnished an liberalists report (at his suggestion) at a cost to me of about 51,200. The arborist's report concluded that the planting of a second, parallel windbreak fifteen 38 3 City Clerk 16 April 1991 Page 2. feet north of the old one was very foolish. Mr. Buller recommended compromise solutions. The City Engineer would not budge one inch. I appealed to the City Council. The ~+*p ^_ccroil `- .. Ci~y euyineer ne ehoultl come up With a sensible solution and he did, the night o£ the City Council meeting. I agreed to it on the spot. I paid a day or two later. During the apQroximate four months duration of the tree appeal, the City doubled its draiaage fee requirement, The added cast for my project was 54,017. Thus, the draiaaga fee iacreaee, the arhorist's report sad the cost of waiting ran the expense to ^do what is right" to far more than $6,000. It should be noted, according to the arborist's report, if I had followed the City Engineer's requirement, the health of the existing windbreak-- which the Etiwanda Specific Plan seeks to preserve-- could have been seriously compromised. The City staff has denied my request for a refund of the increased drainage fee on the theory that the fee increase applied to everybody with building permit applications in progress went the ordinance became law sad to allow one exception would open a flcod gate to similar such request a. I submit that my situation ie different from the typical person with a permit pending and that the differences justify the refund. I will explain why. (1) My application, for all practical purposes, had been approved before the drainage fee increase want into effect. With some possible minor diecrepanciea, the only impediment to my approval weeks before the drainage fee increase, was the City Engineer's ateadfaet refusal to compromise on the question of the second windbreak. I had done everything I wee required to do. I had met all requirements except for one requirement which was later waived. My application was really not in procesa7 it was approved except for a later-waived condition. (2) I did offer, both before and after the drainage fee increase, to pay my fees and obtain my permit with the tree question excepted from the conditions based on my promise to obey the ultimate decision no matter what it was. I don't recall the lady's name in the Building Department-- an attractive brunette in her 30's-- but she declined to accept ~g ~~ City Clerk 16 April 1991 Page 3. one of my offers to pay fees which waa made within a few days before or after (I can't recall which) the drainage fee increase. But, even if she does not recall or I cannot ocnerwiae k+a.,vc u.1 - -.:c.. '^_°~i !t ..eat,.. n1V obvious that I would haveudone soVif allowed to~do so. (3) The condition to which I objected was bused on a "ridiculous" interpretation of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. Any decision maker with sound reasoning ability and good judgment would have allowed a deviation orithout~undne delay. Thus it was, by the obatinance or £ear of one civil aervaat taking refuge a.n a trivial interpretation of a minor requirement and unable to nee the overall purpose of the Etiwanda Specific Plan that prevented the approval of my plan in an ordinary time frame. (4) I was carrying out one of the major goals of the Etiwanda Specific Plan by seeking to preserve the existing, magnificent windbreak. The City Engineer was adhering to a pedestrian reliance c.n an obscure drawing in the Etiwanda Specific Plan, the result of which may well have been to defeat one of the major goals of the Etiwanda Specific Plan. (5} The 3rainage fee system is to provide a mechanism for financing flood water runoff generated by development. I still own or control 18 acres at the site of my house which are not covered by any improvement. I have no plans to develop the property. I am doing more than my fair share of percolation and I am not contributing in any fashion to any runoff problem. In conelueion, it is simply unjust and illogical to charge somebody an extra $4,817 and cost them an extra $6,000 or so when they have mat all of the rational requirements, offered to pay and tried to carry out the legitimate goals and puzpoaes of the City thwarted only by the narrowest conceivable construction of an isolated provision of the Etiwanda Specific Plan which would have resulted in a defeat of an important overall goal of the Plan. I request that the City Council deem my application to have been approved when the last requirement other than the second windbreak was met. This date preceded the effective 34~s City Clerk 16 April 1991 Page 4. date of the ordinance which increased the drainage fee. Having established the rolled-back approval date, I regneat a refund of the 54,817 overpayment of the drainage fee. incsrel _ James F1+~~ 3BS/da 38~ C1TY OF RANCriCi CUCAMOivi REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STAFF REPORT DATE: July 3, 1991 TO: Mayor and Members of [he City Council FROM: Linda Daniels, Deputy City Manager SUBJECT: State Library Grant Application for Second Round Funding RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached resolution, approving the library grant application, and authorizing the Mayor to execute the application. BACKGROUND : in April, the City received word that the initial Application for Slate Grant funding had been deemed ineligible. Pursuant to Agency/Council direction, staff has been revising the application for submittal in the second round of funding, ANALYSIS: The application has been revised to reflect the comments from the grant review board and the Agency's library consultant, as outlined in his attached letter. Following the adoption of the Resolution, the application will be forwarded to the County. The County Supervisors will act on it Monday, July ISth, and the new package will be delivered to Sacramento before the deadline of July 19th. Respectfully Submitted, p ~~~ o~, iC7~-~ Linda D, Daniels Deputy Director 7 ?UI-26^'91 biED 11: 11 ID: LII3RFFY CpJSULTfWTS TEL tJ0:o1?a812927 a341 P02 1tAYMOND M. HOLTAND ASSOCIATES LIBRARYCONSULTANTS Parr Ollic49ox 746 Oe/AUi C~/irom//97011 7Nphom /ela/ 75a~7b7B R~rmond M. Hph . SNh Y. Hd( Tune 2S, 1991 Ltrtda DeNe1a Deputy 6ry Mutagu ... w„uuuu«a 10300 cvle center Dove Rancho 4lscamonge. 91730 Dear Mrs. Daniels: I am pleased ro rospond ro your June 23 memo n:¢atding pttrpoaed~t7ouncil action scheduled for 7uly 3 relative to the re•submittul o the Prop. 8855 app Qtrettion 1: Why was the original apDlicatlon ttnsatcusjul7 Response: We wero keenly disappointed with the State Library's dedslon to decles'e die Rancho (.ltcan:onga Library Ineiiglble. We remain oonvintxd thu the application was basically sound and a legitimate response to a very neat need For fmprovW library faellitles. However, et:cordingg ro infarmadon the City received from the California Stak Library, the exiglnal agglicadon was rejected BurinQ the worse of tha stringent elil;ibility review. The application was "determined to be innon-compliance for the folllowing aasons:" 1. 'The Council resolution was viewed as not cotnmitdng the City to the operation of the "addidona190,060 squaze feee" beyond the (:ounty's agreement to operate n 40.000 square £oot building. 2. Square footage figtucs did not Include that of the peridrtg structttn. 3. Cost of staff parking (53,469,035) "should have been shown u site development and no[ construction." Staff parking tatYCnrce Wald have been claimed as eligible cost. ' 4, "Appllcantcould claim l5%wmingancy as eligible t~sC" S. Works of an could have been claimed es eligible costa. 6, All of die tuchltect and engineering tees wtdd have been Olainted es eligible costs. 7. Costs were over matched, 3$~ e ~~ .,_„JUN-26-' 91 b1ED 11:12 I D: L 1 BRgRY ~ONSl1LTFYJTS TEL N0:6194812927 p341 P03 B. Lkmographie dare in the buildingprogramdid not compare kxel norms m those off s lergir population, 9. No legal opinion Sled regarding exceptions to the tide. From the beginning of the application proeeas, State Library tttlmuntedvea made indicated that every effort would be made to elimbtak as many appUcants as possible through the eligibiliry test based on dte legal nquiremenn ropaaseuted try the applicedoii. Whether we seethe results ss fair oQ not, the dcficiendes u aired wave sufficient grounds from the State's viewpoint m declare the application ineligible. 11ds means supposedly that the actual building pLna wars not reviewed. nimuiw wo ayiw with tiro oia[v s enuysis a beside tiro pone. Were there other factors at work such as the size end wu of the projectT Possibly, but, if ao, this was not indicated in the Steae's response.'Aie SQ projects anbmitted in round 1 repnunted a nqueu for approximanly 4250 million is state fbMa. 'Itwu applicadona that met W~bility tequitmxnts and were ranked as "very compeddve" and "competitive' (the two ranks ?tom which winners wen chosen). '??lase mtaled mane than 562 iidldon. Could the reJecdon on the basis of eligibility have been avoided? I[ would appear that the application weuki have bow declared eligible had these seemingly minor enctes been avoided and ALL eligible costs inWuded, ngacdkas of how large soul. Question 2: What are rh¢ chances cf RancM Cacamonga receiving the~grant In the second rotaut7 Response: In our opinion, the chances of Rancho Cucemonga's application being funded in the second round an extremely limited becnuu of a number of factors: 1. Competition ie expected to be even greater in the seoond round. Some estimates havethe number aw'ith up to 33 applicadona submitted Because of the experlena accumulated during round 1, rho Snre expects e moth higher percentage of the applications ro be eligibk -perhaps half or mom. 2. Only S35 million remains for distribution. Given the number of appticadons, it is difficult to bcliwc Chet more than 1r3 of this atmuat would be given a single project The avenge application foz the I l flbtadea in round 1 "very wmpendve"and "competitive" ranks amounted m more than SS.ti million. If round 2 results In a similar cost bmekdovm, and hat[ of the applications end u as eligible and ere tanked as "v competitive' a ll~reties npnsendng~mae tiara S~ millionviding the S37 millim among 3. Libraries named es "competldve" in the 1st mood represent ova S25 million dollars. It would be stnpnsing if some of these are not funded. Hemet For instanu, was chosen as one of thou to be funded but was set 384 I ,rLW-26-'91 WED 11:13 ID:LIBRPRY Cl7J5lH.TRNTS TEL N0:6194812327 x341 P04 aside bmausa the amount of morrry sveilable in round 1 was 5700,000 abort of the 57,203,437 required, 4. The Sate Board 4 bouts. by the Bond Act to continue fncluding the funding of tool libraries as a ry. These could bulk larger in the numbu of applkadone far round 2. 3. Quertlon; What do yeu recommend? ltaaponse: While you have rot salted for our recommendation, we weuW like to offer the toriowmg suggcsnon for conaiauadon. In our opinion, the dty of Beacho e7tcamonga should move ahead httarodiatety on nn aitanate strategy whGher the ap Lt tesubtmard m rot. While ~g for the decision of the State, whichpmayarno occur untB early 1992, the dry 1s passing upp the ecorwmles of what ma~ybe a eevercly sad canarnrcdon marital. Savings could amount m m0lions of dollars. ar insurtce, w Ma 31 bids were opined an s llbruy in Solaro fbtrnry with an estimated cost of 512.2 viillion. Ten bids were recdved ranging from 59.8 m S10.6 million. The low bid represenu a saving of 52.4 million Ia light of this and die substantial competition sndcipated for the secard round of Prop 85 funding, our recommendation would be for the dry m proceed invrrcdiaoety m: 1. Authorize revision of the building progrem roducing the initial square footage to he occupied by the Library m 10,000 agnerc feet, 2. Authorize the mchitect and interior dtxipier m revise the dedgtt develoytilent drawings in accotdarice with the revised buiddlag prr•grant including rho completion of shoo[ 50,000 square fee[ for immediate library use end "shelling" the remaiodcr of the 100,000+ square foot building, az presendy planned, for future library use. Quick response by the design professionals and prompt approval from the various City departments sod other approval bodies would make it possible m bid the buildmg early m 1992, and pemtit the Ciry to take advantage of lows construction costa. The building would then be caropleuxi six months m a yar arlder [ban might ottiuwlse be posAbla If the City chooses m resubmit its application aM is relecrod to be funded, a minimum etfon would be required to complete the intedon of the entire building. Whatever the decision of the dry, we look forward m the completion of tbte much needed pmjeM In as timely a [more[ ae possible. Sincerely yours Raymond M.Holt Library Consultam 3~fv~ RESOLUTION NO. ,~~ A RESOLUTION OF TLS CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCALSONGA. CALIFORNIA, HARING APPLICATION TO TIC CALIFORNIA STATE LIDRARY FOR CALIFORNIA LIBRARY CON8TRUCTION AND RENOVATION BOND ACT FUNDS AND eLABII~iG FINDINGS IN SUPPORT TI~RF.OF A WHEREAS, Ule City of Rancho Cucamonga currently has one 10,800 squaze foot library faclllty; and WHEREAS, the growth in population of the Clty since its Incorporation has increased demands for library services, such that the current facility is not able to meet the current nor projected needs of the residents of the community; and WHEREAS, the State of California did enact Proposition 85 in November, 1988, the Callfornla Library Constructlon and Renovatfon Bond Act, providing approximately $75,000,000 in funding for Ifbrary construction; and WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga desires to make application to the California State Library for funding of a portion of the construction of its Rancho Cucamonga Public Library (the "Library"); Ii Resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, be it fcurd, determined and resolved by the City of Rancho Cucamonga as Collows: I. This City Council hereby f#nds that the facts set forth fn the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution aze true and correct. 2. This City Council hereby certifies that the project budget as identified 1n the "Library Project Budget," pages 39 through 40, inclusive, in the Application for California Library Constructfon and Renovation Bond Act Funds (the "Application"), attached hereto as Exhibit "A," and incorporated herein by this reference, is true and correct, and represents its best estimate of construction coats. Furthermore, such amounts are summarized as follows: Eligible Project Costs $20,086,076 I~lipible Project Costs S10 A7 5R9 Total Project Cost $30,373,658 3~ Local Matching I•lmds $ 7,030,127 State Matching Flurds $13,055,849 Suoolem ntal r~,~.ai m nd 10 ~a~ 5A9 Total Protect Income $30,373,658 3. This City Council hereby certifies that the amount of local matching funds identified in the "Library Project Budget", page 40 in the Appllcatlon, 1n the total amount of $4,239,127 (in addition to the land value of $2,791,000) is committed to this Library and is now available. 4. t hrs Witty ~ouncu hereby ilnds and certifies as follows: (a) All lnfonnation contained in the Application is true and correct. (b) The City of Rancho Cucamonga is able to finance the supplemental funds, fn the total amount of $10,287.582 necessary [o complete the protect rn a timely manner. (c) The local and matching funds required for the construction of the Library will be avallable when needed to meet the cash flow requirements of the protect. (d) The operation of the completed facility and provision of direct public library service shall be under the jurisdiction of the San Bernardino County Library, which will be responsible for operating costs attributable to 40,000 sq. ft. of the new facility. The City of Ranchc Cucasranga wlll eovzr operating costs for the remamder of the Library. 5. This Ctty Council hereby approves the Application and directs the Mayor to execute the Application on behaff of the City of Rancho Cucamonga. 6. The Ctty Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 3rd day of July , 1991. Mayor I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, Ctty Clerk of the C1ty of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was introduced and finally 3~1 Z _ CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA STAFF REPORT DATE: July 3, 1991 J T0: Mayor and Members of the City Council City Manager FROM: Wm. Joe O'Neil, City Engineer eY: N1111e Valbuena, Assistant Engineer SUBJECT: ADPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT, IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES AND ~w~ninn ";[~•Tr m~ m L~unensor Ys rwTCwawrG DTCTnirT wn 1 AND STREET~~LIGHTING~ M1IINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 FOR AMEkDING TRACT 10210, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF ALMOND AVENUE, WEST OF SADPNIRE STREET, SUBMITTED BY FIRST HOTEL INVESTMENT CORPORATION, A DELAMARE CORPORATION AHD; RELEASE OF THE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT ANO IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ACCEPTED BY CITY COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER 16, 1988 AND RELEASE OF THE IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT AND IMPROVEMENT SECURITIES FOR UNDERGROUNDING UTILITIES ACCEPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 18, 1989, SUBMITTED BY NORDIC DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A GENERAL PARTNER OF SKYLINE I, LTD. RECOMMENOATIgI It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolutions accepting the subUect agreement and securities and ordering the Annexation to Landscape Maintenance District No. I and Street Lighting Maintenance District Nos. 1 and 2, and authorizing the Mayor and the City Clerk to sign said agreement and release the Improvement Agreement and Improvement Securities for public improvements accepted by City Council nn November 16, 1988 and release the Improvement Agreement and Improvement Securities for undergrounding utilities accepted by the City Council on October 18, 1989. ANALTSIS/BACKGROUND Tract 10210, located on the north side of Almond Avenue, west of Sapphire Street, was originally approved by the City Council on September 4, 1985, and was recorded on October 7, 1986. Due to potential seismic hazards, particularly fault rupture within the tract site, a seismic hazards report was completed and as a result, lot line adjustments and special setbacks were required. Consequently, an amending map was processed and approved by The City Council on October 18, 1989, and recorded on November 2, 1989. Since approval of the map the only activity has been the construction of the Almond Intercept Channel. The channel is complete and a maintenance bond has been ;~43 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT 7R 10210 u ui'r 3. i4gi Page 2 posted and accepted by the City Council on June 19, 1991. The new Developer, First Hotel Investment Corporation, a Delaware Corporation, is submitting an agreement and securities to guarantee the construction of all other public improvements in the following amounts: Public Utility Improvements Undergromiding Faithful Performance Bond: 51,284,000,00 5535,000.00 -- -- d1.c, ioi uV,lu. J UYG,UIIU.VU LO/,DVU,W Monumentati on Cash Bond = 4,050,00 The above mentioned securities replaces the securities accepted by Lhe City Council on November 16, 1988, and October 18, 1989, respectively. By process of this agreement, the new developer has responsibility of the protect. First Hotel Investment has assured City staff that Nordic Development will no longer be involved in the further processing of this protect, Copies of the agreement and securities are available in the City Clerk's Office. Also on file is the Consent and Naiver to Annexation form signed by the Developer. Respec tful ly[Qsubm'i tted, ~y ~V_ Wm. Joe O'Neil City Engineer 1iJ O:11 Y:JAA: dIW Attachments 3~ w RESOLUTION N0. 9~-~ p ~p A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CULAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING IMPROVEMENT AGREEIENT, IWROYEMENI SECURITIES FOR AMENDING TRACT N0. 10210 AND RELEASING THE IMPROYEMENT AGREEMENTS AND SECURITIES PREVIOUSLY ACCEPTED NHEREAS, Tract No. 10210, located on Lhe north side of Aimond Avenue, west of Sapphire Street was approved by City Council on September 4, 1985; and uur er,~ -- -- my ;+oy ivr Tru~b iu[iu was apProvea oy Ll ty COUnC11 on October 18,E 1989 ~ due W iot line adfustment and special setback requirements; and MHEREAS, First Hotel Investment Corporatlon, a Delaware Corporatlon has offered the Improvement Agreement submitted herewith for approvai and execution by said City, together with good and sufficient ]mprovement Securities. Said Improvement Agreement and Improvement Securities replaces Improvement Agreements and Improvement Securities accepted at the City Councll meetings of November 16, 1988 and October 18, 1989, respectively. NON, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, as follows: That said Improvement Agreement be and the same is approved and the Myyor is authorized to execute same on behalf of said City and the City Clerk is authorized to attest thereto; and That said Improvement Securities are accepted as and content thereof Eby theC ity Attoney; ands form That the Improvement Agreements and Improvement Securities for public improvements accepted at the City Council meetings of November 16, 1988, and Improvement Agreement and Improvement Securities for undergrounding utilities accepted at the City Councll meeting of October 18, 1989 are hereby released. 34 s RESOLUTION N0. ~~ / U ~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF 7HE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING THE ANNEI(ATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT N0. 1 AND STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 FOR TRACT 10210 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California, has previously formed a special maintenance district pursuant to the terms of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972", being Division 15, Part ? of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California, said .. ayc~..a. xn nieeuantn u.>en ~L .numl anu ueslgna cea as ~anascape ner nsenance District No. I, Street Lighting Maintenance D15tr1ct No. 1 and Street Lighting Maintenance District No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as the "Maintenance District"); and WHEREAS, the prnvistons of Article 2 of Chapter 2 of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972" authorize the annexation of additional territory to the Maintenance District; and WHEREAS, at this time the City Council is desirous to take proceedings to annex the property described on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this referenced to the Maintenance District; and WHEREAS, all of the owners of property within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Maintenance District have filed with the City Clerk their written consent to the proposed annexation without notice and hearing or filing of an Engineer's "Report". NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAPgNGA HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: That the above recitals are all true and correct. SECTION 2: That this legislative body hereby orders the annexation of the property as shown in Exhibit "A" and the work program areas as described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto to the Maintenance District. SECTION 3: That all future proceedings of the Maintenance District, including tie Tevy of all assessments, shall be applicable to the territory annexed hereunder. 3~4 E)fHl@I7 •q• ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM I-AND~CAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE bISTRICT NOS. 1 AND 2 'Orlg~nal Poor Quality y ~ 2. ~T/~ del 1i f~ Y+ d] .,-. u. Y Jl \ f U ~a / W~' 39 / •. r Hn Y9 '/ V33 ~ l ~. ,3t•J ~. ~1 ter.` \r O I _ I ~j1 `~rl ~ fa 4~~l lPPt i .1NSP i ;w+~~ s Vi e" 12 ie.1 tqy~ C6~~1 6 ..i~ i NP(P F \'B wwll~I ~iy Li V /0 3 - ' I i - x . IL F ti W hh CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA COUNTI~ OF SAN BERNARDINO STATE OF CALIFORNIA TR/07~ EXHIBIT 'B' PROJECT NAME: TRACT 10210 N0. OF D.U. OR ACREAGE: 36 d/u N0. OF ASSESS. UNIT: 36 assess units STREET LIGHTING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT No. of Lam s to be Annexed Otstrict No. ~ ~_ ~_ -r 1 --- --- -° --- --- 2 36 --- --- --- --- LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT Community Turf District No. Street Name EQUest.Tra11 Sa. ft. 1 Almond Ave. --- --- Crestview P1. --- --- Inspiration Dr. --- --- Crestview CL. --- --- Skyline Rd. 19,200 --- JAA:7/3/91 Ground Cover Trees SQ. ft. Ea. 17,600 69 --- 63 --- 67 --- 12 7,054 60 3~$ 1 fdl RESOLUTION NO. -~~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF T$E CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA. CALIFORNIA, NIABING APPIZCATION TO THE CALB~'ORNIA 8TATE LIBRARY FOR CALBFORNIA LBBRARY CONSTRUCTION AND RENOVATION BOND ACT FUNDS AND IIAHING FINDINGS IIV SUPPORT THEREOF A Recitals WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga currently has one 10,800 squaze foot library faculty: and WHEREAS, the growth in population of the Ctty since its incorporallon has Increased demands for library services, such that the current facility is not able to meet the current nor protected needs of the residents of the community; and WHEREAS, the State of Cahfornla did enact Proposition 85 >n November, 1988, the California Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act, providing approximately $75,000,000 in funding for library construction; and WHEREAS, the City of Rancho Cucamonga desires to make application to the CaUfomla State Library Cor funding of a portion of the construction of Its Rancho Cucamonga Public Library (the "Library"}; B. Resohitlon. NO:i', THEREFORE, be it found, determined and resolved by the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows: 1, This Ctty Council hereby finds that the facts set forth In the Recitals, Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct. 2. This C[ty Council hereby certifies that the protect budget as identified in the "Library protect Budget," pages 39 through 40, inclusive, 1n the Application for California Library Construction and Renovation Bond Act Funds (the "Application"}, attached hereto as Exhibit "A," and incorporated herein by this reference, is true and correct, and represents its best estimate of construction costs. Furthermore, such amounts aze summarized as follows: Eligible Protect Costs $20.086,076 Ineligible Proi ~t rr,ctc 10 oR~ FRS Total Protect Cost $30.373.658 Local Matching Flrrtds $ 7,030,127 State Matching Fluids $13,055,949 Suoolemenral tw.al m,nds $lp ~a~ S.Q9 Total Protect Income $30,373,858 3. This City Councll hereby certifies that the amount of local matching funds identified !n the "Library Protect Budget", page 40 in Ute Application, !n the total amount of $4,239,127 (1n addltlon to the land value of $2,791,1x10) is commuted to this Library and is now available. 4. 'this Clty Councll hereby finds and certifies as follows: (a) All information contained in the Application is true and correct. (b) The City of Rancho Cucamonga is able to finance the supplemental funds, >n the total amount of $10,287,582 necessary to complete the protect in a timely manner. (c) The local and matching funds required for the construction of the Library will be avallable when needed to meet the cash flow requirements of the protect. fd) The operation of the completed faclllty and provision of direct public library service shall be under the JurtsdicUOn of the San Bernazdtno County Library, which will be responsible for operating costs attributable to 40,000 sq. ft. of the new facility. The Clty of Rancho Cucamonga wiiI cover operating costs for the remainder otthe Library. 5. This City Council hereby approves the Application and directs the Mayor to execute the Application on behalf of the Ctty of Rancho Cucamonga. 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution. ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 3rd day of July , 1991. Mayor I, DEBRA J. ADAMS, C1ty Clerk of the Clty of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was Introduced and finally passed at a regulaz meeting of the C1ty Council of the Clty of Rancho Cucamonga on this 3rd day of July, 1991, by the following wte: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAINED: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ATTEST: City Clerk of the City of Ranch h.nomnneo~ (must beaz the city seal) .T[INE 28 1991 ROBERT NORMAN LIATTI PROPERTY OWNER 11143 BRENTWOOD DRIVE RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CALIFORNIA 91730 REESTABLISHMENT OF ASSESSMENTS MEETING JULY 3,1991 /~~~ ~~ 1 pay CC^` '~ RECEIVER __ ~~ ~, CITY CO[1NCIT. MTiMHERS AND MAYOR DENNIS STOUT RECENTLY IT WAS BROUGHT TO NY ATTENTION THAT THERE WAS A SIZEABLE INCREASE PROPOSED IN THE AMOUNT OF ASSESSMENT THAT WE AS HOME OWNERS PAY EACH YEAR FOR LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING. AT FIRST GLANCE THIS ASSESSMENT LOOKS AS IF IT WAS MEANT FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY TO PAY THE LIONS SHARE OF THIS ASSESSMENT~I WOULD LIKE TO FIND OUT WHY THERE IS A 45$ INCREASE OVER LAST YEAR, AND WHY IS IT THAT AN OWNER OF COMM./INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY ONLY PAYS $248.99 PER ACRE WHICH IS 43,560 SQUARE FEET, AND MOST SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ARE ABOUT 6,000 SQUARE FEET,THIS MEANS IF WE ALL WERE PAYING AN EQOITABLE SHARE, A SINGLE FAMILY WOULD PAY ABOUT $34.20 OR .57 A SQUARE FOOT, AND MULTI FAMILY PAYS $193.42 PER PARCEL WFII CH AGAIN IS IN THE FAVOR OF THE MULTI FAMILY OWNER, IF THE MULTI FAMILY PARCEL HAS 100 UNITS HE WOULD ONLY PAY I CAN NOT SEE WHERE THE CITY COUNCIL OR THE MAYOR HAS CONSIDERED THE SINGLE FAMILY OWNER IN THIS ASSESSMENT,IT LOOKS AS IF THE COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR ARE ONLY LOOKING TO HELP THEMSELVES WITH THE DEVELOPERS, AND LET THE SINGLE FAMILY OWNERS HELP PICK UP THEIR TABS. I STRONGLY FEEL THAT EITHER YOU START GIVING THE SINGLE FAMILY OWNER MORE SUPPORT, OR I SUGGEST THAT WE START LOOKING FOR LEADERSHIP THAT CAN STAND ALONE, AND NOT HAVE TO BUCKLE UNDER EACH TIME SOMEONE OF MEANS CROSSES THEIR PATHS. I WILL BE THE FIRST TO PAY MY FAIR SHARE OF TAXS AND ASSESSMENTS, BUT I WILL NOT PAY WITHOUT FIRST KNOWING THAT THE AMOUNT I PAY IS FAIR FOR ALL ALIKE. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THIS TOWN NEEDS BETTER LEADERSHIP THAN IT HAS) THERE HAS BEEN TOO MANY PROPOSALS PASSED THAT LEAVE THE SINGLE FAMILY OWNER OUT IN THE COLD AND THAT INCLUDES OUR CHILDREN AND THE SCHOOLS THEY ATTEND, WE HAVE A MULTI FAMILY PROBLEM IN OUR CITY NOW AND THIS TYPE OF INADEQUATE MANAGEMENT ON THE PART OF OUR CITY~S LEADERS MAKES A SEVERE PROBLEM CATASTROPHE. I WONDER IF YOU FORGOT THAT THE BACK BONE OF ANY CITY IS THE HOME OWNER, NOT THE RENTER WHO HAS NO INVESTMENT IN THE CITY AND WILL LEAVE ON THE DROP OF A HAT, THEY PAY NO TAXES AND ADD VERY LITTLE, IF ANY, TO THE CITY THEY LIVE IN. MOST OF THEM CARE LESS ABOUT THE WAY THEY TAKE CARE OF THE PROPERTY THEY LIVE IN AND EVEN LESS OF THE CITY~S PROPERTY, SO WHY DO YOU FEEL THAT THIS FRACTION OF THE CITY NEEDS THIS TYPE OF A BREAK WHEN IT COMES TIME TO PAY UP) THE PROPERTY OWNER OF THE MULTI FAMILY SHOULD PAY AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF THE ASSESSMENT AND THE SAME SHOULD BE PAID 6Y THE COMM./INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY OWNER(THEY CAN PASB THE COST OFF ON THE RENT THEY RECEIVE. YOU MUST START THINKING ABOUT THF. SINGLE FAMILY PROPERTY OWNER OR WE AS OWNERS WILL HAVE TO UNITE AND FIND IMPROVED LEADERSHIP. Y~~g,,,,U//rr~,,,,/''V, OA~T ~ ~., ROBERT LIATTI WE THE UNDER SIGHED AGREE WITH THE ABOVE r ~,.~~ ~,~, _, , _ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ -~;~~~~ ~ awn , ~ `~ ~1~'~`~~u~~~~ ~I ~tiBLiC t~i~3TIC~ .;,i ~:;~ , ~h G* On July 3, 1991, the Rancho Cucamonga City Councll will conduct ubl{c hearings to consider the establiahment of assessments for vorlous ~~ P htinp and landscaping distriNS for Hscol Yaar 1491.1995!. 7h~ haorlnps shall ba held In the Clfy Councll chambaro~~ 7:00 p.td. or as won ihereaNer as possible at 105Q0 CIvIc Center'brlve, Rancho Cucamonga. The plstricta and the proposed assessment/'era os follows: •~ turronf FY 91 / ~2 Dtstrlcts Auessmanf ~ASfasisnanf Street Lightlry 1 (Arterial) S 9.25 5 18.18 Street Lighting [ (local) i i~.w a nrr m Street Lighting 3 (Victoria) 5 p•~ 5 ~•~ Street Liphtirtp 4 (Terra Vlcta) 5 ~•~ ~ 520.00 Street Lighting 5 (Caryn) S 20.00 520.00 Street Lighting 6 (Comm./Industrial) 520.00 S 20.00 Street lighting 7 (Etiwanda North) Rate during formation in FY 90/91 was 532.16 S 32.16 Street Lighting 8 (Etiwanda South) Rate during formation in FY 90/91 was 5121.92 SI21.92 Landscape 1 (General City) 535.00 S 69.95 landscape (Victoria) §204.75 2 Single Family 5376.00 5409.50/acre Commercial 5752.00 S 51.19/acre Vocanl S 94.00 Landscape 3A (Hyssop) 5258.75 5379.38/au Landscape 38 (Comm./Industrial) §170.00/acre §248.99%au Landscape 4 (Terra Visio) 5110.25 ,Single Family -,-a . 5240.18 Landscape 4 $ 91.45 Multi Family 5193.42 landscape 4 S 10.25/oae Vocont S 25.09 Landscape 5 (Tot Lot) 5705.00 y105.00 Landscape 6 (Caryn) 5195.00 5235.48 Landscape 7 (Etiwanda North) 5 75.00 5400.58 Landscape 8 (Etiwanda South) 5 95.00 5745.22 Comments regarding the recommended rate for FY 91 /92 can be made at the meeting on July 3, 1991, or submitted in writing to the City Clerk aT the address set forth below prior to July 3, 1991. For further details refer to the ad found in the legal notices section of this paper. Copies of the Engineer's report regarding the recommended assessments are available for inspectiuon in the City Clerk's CNfice ai 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. Questions should be referred to Walt Stickney or Joe O'Neil at (714) 989-1862, extensions 2310 and 2301 respectively. ~; , 'Qrig~na~ ~p0ti Quality D» » .. .E. .e: l I z av. W~TCU TN NII yyy yMN SIM. M~IIISmy Ylflyp /vDENM13L 3TDVT AYry NOM •D~/A3 Jamul ~d/\ 4` ~/\ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ';~ REINED ~;' \' ~ rAa ~' \i~ ~.. ~,,z.,~ -~~.~,...~ ~~ c~.a, d~--ems- ~~-r' v .~. ~, ,, c ~ ~-ASS--.~-.. ~~rc.,,.G ~~-t--- ,;~~G~ ..c.J.~~,``ti"-~ ~~p-c. ~ ,, ~i. o .,, the ~-1~~4 t~~-.F ~,,. ~ ~.~~ d-..:,.~, =ice,, },~z u~~.:.u~ ..i. ~~=-~ c~~ ~'^.' ~1. G,0 l~,ceu.~ ~ R &~ Cc~. ~w /tn-e, ti.c w...cu Co~~.~~.-..% o-~ -tea, ~u.~z , tow- ii•Ct E !~ ~~ C.v lwcty- Y ~~i Zr.-.~-~.. ~ tE°w ~°~~ ~ f July 1, 1991 Office of the City Clerk 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 T0: Members of the City Council of Rancho Cucamong and Mayor Dennis Stout RE: Assessments I strongly object to the proposed increase in current assessments as shown in Resolution No. 91-149 to recommended amount in 91/92 or a~ other increase to property owners. Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 be darned! This same "act" was used by the people before you to stuff "Red Hill and Heritage Parks" at us, and it is still just as unprofessional now as it was then. It is a rotten way for you to carry on in the office for xhich yov were voted and entrusted 6y the will of the people. Remember what was said about those before you? All is not forgotten. why can't you put this and all other "tax-like" assessments to the vote of the people of our fine city? The best reformers the world has ever had, are those who have commenced on themselves...please try it. --- ~. Sincerely, ` ~'- ~''-~ ///~ ~\~~ ~~~ ~~ ~ / James R. Hiil _ ~ 9 ]9~ '~, 9073 Mandarin Ave. ~" Aita Loma, CA 917D1 RECEIVED :;_ _ l' July 1, 1991 Office of the City Clerk 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 T0: Members o£ the City Council of Rancho Cucamong and Mayor Dennis Stout RE: Assessments strongly ubj ect to the proposed increase in current assessments as shown in Resolution No. 91-149 to recommended amount. in 91/92 or a~ other increase to property owners. Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 be darned! This same "act" was used by the people before you to stuff "Red Hiii and Heritage Parks" at us, and it is still just as unprofessional now as it was then. It is a rotten way for you to carry on in the office for which you were voted and entrusted by the will of the people. Remember what was said about those before you? Ali is not forgotten. why can't you put this and ail other "tax-like" assessments to the vote of the people of our fine city? The best reformers the world has ever had, are those who have commenced on themselves...please try it. ~incere.l y, -~~~-~ r `~ ~1~1~'d ~ep1 James P.. Hill ~/~~ ~ ~e01 / 9073 Mandarin Ave. !-, ,' rn Alta Loma, CA 91701 ~ R '`~ (sasa~ u~) ~aiy paure;u~y~ N .. .... ..: .......... .. N ........ . "~ O QNj , . ! '~ ~ ,~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M, ~ Qy ~ p ( ~~ r+ ~1 y -. ..;... ... ..... .. o~ ~ V i i j i i i O ~ . ~ . ~ ~ qC '~d ~ U U .. ,. U F. •~ ~ C ~ ~ ~ i ~ 1~ O O O O O S O O O O O ~~ O O O O C O O O O O O O C , 0 O O O O C O,. .-i d ' ,-i N ,..., O 0 0 .-i tf? C O ~ &} ~} N ffl fA &} y} ~ s;sod aau~ua;up?y~ l~ ~~ 1 N .~ • --~-- L':'S'Y L;' YR":vf..^. i 'v``)n'ni0ivvv MEMORANDUM July 1, 1991 T0: Mayor, Councilmem tiers and City Mana er FROM: Jerry Grant, Building Official SUBJECT: Fireplace and miscellaneous re it Mayflower/Ba youn, Kernwood Court Nom es This memo is to advise the City Council concerning repairs to the seven homes en Kernwood Court in the Mayflower/Ba youn Tract. Work on the fireplaces commenced Thursday, June 11 with demolition of the im pro De rly constructed Dortions of masonry. Work on the underfloor carpentry and ventilation started on the first home today. Completion of all the work is anticipated within three weeks. The last of the issues raised several months ago by the Flores' engineer/inspector has finally been resolved after repeated comm un ica±ions with him and the original design engineer, and several reassessments of the structure and its design. It is our opinion that, although the issues raised were legitimate, the areas of concern, as they exist, meet the requirements of the code without additional modification to the structures. We will advise the Council when work has been completed. JG/dm PUBLIC NOTICE On July 3, 1991, the Rancho Cuea,;.onga city Cuuncil •.:".'1 cond»rt public hearings to consider the establishment of assessments for various Ughting and iandacaping districts for Fiscal Year 1991-1992, The hearings shall be held to the Clty Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. The Districts and the proposed assessments aze as follows: Recommended Current FY 91/92 Dletrlct Assessment ~sessment Street Lighting 1 (Arterial) $ 9.25 $ 10.18 " 2 (Local) $ zo.oo $ 20.00 " 3 (Victoria) $ 20.00 $ 20.00 ,. ~~ ITe._._.~ t/ICtal $ 20.00 $ 20.00 : 1... " 5 (Caryn) $ 2u.u0 Q 20.00 " 6 CComm./Industrial) $ 20.00 ffi 20.00 " 7 (Etiwanda North) Rate during formation in FY 90/91 was $32.16 $ 32.16 " 8 (Etiwanda South) Rate during formation iri FY 90/91 was $121,92 $121.92 Landscape 1 (General City) $ 35.00 $ 69.95 " 2 (Victoria) $204.75 (Single family) $376.00 $409.50/acre (Commercial) $752.00 $ 51.19/acre (Vacant) $ 94.00 " 3A (Hyssop) $258.75/acre $379.38/acre " 3B (Comm./Industrial) $170.00/acre $248.99/acre " 4 (Terra Vista) $110.25 (Single family) $240.18 " $ 91.45 (Multi family) $193.42 " $ G9.26/acre {Commercial) $284.42 " $ 10.25/acre (Vacant) $ 'L5.09 " 5 (Tot Lot) $105.00 $105.00 " 6 (Caryn) $195.00 $235.48 " 7 (Etiwanda North) $ 75,00 $400.58 " 8 (Etiwanda South) $ 95.00 $145.22 Comments regarding the recommended rate for FY 91/92 can be made at the meeting on July 3, 1991, or submitted in writing to the City Clerk at the address set forth below prior to July 3. 1991. For further details, refer to the ad found in the legal notices section of this paper. Copies of the Engineer's report regarding the recommended assessments aze available for inspection >n the City Clerk's Office at 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. Questions should be referred to Walt Stickney or Joe O'Neil at (714) 989-1862, extensions 2310 and 2301 respectively. PLB:dC NtY:iCE On July 3, 1991, the Rancho Cucamonga City Councll will conduct public hearings to consider the establishment of assessments for various lighting and landscaping districts for Fiscal Yeaz 1991-1992. The hearings shall be held In the Clty Counetl Chambers at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible at 10500 Clvlc Center Ljnve, Rancho Cucamonga. The Districts and the proposed assessments aze as follows: Recommended Current FY 91/92 Dletr(ct Assessment Assessment Street Lighting 1 (Arterial) $ 9.25 $ 10.18 " 2 (Local) $ 20.00 $ 20.00 n ~~ o rtr... ..~ .w " 4 (Terra Vista) $ 20.00 $ 20.00 " 5 (Caryn) $ 20.00 $ 20.00 6 (Conan./Industrial) $ 20.00 $ 20.00 " 7 (Etrwanda North) Rate during formation in FP 90/91 was $32.16 $ 32.16 " 8 (Ettwanda South) Rate during formation In FY 90/91 was $121.92 $121.92 Landscape 1 (General Clty) $ 35.00 $ 69.95 " 2 (Victoria) $204.75 (Single jamtly) $376.00 $409.50/acre (Commercial) $752.00 $ 51.19/acre (Vacant) $ 94.00 " 3A (Hyssop) $258.75/acre $379.38/acre 3B (Comm./Industrial) $170.00/acre $248.99/acre " 4 (Terra Vista) $110.2.5 (Single family) $240.18 :' $ 91.45 IMultt family) $193.42 ' $ 69.26/acre (Commerc[aU $284.42 $ 10.25/acre (Vacantl $ 25.09 5 (Tot Lot) $105.00 $105.00 " 6 (Caryn) $195.00 $235.48 " 7 (Etlwanda North) $ 75.00 $400.58 8 (Etiwanda South) $ 95.00 $145.22 Comments regazding the recommended rate for FY 91/92 can be made at the meeting on July 3, 1991, or submitted to writing to the Clty Clerk at the address set forth below prior to July 3, 1991. Copies of the Engineer's report regarding the recommended assessments aze avallable for inspection to the Clty Clerk's Office at 10500 Clvrc Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga. Questions should be referred to Walt Stickney or Joe O'Neil at (714) 989-1862, extensions 2310 and 2301 respectively.